City of Chandler Planning & Zoning Meeting 5/1/24

play
e
e for
together
of course first one right
there e
good evening welcome to the planning
zoning commission regular meeting for
May 1st can I have a roll call
please chairman human here Vice chair
Kos here commissioner Quinn here
commissioner bar Kell here commissioner
Lopez here commissioner goola here we
have Corum thank you very much next item
is the Pledge of Allegiance believe us
please I pledge of allegiance to the
flag of the United States of America and
to the Republic for which it stands one
nation under God indivisible with
liberty and justice for all
sir
okay so to the audience I've got some
speaker cards for item
number three so what I'm going to do is
rather than pulling it off right away
I'm G to ask I'm gon to go to these
comment cards for people if they want to
talk if we feel we need to pull the item
for Action we'll pull the item for
Action is that okay City attorney okay
all right
um so Connie Frasier do you want to come
up and
speak you want to come up and state your
name and address for the record please
Connie hi
here my um concern about that the
proposed Housing Development uh there
there was a lady came by the house a
month or so ago and we went over the
items and they said they had reduced the
amount of houses and that were going to
be built but they still wanted the one
of the entrances and exit on an
Alamosa and we were wondering why
because there's already an entrance on
mqueen that would go into that area it's
been there for as long as I've lived
here and another concern with it coming
out on Alamosa that's a really small
little street that goes into our
neighborhood and I think the traffic
would be horrible like right now if you
try to turn left onto McQueen for
Alamosa you really can't even do it in
the mornings it's like ridiculous and
also we were concerned about people
taking a
shortcut through our neighborhood like
to get over to the elementary school or
the high school even so and uh they said
one of the
things um that that light if they put a
light there it' be too close to McQueen
and I looked at the the distance from
the other entrance off of aao to McQueen
is the same distance as what would be
from McQueen to the intersection there
so that didn't make any sense to me so
that's all I have to say okay Connie
could you state your address for the
record because it's not on the card my
address oh please
4295 South Cross Creek Drive and it's in
Alamosa States okay thank you very much
any questions for the speaker okay thank
you very much con than you the next
person is
Jennifer
Al I gotta
close you want your state state your
name and address for the record Jennifer
please up here yeah thank you
okay um thank you my name is Jennifer
alvie and uh we live at 1154 East Grand
Canyon Road we have lived here in
Chandler for 22 years now and um we
really appreciate and love living here
we think the city just has done an
amazing job of managing the growth we
live right by McQueen and okao poo Vista
Park turned out wonderfully so um
there's so many things that the city
does really well what we are hoping
tonight is that the commission will hear
what our resident concerns are regarding
this proposal speaking just for myself
and my family we're we're not opposed to
this Housing Development coming in
necessarily we would just like to make
sure that it's done in such a way that
it benefits both the people who are
moving in and the residents who already
live there uh our main concerns are the
developer had indicated in a proposal we
saw that there could be a buffer
between the existing homes which are in
um our subdivision of Geneva Estates my
family's home is on that corner we're
we're removed from the street corner but
um we're the closest to that
intersection if that makes any sense and
so uh the developer we really
appreciated that they heard our input
and went ahead and added kind of a
buffer area so that we would not all of
a sudden have five families living
immediately behind us in very close
range and it looks like after the
proposal came back um perhaps after the
city had reviewed it that buffer had
either been removed completely or at
least had been taken away to the point
that we still have some concerns we um
like I said we're not opposed to housing
being back there we would just like to
make sure that we don't have neighbors
literally looking into our backyard so
that was our first concern our second
concern is the traffic impact like
Connie mentioned um as you all know
already at that intersection of McQueen
and okao we are in the past few years
managing a huge increase of traffic due
to both the Amazon facility up on
McQueen as well as the bus barn that was
put in down the road from us on okao so
our our traffic there at that EX at that
intersection has jumped exponentially in
the last few years my backyard due to it
facing that intersection uh we have a
balcony and I I can't tell you how much
more frequently now we hear and
ambulances out there at that
intersection in ways that we didn't hear
for the first years that we lived in
that home we've been there 11 years now
so we are very concerned it is obviously
a family neighborhood with lots of kids
uh which would only increase bringing in
a new development that would add even
more kids moving through that
intersection so like I said between the
Amazon trucks already there the bus barn
happening we're just really wanting to
make sure that the city looks at how to
SA safely facilitate the traffic that
would accompany an inter or excuse me a
subdivision there and that would not add
to increaseed traffic coming through our
neighborhood as Connie said not allowing
people to leave that new subdivision and
turn out onto Alamosa because it it will
only create massive additional traffic
headaches there so we appreciate the
city listening to us and being willing
to consider our input and again just
appreciate all you guys have done to
create a really wonderful place for our
families to live so thank
you thank you very much I'm going to
take the other speaker then I am going
to pull this item for Action so um the
last speaker I have
an this this one
Rashid did you want to
speak you could state your name and
address for the record too please that'd
be
great hi I'm risan Rashid the address is
4190 South J Street Jen alv is my
neighbor and I have a concern that
between her and I we're going to have 12
homes right behind
us 12 homes bed up against uh two homes
I don't like the density um I appreciate
all the comments that Jen had she put it
very eloquently um I just have the
density concern and I would be okay with
a residential plan but not that high
density and I've asked the build to do
that and they said they just cannot do
it in a profitable way so it seems like
the best interest here is for them not
for us and I would at this time I
personally feel that A Light
commercial um plan that has been in
place should stay if this is the Builder
that's going
to um be working here uh i' would
welcome another Builder if they have
larger homes with Le lesser density but
I don't doesn't seem possible with this
Builder so that's all I have to say
great any questions thank you thank you
so we're going to pull this item for
Action staff so uh but so right now um
we have items then number one two four
and five to the audience those items
will be voted on by one motion if
there's anybody in the audience who
would like to speak on any of those four
items let me know let see okay so what
is Commission
pleasure chair um I move to approve
consent agenda items one two four and
five do I have a second second I have a
second commissioner Quinn any further
discussion all those in favor say I I I
any opposed any extensions commissioner
Lopez I thank you okay all right
so staff do you want to come up on item
number three and address any of those
questions and then we'll have the
applicant come up and talk as
well thank you chair
um chair human you want me to address
can you address some of the question so
address for me U for the Neighbors the
entrance and exit on
Alamosa seems to be some concern about
that can you address that and staff's
opinion on that please of course I'm
just pulling up Google Maps real quick I
apologize right so you early on before
the uh applicant submitted an
application they submitted a preliminary
technical review uh to staff
so uh all other departments reviewed it
we have fire civil traffic uh
building utilities um and during that
you know our traffic engineer did review
it and general practice when we're
looking at developments is to limit the
amount of entrances out along an
Arial
and to use utilize collector streets to
take a uh smaller roads to larger roads
um as we heard from the residents
McQueen uh is often referred to as like
a highway with people speeding out down
it so you know our traffic engineer
would preference is to have uh Alamosa
be used uh to allow for traffic to spill
out onto that then to exit out on
McQueen versus adding another uh
entrance out along
McQueen um let's just see and then just
pulling this
up so that's just a best practice for
the traffic
engineer um when we look at the
subdivisions that develop to the
South um they don't have access to
McQueen uh the subdivision directly
south of that subdivision there's no
entrance out along McQueen and they
utilize collector streets to the north
and to the
South the subdivision 3 down again they
don't have direct access to McQueen and
they utilize collector roads blue
Bridgeway and down to Chandler
Heights so in discussion with the city's
traffic engineer you know best practi is
to take minor collectors to collectors
out to
arterials sorry Lauren could you address
there was a question about the schools
and cutting through neighborhoods to get
to the school where is the closest
school so Santan down on chanler Heights
okay so somebody have to do a lot of
cutting to get through down there
okay were there other questions that the
residents brought up you want to address
uh yeah one of the residents brought up
the need for a signal I did discuss with
her I was at the neighborhood meeting we
were in I was in attendance um you know
a signal again traffic engineer I did
confirm with her uh it's too close to uh
the intersection of McQueen and aao to
allow for a a signal to be installed at
the current alignment of Alamosa Drive
or even if the entrance was proposed
along McQueen or even the entrance has
being proposed along
acao okay there was also a question some
of you one of the uh speakers talked
about commercial can you address the
traffic if this would have been built as
a quick trip and the rest of the
commercial versus what this would
generate oh great question uh chair
again uh I'm not a traffic engineer but
through uh my tene with the the city
I've learned that uh traffic uh
commercial development generates more
traffic than residential uh commercial
traffic generates more traffic than even
mult multi family uh because the amounts
of trips generated there's more versus
residential and I know we just had a
quick trip come through the system folks
if you'll be if you like to talk I'll
have you come up and talk but please um
we had a quick trip that just came
through here and I know the trips are
hundreds per hour and stuff so okay um
any other questions for staff sure
Lauren there was a a comment about a
buffer can you clarify what happened to
that buffer and where did it go of
course I'm just going to pull up this
PowerPoint here uh I don't have that
image but um so with the site plan so uh
during that December neighborhood
meeting you know they were proposing to
have a 20 foot
um a 20 foot sidewalk uh between the
existing residential and the proposed
homes um and you know it is of uh
historically we've learned that you know
these generally tend to be no man's land
um there's no eyes on it um if somebody
was to get in although it is a gated
community uh they could get in there
camp out and if a resident was in there
walking their dog you know they they
could be uh it could be a potentially
dangerous situation um and so it was
best to uh have larger Lots than utilize
a um 20 foot landscaped area with a
sidewalk with a low lighting bowered uh
lighting which would be lit throughout
the evening so you're saying that that
20 foot was added into Lots 30 through
40 to make
them deeper that is correct okay thank
you I like that idea a lot actually did
I see a trail along mqueen in that open
space in one of the renderings uh yes uh
through the chair commissioner Cal uh
that is correct um in order to get
additional um you know to Part of Me
There we go yeah that's dizzy Lauren I
know sorry don't look um yes so you know
the the home builder is proposing to do
uh another sidewalk uh along McQueen uh
closer to their development just to
allow people to walk their dogs and not
have to walk adjacent to McQueen road
with cars speeding down there to give
them a safer environment to walk within
their Community I'm sorry that'll be
available for public correct it won't be
gated off or correct it' be open to the
public thank
you Lauren just a question on that I
didn't see that in any of the other
documents except for that that rendering
up there so just just a comment that I
want to make make sure that if that is
the plan that you know it's consistent
across some of these
documents thank you for the comment uh
through the chair commissioner uh arello
uh I can confirm that it was there
because we were reviewing it uh through
the lens of the preliminary plot uh
civil and site
development so circling back to Lots 30
through 40 and the buffer so the buffer
is now with the larger lot sizes so the
homes will not be allowed to go back as
far so they still have that 20ft buffer
it's just a bigger lot so farther away
from their
homes uh through the chair commissioner
um yes so they eliminated that 20 foot
uh a landscape area to allow for uh
longer lots to you know provide um
larger backyards for those users okay so
the homes will not slide farther back
onto the lot so they will essentially
get their buffer correct
okay Lauren do you want to address um
the single story plus the push back two
story your different colors you have up
here that will be so long the South part
of the parcel there's like three or four
houses there and then there's a couple
houses on the the East Side um in terms
of how so some one of the things came up
from the speakers was the looking down
on S their properties so will you want
to talk about chairman if I could
interject really quick uh these are all
questions that are about the specific
proposal which it's not staff's proposal
it's applicant so like I would I would
feel better if we got the applicant fine
we can do that address their proposal
okay that's thank you okay any other
questions for sta okay if the applicant
wants to come up and state your name and
address to the record and maybe address
some of the concerns from the
neighborhood please all right there you
are that you saved in there so just
click here yep here let me start
you there you go so where hold y go up
and down yep
okay Mr chairman members of the
commission my name is Ralph Pew my
office is at 1744 South Valvista Drive
in Mesa site 217 it's a pleasure to be
here this evening on behalf of kavanian
homes Mr Chuck Chisum is here and
Francisco Castillo are here from
kavanian in case there's questions that
we can't answer or not aware of uh I
think members of the commission it might
be easier to address some of the
questions that have been raised and then
we'll show you in more detail a couple
of exhibits here so first of all with
with respect to the
Alamosa Drive that has been a point of
discussion from the very beginning in
all the meetings we've had with the
neighbors and it became abundantly clear
to us that that the city in planning uh
McQueen Road as Lauren has indicated do
I want to minimize the number of access
points on McQueen so consequently the
best approach we could find to implement
this plan was to put an entrance on
Alamosa the southern Edge and make that
only for residents so it will be keyed
there'll be a lock so no deliveries will
be made there no guests can come through
there all that type of public access in
fact some resident access is occurring
up on OKO so uh we've done all we can do
in our opinion to comply with Street
design standards in the city of Chandler
and at the same time create some way to
make that Alamosa uh location a little
bit better for the neighborhood and and
so that was the proposal and that's what
you have uh on your uh plate tonight
secondly there's been some discussion
about well there's already some curb
cuts on McQueen well when you look at
those they are not curb Cuts because
there was really never a plan approved
here with a site plan on this land and
they never got to the development stage
those are what I would call Roadway
drainage spillways they take drainage
from the road if you'll look at them
they're concrete they have um grates in
them and then they drain the the water
from the street into the property today
so I just didn't want anybody being
confused and come and say oh we have
Curb Cuts there let's just put a road
there that's not the case so just want
to make that clear um secondly with
respect to the buffer I know um some of
the Commissioners made a question about
that we'll show that on the on the map
here in just a minute but that buffer
became
particularly uh Troublesome it just like
Lauren indicated it became a spot where
without constant eyes on it and
vigilance it could turn into a location
for mischief to occur so we did what we
thought was the best at that time and
that's to put that land square footage
back into the Lots so that's how that
happened and it was a good idea for the
moment until everybody at least we
thought about it staff thought about it
others it didn't make much sense so
that's why we changed it um there's been
a question too about two story looking
into backyards it's something we deal
with frequently in the land use World
I'll show you an exhibit in just a
minute that indicates that all of the
singl story homes that ad joined this
property are correct ly uh our project
is designed not to have two-story homes
near those so we'll show you that here
in just a
minute um as hard as I've tried in an
entire career of doing land use planning
no one seems to believe Traffic
Engineers when they talk about in and
out peak hours for commercial versus
residential it is significantly higher
not just higher sign significantly
higher for commercial uses in those Peak
morning and Peak afternoon hours and for
that reason that that's another U
thought as to why this residential use
on this infill property in our opinion
is much better than the commercial
that's proposed there uh today um let's
see the high density that that question
been raised earlier our plan's gone from
91 lots to 76 after four different
iterations of it we keep the density
consistent with the southeast area
Channeler plan just as Lauren explained
when you do the math on that the density
is slightly over three units per acre if
you do the math In fairness just on this
property just on the 15.3 net acres and
76 units you have a higher you have a
higher density 4.8 but when it's
averaged out like it's supposed to be
under the plan and how that's been
interp by the city for a while it fits
well within uh the density ranges that
are allowed and the home sizes range on
this proposal from slightly over 2,000
to 3,300 almost 3,400 square feet so
these are not small homes these are
meaningful important homes on smaller
Lots admittedly uh today so let me see
if I can just cover a couple things here
uh we've talked about this as it relates
to the density
calculation um uh the staff covered
exactly the four specific requests to
implement this application to amend this
the area plan uh to do the pad zoning to
do the PDP development plan and the
preliminary plat so those are the those
are the requests and planning tools that
we're asking for here
tonight so here's another overview of
the site how we comply with the
southeast area chanler plan
and then let's see oh here we
go these are the this is the gyration of
the number of times we've changed the
plan from 91 lots and 4,000 square feet
to where we are today 76 Lots with
almost a 5,000 foot lot we now have 12
twostory uh Lots with the 40 foot
minimum setback I call that our
staggered plan that you've seen on the
on the uh screen tonight where the
two-story element is staggered 40t
behind the rear wall of the
home um and we have 15 of the 76 that
are limited specifically to single story
we've had two neighborhood meetings one
informal one formal and then we have
done extensive door-to-door contact with
Tom and Christa Bilstein and their
Outreach to neighbors to keep them
informed solicit their opinions and
listen to their uh
thoughts so here's the here's an exhibit
I think should be helpful
so if you look at the project as uh the
staff explained it uh you'll see the
brown and what we'll call orange and
yellow right so the yellow on the
development side are twostory homes the
Orange is that staggered home and the
brown are single story now if you look
to the east you'll see that there are
one two 3 4 five six seven there are
seven twostory homes on the east side of
us so those homes we have homes that
back up to two stories with either a
twostory or a stagger which to us seems
like a fair solution to that on the
other hand where you see single story
which are white on the outside of our
project predominantly let's take a look
at the East side first south of
okao um you'll notice that there is a uh
single story home home up there that one
is adjacent to a single story home in
our project as you come down further
south you see two white bars both with
26 96 square feet that represents homes
that are across the street you see that
little North South Street on the east
side of that location of our property
those homes are on the east side so we
do have twostory homes on that location
why because the homes in our opinion
east of there are buffered by a
landscape buffer and a full City street
width and then they're siding on not
backing on to this project um then if
you come around the corner there are
three more white uh indicators there
with square footages of the homes all of
those are single story and all of the
homes that back up to those homes in our
project are either either single story
or there's one staggered uh twostory
unit that has the twostory 40 ft back so
we've been very sensitive to that then
if you get to the South End there's one
uh spot there that you see white that is
a singl story home so if you look
immediately to the east of that it is
adjoining a single story home on our
plan in fact two single story homes and
a stagger so we have done what we think
we can do the best we can to make sure
we've accommodated two stories uh with
two stories and single Story matching up
to single story so we don't have a
situation where a two-story home
overlooks a single
story this is some uh renderings of of
the elevations these are meant to give
some spatial relationships uh not
necessarily every detail of the
elevations that were submitted
um and you can see here uh the texture
that it provides within the community
and especially here as it relates to the
Tot Lot the Remada the barbecue area uh
the amenity area in the in the
project this is another good shot of
what the amenity area looks like and and
here here's what the street Frontage I
think because there's roughly nine homes
here this this looks like the okao
frontage I believe because McQueen is
much longer and again you can see the
texture we we we try to avoid
circumstances where you have a rear wall
that meets the minimum setback and it
just lined up with all rear walls so you
can see what it looks like here
especially with the staggered uh unit
and then uh as we go to uh McQueen there
is a significant number of singl story
staggered units and two story that are
mixed all along McQueen to give as I say
texture uh to that street front
AG so Mr chairman and members of the
commission we we urge your support of
this case this this is a typical
discussion that unfortunately arises in
infill
projects and um the staff and the code
and the analysis of the southeast area
plan took that into
consideration when there's an infill
project then every aspect of the
subdivision design does not apply why
because it gives an opportunity for a
fresh look look here at a subdivision
that's not in a typical standard
location of a cotton field that's been
now sold for development and so we meet
those requirements we meet those
standards um and and we believe this has
been a really well-designed project and
we urge your support uh and we' be happy
to rec uh answer any questions that you
might have
here questions of the
applicant okay no I guess we don't thank
you Mr I'm going to go to the audience I
know there were a couple people who
wanted to speak if you want to come up
and state your name and address for the
record
and for three minutes does anybody want
else wants to
speak if you want to speak come on up to
the okay anybody else you need to come
up to if you can come up to the Das
please yep be great thank you you've
already sted your name and address
you're so it's me again uh one point I I
appreciate hearing what uh kov V not
even gonna be able to say it but you're
good I I got it you know you know we
appreciate that um and that is helpful
to have Clarity on that the one
situation I would like to point out was
uh what the city of Chandler mentioned
about it being a feeder Street I think
the name is is is what it's called or
Alamosa is not a feeder Street it does
not continuously travel east to west it
literally travels for you know the
length of six houses and then you can
only turn into Alamosa States or into
Geneva States so we're not talking about
an Apples to Apples comparison on that
we're talking about a situation where
any car turning out of this new
subdivision onto
Alamosa to go to Santan Elementary or
Santan Junior High there's two there
there's two schools is only going to be
able to travel through residential
neighborhoods to get to that school and
as as was mentioned um it's a valid
point that most travel is happening
during certain times of the morning and
certain times of the afternoon evening
that's when you're talking about this
entire subdivision of people or at least
approximately half of them all leaving
the subdivision and roughly half of them
at least exiting onto Alamosa now
however many of them are traveling on to
work are very likely to turn off of
Alamosa out onto McQueen but however
many of them are trying to get their
children over to Santan junior high or
Santan Elementary are not going to be on
a feeder street they're going to be on
residential roads that wind through
neighborhoods where children are biking
where children are walking to school
where people are out in the morning we
have uh multi-generational families that
live in our community so elderly people
and that is our concern as residents we
do not have a feed or Street situation
there we have only a situation that
pulls into our neighborhoods so I would
appreciate if the city would keep that
in mind as they're making their
decisions that this is not the same as
putting people out onto Blue Ridge or
putting them out onto the next further
Street South this is an only into a
residential neighborhood not a feeder
street so thank you very much for that
thank you very much any questions
anybody else in the audience would like
to speak on this item Lauren do you want
to address the feeder Street or best you
can or Kevin or somebody you know uh
chairman Lauren had mentioned that uh if
if we kind of play the like could they
get a curb cut onto uh onto McQueen um
while the applicants correct in that
there was never a formal PDP that was
approved for the commercial center there
was a concept site plan that a company
Geneva States when it was zoned had
office down on the finger that kind of
reaches down south and a retail Center
on the uh on the North uh that concept
site plan always showed a driveway
connection for the commercial Center to
Alamosa and then a spot out onto aao one
on to McQueen um I can tell you just in
the four decades combined that we've
been doing this uh if uh if the center
had developed as it was intended to
develop with retail and office and it
maintained all the curb cuts and
driveway locations that it was that
would still send more traffic to that
Alamosa driveway um entrance than if
this entire subdivision vision went only
to Alamosa entrance and exit for
everybody it would still be less traffic
than the commercial center would
generate um collector streets they're
they are not uh they are not always a
street that links one arterial to
another another arterial like Willis
Road does in certain places or Brooks
Farm Road does in certain places Alamosa
is is still in the traffic engineering
World defined as a collector road
because it's collecting the traffic from
Geneva States and Alamosa States and
getting it to uh getting it to McQueen
um so I I I appreciate the the resident
comment that it's not the same as the
one directly to the South and she's
absolutely right but in traffic
engineering world it's still considered
a collector Street homes don't back up
to it or homes Don't Front on to it and
it's collecting residential traffic from
two different neighborhoods um the kind
of cut through um traffic that could be
uh coming from this subdivision get down
to the schools it's a real concern um
uh citizens and parents they do what
they do um I live near a school and I
it's I deal with it every day um if uh
if the access point was moved off of
Alamosa and say put to there's a semi
full movement access point that serves
the church just a little bit about
halfway up uh up McQueen let's say that
it was put there um if parents were
going to cut through the neighborhood to
get to the school they would exit out on
a McQueen head south dive back into
Alamosa and do their thing um they're
going to cut through it anyway and
whether we move it from Alamosa onto
McQueen or not that cut through it's not
really incented to cut through because
they have an access to alosa um parents
will still do it if they're going to do
it and it's something that the city
wrestles with with every school that we
have in the city okay all right thank
you any questions for
Kevin okay any other questions for I'm
going to close the floor then since
there's nobody else like to speak on
this item so what is the commission's
pleasure
Mr Quinn Mr Mr chair n motion to approve
item three as presented okay I have a
motion to have a second a second any
further
discussion all those in favor say I I I
opposed I commissioner
Lopez yes uh I for for passing okay
thank you motion carries um to the
audience we are a recommending body to
the city council uh this item comes to
city council when
David Mr chairman this item goes to the
city council on May 23rd okay so to the
audience you'll have another OPP
opportunity on May 23rd to express your
concerns to the city council who makes
the final decision on this so um any
other comments from staff tonight
comments from the commission just want
to wish everybody Mother's Day is coming
up up before our next meeting so happy
Mother's Day to everybody all the moms
out there and we are adjourned