TOWN OF GILBERT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WORKING SESSION

GILBERT MUNICIPAL CENTER, 1025 S. GILBERT ROAD, GILBERT ARIZONA

SEPTEMBER 3, 2003

COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice - Chairman Brigette Peterson, Commissioner Daniel Dodge, Commissioner Shane Leonard, Commissioner James Beene, Commissioner Karl Kohlhoff, Commissioner Michael Monroe, Alternate Commissioner Scott Simas

COMMISSION ABSENT: Chairman Joan Krueger

STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Jerry Swanson, Planning Manager Linda Edwards, Planning Manager Maria Cadavid, Senior Planner Jim Cronk,

ALSO PRESENT: Town Attorney Phyllis New, Councilmember Don Skousen,Recorder Trasie Johns

CALL TO ORDER:

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M.

Z03 - 21 and S03 - 2 - Pecos Manor, Zoning to R - CH and Plat for 222 lots in Gateway Area, Jim Cronk, 503 - 6815

Senior Planner Jim Cronk informed the Commission that Pecos Manor was a forty acre site located at the northwest corner of Recker and Pecos Road. He stated that the proposal was for the R - CH Multifamily zoning with 222 proposed lots. He explained that they wanted to present the item to the Commission was to get their comments on whether this project was appropriate for the Gateway area and reflected the characteristics of the area. He used the visual aid of the Gateway area and noted that the property was at the southern boundary of the Gateway area. He provided the plat for the Commission to review of Pecos Manor that was a part of the zoning case.

Mr. Cronk reviewed the project. He explained that the plat consisted of three pack units where lots were arranged in groupings of three which were repeated. He noted that the pattern provided a slightly recessed garage, a deeply recessed garage and a side entry garage. He pointed out that all of the garages were accessed from the street. The property was proposed to have single and two story homes ranging from 1600 to 2700 square feet, providing some variety in the size of the homes. The density range was in the range of the General Plan, between 5 - 8 units per acre.

Mr. Cronk referred to the Traditional Neighborhood Guidelines that were provided in the Commissioners’ packets. He pointed out that one of the things that was listed in the Gateway area of the General Plan was to specifically deemphasize garages and encourage alley and rear access. In addition, the guidelines specify that 50% of the lots were to be rear access to a garage. He explained that projects that were approved in the Gateway area a long time ago were approved without alleys, but recent projects such as The Gardens, William Lyons Cooley Station, Lyon’s Gate project have included at least 50% alleys.   He questioned whether the proposed project would be acceptable to the Commission without some significant portion of the project as rear access.

Commissioner Shane Leonard wondered why there wasn’t access to Recker Road. He felt that there was limited access in the project since it contained 222 units.

Mr. Cronk replied that since Higley High School was located to the west of the project with three different access points the Town Traffic Engineer felt that an additional access point on Recker Road would not be advisable.

Commissioner Shane Leonard was concerned about the transition from the high density homes to the low density county homes on the west side of the project. He asked if there was any way to mitigate the impact of this on the county homes.

Mr. Cronk responded that at the end of each block there was a 25′ minimum landscape with a public street and guest parking. He pointed out that the closest home would be about 80′ from the rear lot of the county homes.

Commissioner Michael Monroe was concerned about the access into the project. He felt that they should add an access point that aligned with the school on Recker Road that could be signalized. He thought that since the project consisted of about 40 acres they should require the developer to provide some rear alleys. He referred to the guidelines and stated that if the project were closer to 20 acres, he would not feel so strongly about them adding the rear access.   He questioned what the Staff felt about the project.

Mr. Cronk explained that the 20 acre exemption from providing alleys was written into the guidelines on the request from the developers. He agreed that since the proposed project was over the 20 acre exemption, there should be some proportion of rear loaded garages.

Commissioner Michael Monroe questioned what the applicant felt about changing their proposal and what their view was on the subject of alleys.

Mr. Cronk replied that the applicant did not want to change their proposal and they had put a lot of money into the project and felt that this was what the Town wanted when they began the process.

Commissioner Michael Monroe thought that the plan was well designed with the three packs, the circulation was well thought out and the floor plans work well with the setbacks. He added that most of the guidelines were in met.

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson asked for clarification on where the points of access were to the high school and if they were signalized.

Mr. Cronk pointed the access points out on the visual aid and stated that they were not signalized at that time.

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson recommended that the project have another point of access added on Recker Road and that it could be signalized if it lined up with the high school.

Alternate Commissioner Scott Simas questioned if the other projects that were approved without alleys were approved prior to the guidelines being written.

Mr. Cronk replied that he was correct, the other projects were written prior to the work on the guidelines. He reminded the Commission that they were not yet approved guidelines, but that the Staff had been working with developers using the guidelines.

Commissioner Dan Dodge questioned when the applicant submitted the project.

Mr. Cronk replied that the preapplication process was done back in January, which was before the guidelines were being used.

Mr. Cronk questioned whether the Commission would be agreeable to approving the project if the applicant were to provide less than 50% of the homes having rear access.

Commissioner Michael Monroe agreed that he would accept less than 50% rear access with a valid reason of why they provided that specific percentage and didn’t meet the guidelines.

Commissioner Dan Dodge commented that the applicant most likely started the platting design before they were aware of the guidelines and therefore would not be establishing precedence for other developers. He added that if possible he would like to see them follow the guidelines but that he would be more flexible since the project was platted prior to the guidelines being approved.

S565 - Preliminary Plat Phase II - Santan Lakeside Estates, Preliminary review of Phase 2 Preliminary Plat for 41 lots located within Santan Lakeside Estates north and west of the NWC of Recker Road and Santan Blvd Linda Edwards, 503 - 6750

Planning Manager Linda Edwards informed that Commission that they only had one issue regarding S565, Santan Lakeside Estates. She explained that they would be reviewing the R1 - 20 zoning case later that evening which the Staff was in support of. She used the visual aid to point out where the project was located and pointed out the two Phases. She noted that their concern was that the major point of access was off of Riggs Road for the existing project. She added that it was a gated community. She pointed out that one development was proposing one emergency only access point off of Recker Road. She showed the Commission where the gated access would be located in West Village and pointed out the circulation that would need to take place to get through the development, which was cumbersome. For convenience of the neighborhood and for safety purposes, Staff felt it made sense to add an access point to the project.

Commissioner Shane Leonard questioned if the local street was wide enough for access.

Ms. Edwards replied that they would most likely need to increase the size of the road to provide queuing and a gate.

Commissioner Dan Dodge questioned why the applicant had only placed an emergency access instead of a regular access.

Ms. Edwards replied that she would need to verify why this emergency access was added.

Commissioner Karl Kohlhoff thought that the Commission had come to a consensus that gated communities were intended for odd shaped little parcels and not for major parcels. He added that he was not in favor of gated communities.

Commissioner Shane Leonard agreed that he was not in favor of gated communities.

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson and Commissioner Michael Monroe felt that there needed to be another point of access into the development.

Commissioner Michael Monroe questioned if the Town Traffic Engineer had reviewed the project and if it was acceptable.

Ms. Edwards replied that Bruce Ward, the Town Traffic Engineer, had reviewed the project and stated that it would make sense to have an additional access, but he would not mandate this.

Z03 - 06 and S587 - Twin Fields - Preliminary review of a rezoning request for approximately 153 acres from County R - 43 to R - CH, R - 3, PF/OS and C - 1 with a PAD Overlay at the SEC of Greenfield and Williams Field Roads. Joseph Moon,503 - 6748

Senior Planner Joseph Moon informed the Commission that Twin Fields was a 153 acre proposal with 1436 units surrounding a five acre park. The project contained a mixed density PAD with both single family and multifamily products. He pointed out where the R - CH, R - 3, PF/OS and C - 1 developments would be located in the project. He used the visual aid to discuss the surrounding area. As a part of the annexation, the Town is proposing the half street right of way along Frye Road and in front of the exemption parcels that will not be participating in the annexation.

Mr. Moon discussed the Staff’s primary concern with the project, which was the transition between the R1 - 20 lots in Chaparral Estates and the R1 - 10 properties on the eastern and southern border of the proposed project.   He explained that typically they would want a transition that would be close to what already existed. He pointed out that the applicant had worked to increase the size of the adjacent lots. He used the visual aid to show where the applicant was proposing a landscape buffer along Frye Road which would serve as a transition between the adjacent acre lots and the proposed R1 - 10 lots.

Mr. Moon described the deviations proposed in the project. He noted that the applicant was requesting side and front yard setback deviations for the R1 - 6, R1 - 7, R1 - 8 and R1 - 10 properties. There were also deviations requested for lot coverage allowing up to 45% lot coverage for the four zones where the code requires 40%, which were for single story homes.

Mr. Moon explained that the applicant had provided a traffic and noise study since it was adjacent to the Santan Freeway. He pointed out where the walls would be located along the freeway and that the freeway was depressed in that area. He used the visual aid to show where the trails would be located in the project. He noted that the total open space for the project was a little over 15% with an overall density of 9ሞ units per acre.

Commissioner Shane Leonard questioned whether there would need to be a taking in front of the exemption parcel for Frye Road to be developed.

Mr. Moon replied that there would need to be a taking of approximately 7′ - 14′ of the exception parcels.

Commissioner Shane Leonard asked if the owners of the exemption parcels were aware of the takings.

Mr. Moon responded that they were working with the owners regarding their property.

Commissioner Shane Leonard was concerned that the developer was requesting so many deviations. He felt that the ULDC standards should be called “guidelines” and not “standards” since so many developers request deviations. He questioned why they were requesting these deviations.

Mr. Moon explained that one of the primary reasons the applicant was requesting a PAD was to request the deviations from the ULDC standards. He added that Staff was comfortable with what the applicant was proposing, but they were looking for direction from the Commission.

Commissioner Shane Leonard questioned if the deviations were in line with the ULDC that was being revised.

Planning Director Jerry Swanson commented that the deviations were in line with the new ULDC.

Commissioner Dan Dodge discussed his concerns with the deviations. He felt that they had been flexible in the past allowing deviations for lot coverage for single story homes, but that side yard and front yard set back deviations needed to have good justification in order for the Commission to grant these differences from the code. He explained that side yard set backs were established for a reason and it would be problematic to change these unless there was a good justification provided by the applicant.

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson agreed with Commissioner Dan Dodge’s comments.

Alternate Commissioner Scott Simas questioned the boundary between the existing ½ acre and 10,000 square lots. He asked if the applicant might be agreeable to make the lower half of the lots bigger than 10,000 square feet.

Mr. Moon replied that the applicant had revised his plan to increase the size of some of the parcels, which he pointed out on the visual aid.

Commissioner Karl Kohlhoff referred to the homes across the property lines and felt that in looking from Williams Field Road down to Frye the R1 - 10 was satisfactory since the lots were very narrow where they back onto the subject property. He felt that there was a good buffer on the south side of the project.

Commissioner Dan Dodge agreed with Commissioner Karl Kohlhoff’s comment about the southern boundary and that it wasn’t a transition issue in that area.

GP03 - 7 and Z03 - 25 - Via Sorento -   Preliminary review of a request to change the General Plan land use classification and zoning districts to accommodate an attached single family townhome condominium project, Via Sorento. The project is approximately 17 acres and is located south and west of the SWC Guadalupe and Gilbert Roads. Linda Edwards, 503 - 6750

Planning Manager Linda Edwards passed out an aerial and renderings of the project. She informed the Commission that Via Sorento consisted of 17 acres and was located south of the Albertson’s at the SWC Guadalupe and Gilbert Roads. She used the visual aid and aerial to discuss the surrounding area and where the proposed project was located. She pointed out the access points on Juniper and Olive Road.

Ms. Edwards discussed the proposed product that was illustrated in the rendering. She noted that the applicant was proposing a combination of two and three story town homes. Some of the units would be grouped together in four buildings and some in groups of five to seven. Typically these types of items were not discussed in zoning, but since it was a PAD they needed to review the product. The zoning that was requested in the PAD was R - 4 from the C - 1 and C - 2 zoning categories. She noted that as they continue to work with the applicant the zoning might change to R - 3. She explained that Staff supported the project.

Ms. Edwards explained that the project would not be viable for Shopping Center since its only remaining access was off of Juniper, which was a collector. She used the visual aid to point out the circulation through the project and noted that the open space was private safe space located in the center of each pod. She pointed out that the street around the pods would have brick pavers.

Ms. Edwards noted that the traffic engineer had requested a traffic study. The main entrance that was gated would line up with Arbor Walk. She explained that they had some concerns regarding the intersection of Juniper and Gilbert Road because of the increase of traffic that would occur with the development. She added that they were also concerned that the project was garaged dominated through the streetscape and they were working with the applicant to find alternatives. Although the project would not meet 45% open space they were more concerned that the open space be useable for the residents. The R - 3 and R - 4 standards require that the first floor have a minimum of 80 square feet of open space and since the garage was the first floor and the livable space on the second floor they would be working with the applicant to come up with quality open space per unit. She concluded that they support the General Plan amendment to change the zoning from commercial to high density residential.

Commissioner Dan Dodge questioned what Economic Development felt about losing the commercial zoning in the Town.

Planning Director Jerry Swanson replied that Economic Development approved of the change since it was not a good parcel for retail since it had poor access and visibility.

Ms. Edwards added that the project was located at the edge of the Village Center for the Heritage District and Staff felt that the project would be a compliment to the area.

Commissioner James Beene questioned how much open space the project would have.

Ms. Edwards replied that the project would contain 37%, not including the private open spaces per unit.

Commissioner Karl Kohlhoff commented that he liked the layout with the parking and street on the sides providing a large buffer between the project and surrounding area.

ADJOURNMENT

Vice Chairman Brigette Peterson adjourned the meeting at 6:00 P.M.

ATTEST:

Recorder Trasie Johns