[00:00:06]
[1. Call to Order]
MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.FIRST TIME AND MAYBE HAVE A ROLL-CALL PLEASE.
[2. Roll Call NOTE: One or more Commission Members may be in attendance telephonically or by other technological means. MARIE JONES, VICE CHAIR BOB HARRIS III DR. RICARDO GUTHRIE CAROLE MANDINO DR. ALEX MARTINEZ MARY NORTON LLOYD PAUL ]
>> ALEX MARTINEZ. THERE IS A QUORUM.
>> THANK YOU. THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AND THIS TIME ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY SUBJECT WITHIN THAT JURISDICTION THAT IS NOT SCHEDULED BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON THAT DAY.
DUE TO OPEN MEETING LAWS THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR ACT ON ITEMS PRESENTED DURING THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA.
TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA PLEASE WAIT FOR THE CHAIR TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE TIME THAT ITEM IS HEARD.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? I DON'T SEE ANY HANDS.
LET'S MOVE ON TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on Wednesday, March 23, 2022.]
THIS WOULD BE FROM THE MARCH 23RD MEETING.>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO AND I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN FROM MARCH 23RD.
NO, ACTUALLY LET ME STATE I HAVE A CORRECTION TO THE MINUTES. I JUST SAW IT.
IT SAYS IT WAS ON MARCH 23RD, 2023 INSTEAD OF '22.
BUT ONCE THAT'S CORRECTED, I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN WITH CORRECTING THE DATE FROM MARCH 23RD, 2023 TO MARCH 23RD, 2022.
>> THANK YOU. HOUSE, DO WE HAVE SECOND? IF NOT I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
DO WE HAVE ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR ANY MORE COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE RECORD [NOISE] I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER HARRIS IS NOW ON.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT, I HAD THE WRONG LINK.
>> COMMISSIONER HARRIS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE HERE FOR THE VOTE ON THAT. ARE YOU READY TO MOVE ON?
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO.
I ALSO SEE THAT COMMISSIONER GUTHRIE IS ON AS WELL NOW.
>> WELL, WE JUST DID A MOTION AND A PROOF OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE LOGISTICS ARE ON THAT.
BUT I'D SAY IF THE TWO COMMISSIONERS WHO MAY NOT HAVE HEARD THAT HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO MAKE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER HARRIS.
I DID HEAR AND I HAVE NO COMMENTS.
>> COMMISSIONER GUTHRIE, SAME THING, THANK YOU.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU. NOW IT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE MEETING.
[A. Restoration Soils PZ-21-00117-03 A minor Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 amendment request from Square Peg Development, on behalf of the property owner, Arizona State Land Department, to change the area type designation on Map 21 and 22 from Area in White to Existing Employment for approximately 24.75 acres located at 2661 N El Paso Road. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward the minor Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for approval in accordance with the findings. ]
[B. PZ-21-00117-01 Restoration Soils Zoning Map Amendment: Direct to Ordinance Zoning Map Amendment requested by Square Peg Development, on behalf of the property owner Arizona State Land Department, of approximately 7.29 acres located at 2661 N El Paso Road from the Highway Commercial (HC) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) to the Heavy Industrial Open (HI-O) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO). STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff believes that the proposed Zoning Map amendment is in substantial conformance with the required findings and recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission forward the request to the City Council with a recommendation approving an amendment to the Zoning Map for 7.29 acres from the Highway Commercial (HC) to the Heavy Industrial Open (HI-O) zone, subject to the following conditions: All other requirements of the Zoning Code and other City codes, ordinances, and regulations shall be met by the proposed development. In the event the property is rezoned, and the applicant fails to obtain final Civil Plan approval within two (2) years of the effective date of the rezoning ordinance, then the City may schedule a public hearing before the City Council for the purpose of causing the zoning on the Property to revert to the former classification of Highway Commercial (HC) in accordance with A.R.S. § 9-462.01.]
WE HAVE THE FIRST CASE HERE IT'S CALLED RESTORATIONS FOR US.THIS IS OUR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FROM SQUARE PEG DEVELOPMENT AND ARIZONA LAND DEPARTMENT.
WE'RE READY FOR A PRESENTATION.
>> APPARENTLY, MY COMPUTER IS DISAGREEING WITH ME, I'M SORRY.
GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN AGAIN.
I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PRESENT BOTH OF THE TWO ITEMS TOGETHER ALTHOUGH YOU'LL NEED TO DISCUSS THEM AND MAKE MOTIONS ON THEM SEPARATELY.
BUT SINCE THEY'RE A GROUP PACKAGE,
[00:05:02]
IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO SHARE IT ALL WITH YOU ONCE.HERE WE GO AGAIN WITH SHARING.
>> PERFECT. [NOISE] TONIGHT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU A REQUEST FOR A MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AS WELL AS A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT, BOTH FOR THE SAME PROJECT, WHICH IS ENTITLED RESTORATION SOILS, AND THE SITE IS LOCATED ON EL PASO, FLAGSTAFF ROAD.
RESTORATION SOILS IS AT A PROPERTY ADDRESS OF 2661 ON NORTH EL PASO, FLAGSTAFF ROAD.
THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY OWNED.
IT FALLS UNDER THE OWNERSHIP OF THE ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT.
THE APPLICANT HAS OBTAINED A LEASE THROUGH THE ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT, WHICH ALSO ALLOWS THEM TO PURSUE THESE ENTITLEMENTS.
THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU TONIGHT ARE TWOFOLD.
THE FIRST IS A MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE AREA TYPE FROM AREA IN WHITE TO EMPLOYMENT FOR APPROXIMATELY 24.75 ACRES.
SECOND REQUEST IS A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.29 ACRES FROM THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE TO THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN ZONE.
THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY WILL REMAIN IN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE.
THE AREA YOU SEE OUTLINED IN BLUE IS THE AREA OF THE REZONING.
I'LL SHOW YOU LATER THE AREA FOR THE MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT.
JUST IN TERMS OF PROPERTY CONTEXT, TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE, WHICH IS OUTLINED IN THIS TEAL BLUE.
THIS IS THE ENTIRE ARIZONA STATE LAND PIECE.
TO THE NORTH WE HAVE A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN ZONED PARCEL THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER OPERATION BY CEMEX.
IT IS A VERY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE.
TO THE WEST OF THE REZONING LOCATION IT'S JUST ESSENTIALLY THE REMAINDER OF THE ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT PARCEL, ALSO IN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE.
THE WILDCAT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OWNED BY THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF UNDER THE PUBLIC FACILITY ZONE, WHICH IS THAT GREEN ZONE.
TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S VACANT LAND OWNED BY ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT AS WELL.
IT'S ALSO STILL IN THIS PINK WITHIN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE.
THEN THE RAILROAD IS FURTHER BEYOND.
FIRST, I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST.
THIS IS THE EXISTING FUTURE GROWTH ILLUSTRATION WITHIN THE CURRENT REGIONAL PLAN.
YOU CAN SEE HERE AGAIN, HERE'S THAT SUBJECT SITE.
IT FALLS IN AN AREA CALLED AREA IN WHITE.
AREA IN WHITE WAS APPLIED TO LANDS PRIMARILY OWNED BY OTHER JURISDICTIONAL ENTITIES, SUCH AS THE ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT.
SPECIFIC REGIONAL PLAN CATEGORIES WERE NOT APPLIED TO THEM.
IN THIS CASE, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT A REZONING TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN, THE REGIONAL PLAN DOES NEED TO BE AMENDED TO EMPLOYMENT TO SUPPORT THAT REZONING.
HERE IS THE AREA THAT'S PROPOSED FOR THAT REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUESTS.
THE AREA THAT YOU SEE HATCH MARKED HERE, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 24.75 ACRES.
THIS PINK AREA THAT YOU'RE SEEING COMING THROUGH THIS MAP, THIS IS FLOODPLAIN.
YOU CAN SEE THAT REALLY THIS IS THE MOST USABLE PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY.
ALL OF THIS PROPERTY WILL GO INTO THE EMPLOYMENT CATEGORY, ALTHOUGH NOT ALL OF IT IS CURRENTLY BEING REZONED, ONLY A PORTION OF IT.
BUT THIS WILL ALLOW IN THE FUTURE, SHOULD MAYBE THE EXISTING USE OR SOME OTHER USE WANT TO EXPAND ONTO THIS SITE.
THAT WILL SUPPORT COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT ONCE THIS SMALL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS REZONED TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN.
WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE SITE PLAN AND THE REZONING REQUEST AS WELL.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PREPARED FOR RESTORATION SOILS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROPOSED USES ON THE SITE.
THE PRIMARY ONE WE'VE BEEN WORKING UNDER HAS BEEN COMPOSTING FACILITY.
MOST OF THESE OTHER USES LISTED FALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT COMPOSTING FACILITY, INCLUDING AMENDMENT OF SOIL AND NATIVE SOIL MIXED PROCESSING, SCREENED AGGREGATE PROCESSING,
[00:10:02]
BIOMASS BASED MULCH AND WOOD CHIP MANUFACTURING, AS WELL AS A PORTABLE TIMBER MILL OPERATION, FIREWOOD AND ASSOCIATED BARK MULCH PROCESSING, FOREST INDUSTRY MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT STORAGE.YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THE SITE PLAN'S PRETTY LIGHT.
THERE'S NOT A LOT GOING ON SITE OTHER THAN THE STORAGE OF MATERIALS.
OOPS, I KEEP MOVING THAT, SORRY.
A SMALL CONCRETE PAD HERE FOR PARKING AND A DRIVE AISLE FOR ACCESSING.
THIS IS EL PASO FLAGSTAFF ROAD HERE.
VERY LIMITED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED OR NEEDED TO SUPPORT THESE POTENTIAL USES ON SITE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING, RIGHT NOW THE PROPERTY IS ZONED HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL, AND THEY WOULD LIKE THE PROPERTY TO BE REZONED, A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN.
THE PROPERTY ALREADY IS IN THE RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY SO THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REZONING LIKE I SAID IS TO SUPPORT THESE PROPOSED USES IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN AND THE SITE PLANNING DESIGN STANDARDS.
THERE'S REALLY NOT A LOT TO APPLY BECAUSE THIS WAS AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.
THERE'S NO REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE.
THERE REALLY AREN'T PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CIRCULATION SYSTEMS. THERE'S NO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN TO LOOK AT BECAUSE NO BUILDINGS PROPOSED.
IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE.
I DID GO AHEAD AND ATTACH THE VARIANCE REPORT TO THE STAFF SUMMARY SO YOU COULD ALL SEE WHAT THE SUMMARY OF THAT REQUEST IS.
THE VARIANCE WILL ACTUALLY BE HEARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
NORMALLY, VARIANCES ARE GOING TO BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT IN THIS CASE WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET A QUORUM OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, SO WE'VE MOVED IT ONTO THE CITY COUNCIL.
THERE'S NO OUTDOOR LIGHTING PROPOSED.
PARKING IS VERY LIMITED AND THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION CLEARANCE HAS OCCURRED THROUGH THE STATE LAND DEPARTMENT PERMIT PROCESS.
BECAUSE THIS USE IS STILL LIMITED AND ISN'T ANTICIPATED TO GENERATE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, THERE WERE REALLY NO IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIRED.
IN LIEU OF DOING STORM-WATER ANALYSIS, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL DEAL WITH THEIR PRE VERSUS POST REQUIREMENTS FOR STORM-WATER, BUT NO IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS WAS REQUIRED.
THAT TAKES US RIGHT QUICK TO THE FINDINGS FOR A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT.
THE FIRST FINDING IS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
THIS IS AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION BECAUSE WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT THAT MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT.
IF THE MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, THEN THIS APPLICATION CAN BE FOUND IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REGIONAL PLAN.
I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN, THERE HAVE BEEN 11 MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENTS.
THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE PRIMARILY BEEN FOCUSED ON INCREASING THE PARK AND OPEN SPACE AREA TYPES FOUND WITHIN THE REGIONAL PLAN.
THERE HAVE BEEN NO AMENDMENTS TO DATE INCREASING THE EMPLOYMENT AREA TYPE.
THERE HAS BEEN ONE AMENDMENT CONVERTING APPROXIMATELY 36.5 ACRES OF EMPLOYMENT TO THE PARK IN OPEN SPACE AREA TYPE AND THAT WAS DONE FOR THE MCMILLAN MESA NATURAL AREA.
THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD ADD BACK APPROXIMATELY 24.75 ACRES OF EMPLOYMENT AREA TYPE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE MOST PROTECTED AREA TYPES IDENTIFIED IN THE PLAN.
SIMILARLY, APPROXIMATELY A 119 ACRES OF LAND HAVE BEEN REZONED FROM INDUSTRIAL TO OTHERS ZONING CATEGORIES SINCE 2014.
THIS REQUEST WILL SUPPORT AN ADDITIONAL AND I'M SORRY, IT'S 7.29 ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL LAND IN THE RARE ZONING CATEGORY WHICH IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS SUPPORTED BY SEVERAL GOALS AND POLICIES WITHIN THE PLAN.
THOSE HAVE BEEN DETAILED WITHIN THE STAFF SUMMARY AND IF YOU NEED ME TO PULL OUT AND GO THROUGH THOSE SPECIFIC GOALS AND POLICIES, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
BUT THE SUBJECT USE IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE GOALS AND POLICIES.
THE CITY IS CURRENTLY DEFICIENT IN AREAS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN, WHICH LIMITS THE TYPES OF OPERATION PROPOSED.
THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS AN IDEAL CANDIDATE FOR THIS AMENDMENT.
THE GOALS AND POLICIES LISTED SUPPORT THE LOCATION OF THE USE BECAUSE IT'S AN AREA THAT HAS NEARBY INDUSTRIAL USES ON A ROAD THAT IS DESIGNATED A TRUCK ROUTE, AND THAT HAS LIMITED RESIDENTIAL ACCESS.
ITS PROXIMITY TO THE RAILROAD AND INTERSTATE ALSO MAKES IT COMPATIBLE IN TERMS OF NOISE AND OTHER IMPACTS THAT ARE TYPICAL FOR THE AREA.
THESE CONDITIONS SUPPORT THE FINDING OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE REGIONAL PLAN.
[00:15:05]
THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FINDING 2.THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT MUST BE DETERMINED NOT TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AND WILL ADD TO THE PUBLIC GOOD AS DESCRIBED IN THE GENERAL PLAN.
STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY OR WELFARE SO LONG AS IT IS DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL CODES AND REQUIREMENTS.
THE PROPOSED REQUEST WILL ADD MUCH NEEDED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING WITHIN THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.
FINDING NUMBER 3 IS THAT THE SITE MUST BE DETERMINED TO BE PHYSICALLY SUITABLE IN TERMS OF DESIGN, LOCATION, SHAPE, SIZE, OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS, THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC AND EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS, PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES TO ENSURE THAT THE REQUESTED ZONE DESIGNATION AND THE PROPOSED OR ANTICIPATED USES WILL NOT ENDANGER, JEOPARDIZE OR OTHERWISE CONSTITUTE A HAZARD TO THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN VICINITY.
THE INNER DIVISION STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND CONCLUDED THAT THE SITE WAS SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THE IDS TEAM-BASED ITS CONCLUSION ON THE REVIEW OF ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE SITE WHICH FOR THE MOST PART, WAS NOT REQUIRED.
IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL OF THESE APPLICATIONS, THE APPLICANT HELD A VIRTUAL MEETING ON APRIL 7TH.
NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC ATTENDED THAT MEETING.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN WAS PREPARED AND IS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF SUMMARY AND STAFF TO DATE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS ON THIS APPLICATION.
AS A PRECURSOR TO ONLY REQUIRING THAT ONE MEETING, SEVERAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETINGS ON THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL HAVE ALSO BEEN NOTICED AND ADVERTISED AND STILL TO DATE, NO ONE HAS REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THIS CASE.
THERE'S JUST BEEN MULTIPLE NOTIFICATIONS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO THE PUBLIC.
STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE PROPOSED MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT ARE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FORWARD THE REQUEST TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING GROWTH ILLUSTRATION FOR 24.75 ACRES FROM AREA IN WHITE TO EMPLOYMENT AND THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR 7.29 ACRES FROM THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE TO THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN ZONE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS; THE FIRST ONE IS THAT ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING CODE AND CITY CODES, ORDINANCES, AND REGULATIONS SHALL BE MET BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY IS REZONED AND THE APPLICANT FAILS TO OBTAIN OR MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE THAT THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO CAUSE THE REZONING TO REVERT.
IF YOU SHOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE AS WELL.
>> I'M LOOKING FOR HANDS HERE.
I'M WONDERING WHETHER THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY ON THIS PROJECT.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATED THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BALANCE OF REZONING OF VARIOUS LAND SINCE 2014 AND HOW THIS PUT SOME MUCH NEEDED LAND BACK INTO THAT TALLY.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATED GETTING THOSE NUMBERS.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION, TIFFANY.
IN THE MATERIAL ON THIS, THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE DRAINAGE AND THEN I GUESS THE PROXIMITY TO THE OTHER FLAG THERE.
BUT IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO GRASP, IT WAS VERY TECHNICAL.
CAN YOU GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THAT? I MEAN, WAS THERE ANY CONCERN ABOUT DRAINAGE INTO THE WATERSHED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, ANYTHING ELSE THE CITY HAD TO WORK THROUGH ON THAT?
>> THERE WASN'T A HUGE CONCERN OTHER THAN MANAGING THEIR STORM WATER AND ANY IMPERVIOUS SURFACE THAT THEY INCREASED THAT THEY'RE MANAGING ANY OF THAT STORM WATER RUNOFF.
BUT THERE WEREN'T HUGE CONCERNS FROM THE IDS TEAM.
>> THANKS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS?
[00:20:07]
NOW, THERE'S THE APPLICANT.WOULD WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION COMING FROM THE APPLICANT ON THIS, ANY PRESENTATION YOU'RE AWARE OF?
>> I'M NOT SURE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PREPARED A PRESENTATION. DAVID.
>> HELLO, EVERYONE. DAVID HAYWOOD.
PLEASURE TO CHAT WITH YOU, LINK WITH YOU AND SPEAK WITH YOU GUYS AGAIN.
WE DO NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION PREPARED, BUT ARE OBVIOUSLY AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE.
>> THANKS, DAVID. DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
WE WOULD BE READY TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE IS ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC HERE, BUT THIS TIME, ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? AGAIN, I DON'T SEE ANYONE THERE.
AT THIS TIME, UNLESS THERE'S MORE DISCUSSION, WE WOULD BE READY FOR A MOTION AND THIS WOULD BE TO FORWARD THIS CASE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
FIRST, WE'LL VOTE ON THE CASE.
WE'LL VOTE FIRST ON THE REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT, THE MINOR REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENT.
AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE A MOTION TO FORGE THE CITY COUNCIL WITH EITHER A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OR NOT FOR APPROVAL.
ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION?
>> HI, THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL.
EXCUSE ME. SORRY. I'M LOSING THE TEXTS [LAUGHTER] FROM PDF.
THAT WE WOULD FORWARD THE MINOR FLAGSTAFF REGIONAL PLAN 2030 AMENDMENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS THAT WOULD HAVE REFERENCED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM A, RESTORATION SOILS, PZ-21-00117-03.
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MAY ADENO AND I SECOND THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? THEN, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED? THAT MOTION PASSES.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE SECOND ONE FOR THIS, I JUST GOT TO PULL THIS UP HERE.
GET THROUGH ALL THIS INTENSIVE STUFF.
THE NEXT MOTION WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE, THIS IS REZONING FROM HYBRID COMMERCIAL TO THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THAT? I WENT THROUGH THAT. THIS IS FOR CASE NUMBER PZ2200045.
NEVER MIND, I JUST READ THE WRONG ONE.
THIS WOULD BE A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT.
DIRECTOR ORDINANCE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO REZONE THIS [NOISE] 7.29 ACRES FROM HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL TO BEEF FOOD SOURCE PROTECTION THAT OVERLAY TO THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL OPEN WITH A RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY.
I RECOMMEND THAT. SORRY, I'M GETTING A LITTLE BIT LOST HERE.
[00:25:03]
I MOVE THAT WE FORWARD THIS REQUEST TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT ACCORDING TO THE FINDINGS PRESENTED.I'M SORRY, THAT WAS NOT TOO WELL SAID, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU GET THE POINT THERE.
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER NORTON AND I'LL SECOND THAT.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED? THAT MOTION PASSES.
WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM,
[C. Case No. PZ-22-00045: City’s request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the notification requirements for Development Agreements. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the findings provided in the staff report, make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]
WHICH IS THE CITY'S REQUEST FOR ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT.>> I'M TRYING TO GET MY PRESENTATION [LAUGHTER] READY. JUST A QUICK SECOND.
IT'S FUNNY HOW I STAY IN MY OFFICE AND MY INTERNET IS SLOW.
>> PERFECT. SOLD TO NEANDERTHAL.
SENIOR PLANNERS SOON TO BE ZONING CODE MANAGER AS OF MONDAY.
YOU WON'T SEE ME AS A SENIOR PLANNER ANYMORE, I'LL BE BRINGING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO YOU FROM HERE ON OUT I THINK.
TONIGHT I HAVE BEFORE YOU AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE SECTION 10-20.40.060, JUST NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, IT'S BEEN ABOUT FOUR WEEKS NOW, I PRESENTED THIS ITEM TO YOU IN A WORK SESSION.
WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR YOU TO MAKE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.
THIS WILL MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 3RD IS WHEN WE'RE MOVING THIS FORWARD.
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOTIFICATIONS, IT'S A REALLY SIMPLE, VERY SMALL TEXT AMENDMENT.
BUT ESSENTIALLY THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE PUBLIC NOTICE TO BE PROVIDED WHEN APPROVING OR REVISING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DOES NOT ACTUALLY REVIEW DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
IT IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
OFTENTIMES WHEN A REZONING CASE OR AN ENTITLEMENT CASE, ANNEXATION SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, IF THEY'RE ACCOMPANIED WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WE GIVE YOU THE HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS THAT ARE LIKELY TO OCCUR WITHIN THOSE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY IS JUST A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT BETWEEN A PROPERTY OWNER, DEVELOPER, AND A LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
IT OFTEN INCLUDES TERMS NOT OTHERWISE REQUIRED THROUGH EXISTING REGULATIONS.
THE PRIMARY INTENT OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HELPS US MANAGE WHEN OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE REQUIRED AND THEY'RE REQUIRED TO MITIGATE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN SOME IMPACT ANALYSIS.
A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WATER SEWER IMPACT ANALYSIS, AND SO ON.
NOW, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS OFTEN INCLUDE OTHER COMPONENTS.
THEY WILL INCLUDE A LITANY OF ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT WISHES TO DO TO INCREASE THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT OR THEIR PROJECT.
THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT CAN END UP WITH AN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO PARTIES SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NEGOTIATED.
A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT AS IF A CITY CAN FORCE A DEVELOPER NECESSARILY TO COME INTO PARTICULAR STANDARDS.
IT IS ITS OWN LITTLE SPECIAL ANIMAL.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CAN COVER DEVELOPMENT OF A SITE AND DEVELOPMENTS OF SITES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND HAVEN'T BEEN DEVELOPED FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND THEN SOMETIMES DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE AMENDED.
WE FOUND IT TO BE OF CONCERN THAT PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOT BEING NOTIFIED, ESPECIALLY WHEN A DEVELOPMENT OR AGREEMENT WAS BEING MODIFIED.
MOST OFTEN WHEN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE FIRST INITIATED, THEN MOST OF THE CITIZENRY IS NOTIFIED THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING ANNOUNCEMENTS OF THE REZONING OR THE ANNEXATION,
[00:30:01]
WHATEVER THE ENTITLEMENT CASES THAT'S AFFILIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.BUT WHEN A DEVELOP AN AGREEMENT IS MODIFIED, AND THIS HAS COME UP PROBABLY TWICE IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, IT CAN BE PROBLEMATIC IN AN ISSUE.
WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT VIA THIS PARTICULAR TEXT AMENDMENT.
WE'RE CHANGING ONE SMALL SECTION OF THE CODE THAT BASICALLY SAYS THE NOTICE OF A DEVELOPMENT IN GROUP OR AGREEMENT, INCLUDING AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING AGREEMENT PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF ANY ACTION ON A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOTICE OR THE CITY'S COUNCILS PUBLIC MEETINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED PURSUANT TO PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 10-20.30-80 NOTICE THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS.
THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD DO FOR A REZONING, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SIMILAR ENTITLEMENT CASES.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE FINDINGS FOR ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS.
THE FIRST FINDING IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT AND CONFORMS WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
THERE REALLY AREN'T ANY VERY SPECIFIC GOALS AND POLICIES IN REGARDS TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.
BUT ONE CAN INFER THAT THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN IS TO INFORM AND MAKE THE PUBLIC MORE AWARE OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES WITHIN THE CITY.
CHANGING THIS AMENDMENT IS TANGENTIALLY ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL PLAN, EVEN THOUGH THERE REALLY ARE NO SPECIFIC GOALS AND POLICIES, STAFF CAN STILL SAY THAT THEY BELIEVE IT'S CONSISTENT AND CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLAN.
THE SECOND IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, OR WELFARE.
STAFF LEAVES THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE THAT IT IS A BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC TO GET NOTIFICATIONS ON THESE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATIONS.
LASTLY, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT WITH OTHER APPLICABLE PROVISIONS AND THAT FINDING HOLDS TRUE AS WELL.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THAT THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FORWARD THIS AMENDMENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS AS PRESENTED.
IF YOU SHOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO TRY AND ANSWER THEM.
>> WELL, THANKS, TIFFANY AND CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR NEW POSITION.
>> DO ANY OF YOU OUT THERE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO.
WELL, WAIT I SHOULD LET YOU CLOSE THE QUESTIONS.
>> WELL, I'LL JUST ASK IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I DON'T SEE ANY PUBLIC HERE BEYOND THE COMMISSIONERS, NO HANDS.
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A CASE NUMBER PZ2200045 FOR A REQUEST FOR A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR RECOMMEND TO FORWARD OUR APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS AS PRESENTED.
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL, I'LL SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> ALL OPPOSED. THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT ITEM IS FOR THE GHOST TREE PINE CANYON PROJECT.
[A. Ghost Tree at Pine Canyon PZ-21-00155-03 TLC PC Land Investors, LLC requests Preliminary Plat approval for Ghost Tree at Pine Canyon located at 3201 South Clubhouse Circle, a 12-unit single-family home subdivision on 7.87 acres in the Single-Family Residential (R1) Zone. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission, in accordance with the findings presented in this report, forward the Preliminary Plat to the City Council with a recommendation of approval.]
THIS IS FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.MAY WE HAVE A PRESENTATION, PLEASE.
>> GENEVIEVE PEARTHREE IN THE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION, LET ME GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN AND GET THIS STARTED.
I'M HAVING COMPUTER ISSUES, HOLD ON JUST A MINUTE.
[00:35:25]
GENERALLY, THERE ARE THREE SENIOR PLANNER IN THE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION.I'M HERE TO PRESENT THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL REQUEST AND IT'S WORTHY GHOST TREE AT PINE CANYON PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THIS REQUEST IS FROM TLC PC LAND INVESTORS, LLC, AND FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE GHOST TREE AT PINE CANYON SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS LOCATED AT 3201 SOUTH CLUBHOUSE CIRCLE.
FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION WITH 12 LOTS ON 7.87 ACRES IN THE R1 OR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
ON MARCH 28TH, 2022, THAT APPROVED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THIS IS VICINITY MAP, SHOWS THE LOCATION OF PINE CANYON DOWN HERE IN FLAGSTAFF AT 3201 SOUTH CLUBHOUSE CIRCLE.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PINE CANYON.
IT'S ON ONE OF THE LAST UNDEVELOPED TRACKS.
THE ZONING AND THE MAIN PART OF PENTANE IS ALL R1.
THE AREA AROUND THE TRACT IS EITHER A SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES OR GOLF COURSE USES.
PINE CANYON IS A 660-ACRE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT JW POWELL AND LONE TREE.
IT CAN HANDLE 31,000 SQUARE FOOT CLUBHOUSE, AN 18-HOLE GOLF COURSE.
IT'S MOSTLY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, AS WELL AS TOWNHOME LOTS AND CONDOMINIUMS. THE REZONING REQUEST FOR PAINTING WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2,000.
AGAIN, THIS IS ON 7.87 ACRES IN THE LARGER PINE CANYON DEVELOPMENT.
R1 ZONING TOLD SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND IT KNOWS HOW TO REACH US PROTECTION OVERLAY.
IT DOES HAVE SIGNIFICANT SLOPES AND TREES WHICH REQUIRE UNIQUE BUILDING ENVELOPES IN LARGE SHEETS TO MEET THE RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.
I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE.
SO AGAIN 12 WATTS AND THERE'S FIVE TRACKS.
ONE OF THESE TRACKS, TRACK E IS RESERVED FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
FINDING FOR APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISIONS PLATS FOR THESE THREE, THEY'RE ALL RELATED TO MEETINGS CITY CODE.
THE FIRST ONE IS WHETHER IT NEEDS THE ZONING CODE, WHICH ENTITLED 10 OF CITY CODE.
THIS PLAT DOES MEET ZONING CODE STANDARDS, INCLUDING THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR R1 ZONE STANDARDS WITHIN THE DENSITY RANGE, AS WELL AS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, WIDTH, AND DEPTH STANDARDS, AS WELL AS THE SETBACKS.
BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY AND TREES, THE ENVELOPES ARE INTERESTING SHAPES, BUT THEY DO NEED ME ALL THOSE MINIMUM STANDARDS AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE LOTS HERE.
WITHIN EACH ENVELOPE IS THE AREA THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED AND IT'S LIMITED TO THAT ENVELOPE.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS TO MEET THOSE RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.
I MENTIONED IT DOES NEED A STANDARD SO WE CAN SEE THEY'RE PRESERVING MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT OF TREES THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE PRESERVING, THERE ARE 50.66 PERCENT.
THEN FOR STEEP SLOPES, FOR STABLE STAMINA YOU NEED 24.9 PERCENT GRADE NATURAL PRESERVE, AT LEAST 70 PERCENT OF THE AREA OF THOSE SLOPES.
SLOPES THAT ARE 25 PERCENT TO 34.99 PERCENT GRADE, THEY HAVE TO PRESERVE AT LEAST 80 PERCENT OF THE AREA OF THOSE SLOPES.
THEY ARE EXCEEDING THAT IN BOTH CASES.
FOR PRESERVING 70.3 PERCENT OF THOSE LESS STEEP SLOPES AND THEN 84.2 PERCENT OF THE STEEPER SLOPE.
IN THIS TABLE SHOWS THIS CONFIRMS THAT THEY AREN'T MEETING THOSE RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.
WE CAN SEE HERE'S THE RESOURCE PLAN WHICH WILL BE REMOVED AND HOW THOSE BUILDING ENVELOPES WERE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE AND FLIPPED AND TREES.
THE SECOND FINDING FOR APPROVAL IS THAT A PLAT NEEDS ENGINEERING STANDARDS.
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT ANALYSIS, AND STORM WATER ANALYSIS WERE ALL COMPLETED FOR THE LARGER PINE CANYON DEVELOPMENT IN THE 2000S.
THEY IDENTIFIED ALL THE MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO TRAFFIC, WATER, SEWER, AND STORM WATER.
FOR THOSE THREE CATEGORIES, EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL AREA OF THE SUBDIVISIONS ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED.
THE ONLY NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT IS BASICALLY CONNECTING TO THAT EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE.
THERE'LL BE A NEW PRIVATE DRIVE WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION AND THE ROADS,
[00:40:01]
AGAIN, THEY'RE MAINTAINED BY THE HLA.FOR WATER AND SEWER, THOSE BE NEW WATER IN THROUGH LINES, THERE'LL BE INSTALLED BENEATH THAT PRIVATE DRIVE TO SERVE THE SUBDIVISION.
THEN FOR STORMWATER, THERE WILL BE SOME LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT BASED IN PROPOSED BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION ON THE GOLF COURSE.
WE CAN SEE THAT IN THIS MAP TO SEE WHERE THE NEW WATER AND SEWER LINES ARE GOING INDUSTRY AS WELL AS THOSE LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT BASINS TO CALCIUM MINERALS FROM WATER.
THE THIRD FINDING FOR APPROVAL FOR PLAT IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION AND LAND SLIT REGULATION.
THAT'S IN TITLE 11 OF THE DECODE SPECIFICALLY CHAPTER 11-20, THOUGH IT OUTLINES THE PROCEDURES AND APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THIS PLAT HAS MET ALL OF THOSE, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, AND ALSO IDENTIFIES THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AND OTHER IDENTIFIED AS PART OF A PUBLIC IN THE ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC WATER, WASTEWATER, AND STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT THAT I JUST DISCUSSED.
ALSO NEED SUBDIVISION STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR LOT STREET EVEN IN BLOCK DESIGN.
AS I MENTIONED A COUPLE OF TIMES, THERE ARE THREE FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL FOR PLAT AND THEY HAVE TO DO WITH MEETING CITY CODE THAT TITLE 10, IF THAT'S EARNING CODE TITLE 11, WHICH IS GENERAL PLANTS AND SUBDIVISIONS AND TITLE 13 ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
THIS CLASS NEED ALL THREE OF THOSE SECTIONS.
BECAUSE OF THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS BASED ON THE REQUIRED FINDINGS, WHICH IS THAT THEY DID PLAQUE CONFORMS WITH THOSE THREE SECTIONS AND CITY CODE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE PRELIMINARY OUGHT TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THIS ALL THAT I HAVE FOR MY FORMAL PRESENTATION, BUT THE APPLICATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION AS THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, GENEVIEVE FOR THE PRESENTATION.
DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER NORTON, I'M NOT SURE WHO CAME UP FIRST.
>> I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO FIRST IS COMMISSIONER NORTON.
>> I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF, AND THEN PROBABLY ONE FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'LL DEAL WITH THE STAFF QUESTION FIRST.
IT'S REALLY MORE OF A PROCEDURAL.
IT DOES APPLY TO THIS CASE, BUT I'VE ALSO SEEN IT POP UP ON OTHER THINGS.
AS I WAS PREPARING, READING THE DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS CASE.
I ALSO LOOKED AHEAD AS TO WHEN IT GOES BEFORE CITY COUNCIL AND WHAT DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM TO LOOK AT.
THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, IT ALL READY READS THAT OUR COMMISSION VOTED IN FAVOR TO FORWARD THIS WITH NO CONDITIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS.
I WAS JUST WONDERING WHY THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE PUT FORWARD IN ADVANCE BEFORE OUR MEETINGS EVER GET HELD? THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER NORTON, YES, VERY RARELY ARE PLATS OR ANY CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO PLATS SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN.
OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE WERE CONDITIONS OR IF IT WASN'T APPROVED, OBVIOUSLY THIS COUNCIL'S AGENDA WOULD BE UPDATED.
IS JUST IN THIS CASE, THERE WASN'T BECAUSE OF THE TIMING, I HAD TO GET THAT AGENDA ITEM ROUTED BUT IT WILL BE UPDATED IF ANYTHING CHANGES.
>> OH, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HARRIS.
>> YES. I WAS JUST CURIOUS, IT WAS MAYBE MENTIONED THAT THE TRAFFIC, STORMWATER AND I CAN'T REMEMBER THE THIRD STUDY THAT WAS DONE IN 2000.
I DON'T SUPPOSE THOSE CONSIDERED THE 12 ADDITIONAL LOTS SINCE THIS IS A NEW PLAT.
IS THERE A THRESHOLD OR A REQUIREMENT WHERE THOSE STUDIES NEED TO BE RE-EVALUATED BASED ON ADDING TO THIS SUBDIVISION?
>> THE IMPACT ANALYSES WERE ACTUALLY CONDUCTED IN CONSIDERING PINE CANYON BEING COMPLETELY BUILT OUT, THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T NEED TO BE REDONE FOR THIS PLAT.
HOWEVER, IF THIS WAS A NEW AREA AND THERE WASN'T ANY FURTHER IMPACT ANALYSES DONE FOR WATER SEWER, IT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF 10 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
THEN FOR TRAFFIC, IT'S PR TRAFFIC OF 100 TRIPS OR MORE AND THEN I DON'T REMEMBER THE PARAMETERS FOR STORMWATER.
SO THE IMPACT ANALYSES HADN'T ALREADY BEEN DONE IN PINE CANYON CONSIDERING THIS LOT, BASICALLY THINKING OF THIS SWATCH ALL READY BEEN BUILT, ALL READY TAKEN TWO COUNTIES.
THE HOUSES THAT WERE REBUILT ON THIS PLOT,
[00:45:02]
THEN A NEW ONE WOULD BE REQUIRED BUT THE DATA IS STILL GOOD IN THIS CASE, SO THAT'S WHY IT HASN'T BEEN REQUIRED.>> I SEE, COMMISSIONER NORTON IS YOUR HAND IS UP? OR WAS THAT FROM BEFORE?
>> NO, IT'S MY SECOND QUESTION.
>> I WAS WONDERING IF THESE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE SOLD AS CUSTOM HOME LOTS OR IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE BUILT BY THE BUILDER WITHIN PINE CANYON.
OBVIOUSLY THE HOME SITES, THE BUILDING ENVELOPE IS VERY SPECIFIC TO MEET THE PARAMETERS.
I WAS WONDERING IF THE BUILDERS DESIGNING CLEAR PLANS, HOME PLANS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THESE LOTS, OR AS THEY SAID, IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOLD TO ANYONE ELSE, RANDOM BUYERS AS CUSTOM HOME LOTS. THANK YOU.
>> I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> THANKS, GENEVIEVE. THIS IS TODD SEVERSON WITH SYMMETRY COMPANIES REPRESENTING TLC, PC LAND INVESTORS, THE APPLICANT.
>> YES, THEY ARE NOT BEING SOLD AS CUSTOM HOMES.
IT IS A SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED BUILDER PRODUCT WITH TWO TOUR PLANS THAT SENSITIVELY ACCOMMODATE THE TWO DIFFERENT SITE CONDITIONS, A SLOPING CONDITION AND A FLAT CONDITION.
HENCE THE SPECIFIC OUTLINE FOR THE BUILDING ENVELOPES TO SENSITIVELY PLACE THOSE AND PRESERVE AS MANY OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES AND SLOPE THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXISTING ON THAT SITE SO THEY WOULD BE SOLD AS A LOT WITH A SPECIFIC HOME DESIGN ALREADY PREPLANNED FOR THAT SPECIFIC LOT OF THE 12TH.
>> GREAT. THAT RELIEVES ONE OF MY MOST MAJOR CONCERNS BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY 12 HOMES ON BASICALLY EIGHT ACRES AND YET JUST SQUEAKING BY WITH PRESERVING 50 PERCENT OF THE SLOPE AND TREES.
I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT YOU'LL RETAIN THAT CONTROL TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE NUMBERS AND PRESERVATIONS WILL BE UPHELD.
>> DEAR COMMISSIONER NORTON AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY JUST AS A QUICK COMMENT IN THE CHAT.
FOR THE IMPACT ANALYSES THAT WERE CONDUCTED WITH PINE CANYON, THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY ENVISION THESE SPECIFIC 12 LOTS THAT THEY WERE DONE ACCOUNTING AFTER PINE CANYON HAD BEEN FULLY BUILT OUT.
SO STORMWATER STAFF, TRAFFIC STAFF, AND WATER SERVICES STAFF REVIEW THIS PLAT WHEN IT WAS IN REVIEW AND DETERMINE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S EXISTING IN PINE CANYON WE NOW GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO KNOW THAT IT CAN HANDLE THESE 12 LOTS.
I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES THAT QUESTION.
THEN JUST BRIEFLY, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO MY PRESENTATION.
HOPEFULLY WE DON'T HAVE THE COMPUTER ISSUE JUST TO CLARIFY SOMETHING REALLY QUICK FOR COMMISSIONER NORTON.
BASICALLY, THE WAY THAT THIS PLAT IS WORKING, I MENTIONED THEY HAVE THESE UNIQUE ENVELOPE.
BASICALLY WITHIN EACH LOT, THEY CAN ONLY DISTURB THE AREA WITHIN THE ENVELOPE.
SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER A PINE CANYON WAS BUILDING ALL THE HOMES OR IF IT WAS ACCUSTOMED LOT, THE CALCULATIONS ARE DONE IN A WAY THAT ASSUME THAT THE ENTIRE BUILDABLE AREA AND COULD BE DISTURBED.
IF THAT HAPPENED FOR EACH OF THE LOTS IN ADDITION TO THE STREET, MANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE THEN WE WOULD STILL BE NEEDING RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.
THESE PLAT AND OTHER PLATS, ESPECIALLY WITH UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY AND LOTS OF TREES, THEY DO BUILD IN MECHANISMS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS ARE MET.
I THINK THAT CLARIFIES THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YES. THANK YOU. I'M GLAD TO HEAR IT.
>> THANK YOU. WE'VE HEARD FROM STAFF, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? YEAH, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
EITHER ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS OR A MOTION WE'RE READY FOR. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.
>>THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR GHOST STORY AT PINE CANYON NPZ
[00:50:06]
2100155-03 FOR PLANNING AND ZONING TO APPROVE THE GHOST TREE WELL, LOCATED IN PINE CANYON, AND FORWARD THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS AS PRESENTED.>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER PAUL, I'LL SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, THEN ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> CAN I VERIFY WHO SECONDED THAT MOTION, I'M SORRY.
>> THAT WAS COMMISSIONER PAUL.
>> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT WE JUST HAVE SOME COMMISSION BUSINESS.
[7. OTHER BUSINESS Election of Chair and Vice-Chair, and volunteer to serve on the Open Space Commission. (The Open Space Commission meets on the 4th Monday of the month from 4-6.)]
THIS WOULD BE THE ELECTION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.I DON'T KNOW, SERVE DO YOU WANT TO MANAGE THAT OR DO WE JUST ASK FOR NOMINATIONS FOR THE FIRST STARTING WITH THE CHAIR POSITION?
>> YES. MARIA, IF YOU WANT TO RUN IT AND JUST ASK FOR VOLUNTEERS OR NON NOMINATIONS, I THINK YOU CAN NOMINATE YOURSELF IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DO THAT.
>> YES. FIRST LET'S START WITH A CHAIR LOOKING FOR A NOMINATION THERE, NOMINATING SOMEONE ELSE OR YOURSELF.
>>THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO, AND I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE YOU, MARIE JONES AS CHAIR.
[LAUGHTER] ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? WE HAVE ONE CANDIDATE AND WE'RE READY TO VOTE ON THAT.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS ONE CANDIDATE.
>> ALL OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONFIDENCE.
NEXT, WE NEED A NOMINATION FOR A VICE CHAIR.
I WILL NOMINATE CAROLE MANDINO.
>> [LAUGHTER] YOU'LL BE GREAT WITH YOUR EAGLE EYES.
ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? REMEMBER, YOU CAN NOMINATE YOURSELVES TOO.
WE HAVE ONE /CANDIDATE, COMMISSIONER MANDINO.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? CONGRATULATIONS, COMMISSIONER MANDINO, YOU'RE THE VICE CHAIR.
ALSO LOOKING FOR A VOLUNTEER TO SERVE ON THE OPEN SPACE COMMISSIONS.
THE PNC HAS REPRESENTATIVES THAT SIT ON VARIOUS OTHER COMMISSIONS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO WHAT WE DO HERE.
FOR INSTANCE, THE WATER COMMISSION AND I SIT ON THAT ONE AS A VOLUNTEER.
THIS IS A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY, IF YOU HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS AREA, TO BE A PART OF THAT PROCESS, SHARE CONCERNS BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
CAN SHARE THE INFORMATION WITH THAT OTHER COMMISSION ON WHAT TMZ IS UP TO.
IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING THESE OTHER COMMISSIONS, THEY ALL OPERATE A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN THE WAY WE DO SO IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING.
IF ANY OF YOU HAVE A INTEREST IN OPEN SPACE AND WOULD LIKE TO BE A VOLUNTEER FOR THAT COMMISSION, WOULD YOU LET US KNOW HERE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHOW UP.
YOU'RE NOT A VOTING MEMBER AND I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE THERE EVERY TIME.
BUT WHEN YOU CAN MAKE IT, IT'S REALLY HELPFUL.
[00:55:04]
ANYBODY INTERESTED IN THAT? GOING ONCE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY MEET.DO WE KNOW WHEN THE OPEN SPACE COMMISSION MEETS?
>> THEY MEET ON THE 4TH MONDAY OF THE MONTH FROM 4:00 TO 6:00.
PLEASE SOMEONE VOLUNTEER BECAUSE I TOLD THEM THAT I WOULD GET US A VOLUNTEER.
>> ARE THEY CURRENTLY MEETING VIRTUAL AS WELL?
>> AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, ALL COMMISSIONS WILL CONTINUE TO MEET VIRTUALLY, OR AT LEAST HAVE A HYBRID MEETING WHERE IT'S BOTH IN-PERSON AND VIRTUAL.
YOU WILL ALWAYS HAVE A VIRTUAL OPTION AT THIS POINT.
WHICH MAKES IT SUPER EASY TO ATTEND MEETINGS.
>> YEAH. I KNOW IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING.
MORE INSIGHT INTO THE WAY THE CITY OPERATES.
>> I'LL VOLUNTEER TO BE OUR REPRESENTATIVE.
THAT'S GREAT. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE COMMISSIONERS FOR STAFF?
[8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO/FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS]
>> THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO.
EARLIER THERE WAS A NOTED CHANGE.
I WOULD REALLY LIKE AN UPDATE ABOUT WHO'S STILL ON STAFF AND WHO'S LEFT AND WHERE THAT'S AT BECAUSE THERE'S CHANGES THAT HAD BEEN MADE AND I DON'T KNOW WHO'S LEFT ON STAFF.
>> I CAN PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU, CAROL.
>> FOR THE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE.
WE'LL DO THAT MAYBE THE NEXT MEETING OR SO.
>> I CAN EITHER DO SOMETHING MORE FORMAL AT THE NEXT MEETING OR I CAN EMAIL OUT SOME INFORMATION TO THE GROUP.
>> I THINK EMAIL WOULD BE FINE.
>> YEAH. AN EMAIL WOULD BE FINE.
IT WAS JUST MENTIONED BEFORE THAT THERE'S SOME CHANGES, SO I DON'T KNOW WHO'S WHERE.
>> YES. WE LIKE TO STIR THINGS UP.
[LAUGHTER] YOU GUYS ARE REBEL ROUSERS.
>> ALEX, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE COMMISSION?
BUT I FEEL GREAT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO THOSE ELECTIONS AND GET A VOLUNTEER FOR OPEN SPACE.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU-ALL FOR A LONG MEETING HERE, TWO MEETINGS.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYONE. HAVE A GREAT NIGHT.
>> GOOD NIGHT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.