Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ.2019.0912.Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 1 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 12, 2019 CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE —Chairman Susan Dempster Chairman Dempster called the meeting of September 12, 2019, to order at 600 p.m. 1. MOMENT OF SILENCE —Chairman Susan Dempster 2. ROLL CALL — Chairman Susan Dempster COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Susan Dempster, Vice Chairman Erik Hansen; Commissioners Mathew Boik, Clayton Corey, Peter Gray, Christopher Jones and Scott Schlossberg. STAFF PRESENT: Development Services Director John Wesley and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. CALL TO THE PUBLIC None. Pursuant to ARS. 38-431.01(H), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters NOT listed on the agenda. Any such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Commission and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The Planning and Zoning Commission will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during "Call to the Public" unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the Call to the Public, individual commissioners may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter, or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a future Planning and Zoning Commission agenda. 4. CONSIDERATION of approving minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes dated July 25, 2019. Commissioner Gray MOVED to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission dated July 25, 2019; Commissioner Boik SECONDED: passed unanimously. 5. PUBLIC HEARING to receive comments on RESOLUTION 2019-39, a proposed Minor Amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan 2010 to change the land use designation on approximately 23 acres of land located on the east side of Palisades Boulevard north of Shea Boulevard from Lodging to Multi-Family/Medium. If adopted, the amendment will allow for multi-residential development. (Case #GPA2019 - 01) 7. PUBLIC HEARING to receive comments on ORDINANCE 19-03, a proposed amendment to Lir the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Map. If adopted, the amendment would rezone approximately 59.79 acres at 10825 N Palisades, from the "L-3 P.U.D" and "OSR" zoning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 2 districts to the "Daybreak PAD" zoning district. If approved, the rezoning will allow the construction of an apartment complex with up to 400 dwelling units. (Case #Z2018-10) Chairman Dempster opened the public hearing for agenda item #5 and #7. John Wesley, Development Services Director, explained that the public hearing was originally scheduled on the July 25, 2019, Planning and Zoning Commission agenda. At that time, the applicant asked for a continuance in order to have time to meet with the community regarding the project. The Commission granted the continuance to the September 12, 2019, Planning and Zoning Commission agenda. Mr. Wesley reviewed the application through a PowerPoint Presentation. The applicant has two requests: one for a minor general plan amendment on the 23 acres and to rezone the sixty acres from L-3 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Open Space Recreational (OSR) to Daybreak Planned Area Development (PAD). The first request would change the designation from a lodging to multi-family/medium to allow for the development of a multi-resident community with a density between four and ten dwellings per acre. Mr. Wesley referenced the General Plan 2010 "Amendments to the General Plan 2010 should occur only after careful review of the requests and of findings of fact in support of the revision at public hearing(s) before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council." The property is currently designated as Lodging since the early 1990's. In 1999, the property changed from R1-43 to PUD to allow the resort hotel development.That development did not occur.This could be an indication that this location is not desirable for this use and it is time to consider an alternate land use designation. The applicant is asking the designation change to Multi-Family/Medium. The application is to develop an apartment community. The proposal is for 400 units for general and age restricted apartments. The project is 59.79 acres with an average density of 6.7 dwellings per acre. Mr. Wesley explained the pros and cons of changing the land use designation by referencing the General Plan 2010. In conclusion Mr. Wesley said in order to recommend approval of the land use change, the commission must find that the plan is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. In response to the commissions' questions, Mr. Wesley said that the largest of the buildings proposed is 600 feet in length and 30 feet tall with a roof top garden. The proposed resort building was 1400 feet in length. The assisted living portion has been removed but the 55+ remains. The parking ratio will remain the same but implementation is a problem.There are a couple of ways to look at the density. There is the straightforward ordinance way, as written in the report. There are 60 acres of a PAD, and the request is 400 units. This results in a density of 6.7 units per acre. In response to Commissioner Gray, Mr. Wesley replied that the density of the project is acceptable. This is more of a design challenge and designing it right so it fits the site and neighborhood. Commissioner Jones asked how was the height calculated and the garage parking spaces allocated. Mr. Wesley replied the height was calculated on the proposed grade. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 3 Commissioner Schlossberg asked about the incomplete submittal,which lacked complete Lsite plans and elevation. Mr. Wesley confirmed that they were not as complete like the Keystone submittal. He said there were some agreements made that the missing items are not needed immediately. The ordinance is very specific that the details are required and will be submitted, but what we have right now is sufficient for staff. When this comes back for review and approval,the staff report suggests future review is on the staff level.That does not have to be the case. The commission can make a stipulation to make it part of the public approval. In response to Commissioner Boik, Mr. Wesley said there have been some discussions that blasting may take place given the known soils and rock. A geotechnical report would be required as part of the building permit process. Mr. Wesley stated the proposed changes are tied to the land if this application is approved. A public zoning process would be necessary to revert to previous zoning unless a stipulation is part of the Development Agreement. Paul Gilbert, representing the Hilltop Vista Properties, LLC, said they were going to ask for a continuance but are officially withdrawing the request. There has been a lot of criticism about the developers such as they are outlanders; they are not from Fountain Hills. Mr. Hall one of the developers is here to address the commission. Jeremy Hall told the Commission when he was with MCO Properties, the original master 44,,,., developer of Fountain Hills, and during his involvement in the growth of the community, he contributed the following to the community: served on the Fountain Hills Community Foundation for seven years and personally donated personal time and money to Fountain Hills charities, chaired the FHCF charity golf outing at FireRock four years in a row, served on the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce board of directors for nine years, spearheaded the downtown vision plan and brought renowned Frank Lloyd Wright disciple,Vernon Swaback,to participate, drafted the Fountain Park vision plan, personally worked on building trails in the McDowell Mountains with the McDowell Mountain Preservation Commission and the Sonoran Conservancy, sponsored two annual scholarships for Fountain Hills high school students to attend universities, supported every school and municipal bond issue, donated the building for the Fountain Hills Community Theatre, developed the Eagles Nest public trailhead, worked with Mayor Linda M Kavanagh to bring the Adero Canyon public trailhead to fruition and was invited to cut the ribbon with Mayor Kavanaugh at the grand opening, served on two prominent HOA boards (FireRock and Eagles Nest) and ran their respective design review committees, sponsored countless community events for civic festivals, business showcases and fund raisers in Fountain Hills for decades. He said he can confidently say that no other single individual in town that has contributed more to the community than him over the past two decades. His business partner, Neil Ginsberg, developed and operated Copperwynd, so he too has strong ties to the community. He has extensive experience with resorts and multi-family projects. Over the past two months, Mr. Hall has met with Westridge Village and Crestview neighbors, as well as reaching out to the community through social media and in person. He referenced the agenda packet containing letters of support & opposition. Most of the opposition came very early in the process before the third revision and 19 of the 25 letters received recently have been in support of the project. In the packet are letters endorsing the project from three former PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 4 mayors, The Chamber of Commerce, three Fountain Hills real estate companies, Sunridge ilkor Canyon owner and Copperwynd resort owner. Mr. Gilbert gave a PowerPoint presentation starting with the Daybreak Development Plan. There are two neighborhoods. Neighborhood I is 270 garden apartments and Neighborhood II is 130 units that are age restricted. The assisted living element has been removed. The total amount is 400 units that equals 6.7 units per acre with 77% of open space. There isn't any other similar property in Fountain Hills with this degree of open space and this amount of low density. Mr. Gilbert displayed renderings showing the architectural features and the entire project including open space. He said the applicant is in agreement with Mr. Wesley's request to "beef up" the amenities. One of the stipulations is to work with Mr. Wesley regarding the design. Mr. Gilbert pointed out provisions in the general plan (GP 2010) that support the Daybreak project. He referenced the GP 2010 "strive for diversity in neighborhoods and the natural environment is preserved and protected and where diverse housing is supplied in beautiful developments "Daybreak provides significant open space with enhanced architecture, with appropriate height and less massing. Daybreak is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood because the large buffer around its boarders allow for a transition from less dense to more dense residential. Daybreak meets the goal of the GP 2010, Chapter 4, Goal 3, "Encourage the development of a variety of housing types." Mr. Gilbert quoted from the staff report stating, "If the land use designation were to be changed on this property, a multi-family designation is an appropriate alternative." This indicates that staff is in agreement with multi-family units for this property. The sewer and drainage plans have been submitted and reviewed by The Town Engineer. The traffic report has been reviewed and approved by the Town. The Town Engineer agrees the Sr. location of driveways on the property are the safest and best for placement. Referencing the staff report regarding the proposed use, Mr. Gilbert said, "The proposed development includes a fairly significant open space buffer around the borders as does the continuous development to the north. These large buffers allow for the transition in use from less dense to more dense residential uses." Eighty percent of the site remains open space. Mr. Gilbert showed a side-by-side comparison of the proposed Daybreak (3 stories) against the once proposed conference hotel (5 stories). The hotels longest continuous building measured 1400 feet while Daybreak is 600 feet. The total number of hotel parking stalls were 668. Daybreak's total number of parking stalls are 602. Maximum building height over finished grade (40 feet), maximum hillside cut (30 feet) and OSR area (37 acres) are the same for Daybreak and the hotel. Daybreak is an improvement over the hotel to the neighbors because it's a smaller overall building mass, smaller building footprints, better architecture, lower overall building height, more space between structures, blends well with the desert environment, greater preservation and no noise or disruption from hotel events. Mr. Gilbert shared Daybreak's economic effect over a ten year period; $19.6 million in local employment income, $42.7 million in resident consumer spending, $2.2 million in local sales tax revenue and $1.7 million in local rental tax revenue. Mr. Gilbert said that traffic (safety) was the number one concern among neighbors near the Daybreak property. The traffic impact analysis showed that Daybreak would provide only 200 more cars a day than the resort hotel would produce. The length of the site visibility triangles at the driveways meet the Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (ASHTO) guidelines and was approved by the Town Engineer. Adding dedicated left and right turn lanes on Palisades Blvd., traffic signals were not warranted, but because of the neighbor's concerns a traffic signal or roundabout was offered. The Daybreak cut and fill is consistent with similar developments such as Adero Canyon, Firerock and Eagle Ridge. Daybreak is asking for the same 30' that the previously PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 5 proposed hotel was granted. The Town Engineer has reviewed and accepted the fills. Daybreak is only disturbing 26 acres and is allowed up to 40.5 acres of disturbance. Mr. Gilbert said that "lodging" has been planned since the early 1990's. There has been no offer for a hotel in seven years since the current user has owned the property. The current owner had to foreclose on the property. Clearly, they have tried to get a hotel with success. A letter was provided from Greg Vogel, CEO of Land advisors stating, "There is zero feasibility for a resort style project at this site. "Mr. Gilbert quoted out of a letter submitted by William Hinz, Copperwynd Resort owner who wrote, "The development costs and the overall hotel metrics do not make it viable for resort use without access to a golf course, retail, etc. " Mr. Gilbert said that the applicant agrees with the staff stipulations listed in the staff report. He pointed out two in particular: "Upgrade the design and amenities to meet the general plan requirement for exceptional design and enhanced amenities." and "Provide extensive landscaping along Palisades Blvd. that exceeds the minimum requirements set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance." In conclusion, this property is not right and will not become right in the future to be developed under the present general plan designation for a resort hotel. As indicated in the staff report, if a resort hotel is not going to be built on this property, multi-family is a viable and acceptable alternative. Commissioner Jones asked about the details of the cut/fill comparison to the original PAD. Mr. Gilbert said the presentation mentioned that the Town Engineer approved the fill. Commissioner Corey asked, what would the upgrade to the design and amenities look like. Mr. Gilbert replied that he could not read Mr. Wesley's mind but based on conversations, he thinks Mr. Wesley would like to see more break up in the massing, color diversity and more diversity in elevations and projections. CALL TO PUBLIC Comment cards in favor of the Daybreak project were received from Amy Arnold, Andi Bell and Neil Ginsberg. Comment cards in opposition to the Daybreak project were received from Anna Agboola, Dan Ahern, Robert Allen, Barbara Altergott, Janice Amramen, Michael Anselmo, Gary Barrios, Robert Baskind, Yayoi Baskind, Pam Baskind, James Baskind, Linda Bauerle, Jeremy Bell, Kimberly Bell, Roger Bendet, Judy Bendet, Linda Bennehoff, Dan Berg, Gerald Berna, Karin Bishop, Terri Blatchford, Sandford Borken, Faye Borken, Rene Bouchette, Greg Brandenburg, Addie Brandenburg, Irvin Brock, Ruth Brock, John Brockelman, Jean Brockelman, Rick Brown, Cindy Brown, Dolores Buchanan, Dominick Bueti, Robert Cagaet, Richard Carney, Bruce Cash, Nancy Chapman-Ogden,James Chase, Denise Clark, Michael Clark, Cathi Clausen, Lucinda Cords, Fred Cornell, Sheila Corzine, Reggie Court, Beth Court, Mary Courtney, Terry Cox, John Coyle, Danny Craig, Laura Crane, Alan Crane, Maylou Crane, Yossi Czopp, Mary Dahl, Leo Damkroger, Mary Day, 11) Dave Debucia, Deborah DeRose, Kathleen Dietz, Linda Donzelli, Peter Donzelli, Elaine Dowling, Dorothy Dudgeon, Arnold Dulak, Kelley Duley, Joanne Dunlcavy, James Erickson, Joann Etzler, Bill Fawver, Alice Fawver, John Fears, Marcia Fears, Burt Fischer, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 6 Cathay Fischer, Shirley Fischer, James E Frank, Patricia A Frank, Lola Fraser, Bill Fraser, Judy Frenzen, Steve Friel, Linda Frisk, Michael Garten, Kathy Geiger, Dan Geiger, Joe �r Geraardt, Robert Gianguzzi, C. Kenneth Gibbs Jr., Linda Goddard-Volny, Candace Goodwin, James Green, Mark Greenbaum, Maggie Guiragossia, Brenda Haeberer, Tom Haeberer, Elizabeth Hahn, Heidi Hake, Arnold Hampel, S. Hawksson, Greg Hermie, Marian Hermie, Marybeth Hess, William Hindman, Judy Hines, Richard Hippner, Judith Hippner, Jill Hollister, Ken Hughes, Jean Hughes, Norman Hurley, Joesph Huske, Sherry Irwin, Don Irwin, Maggie Iverson, Dennis Iverson, Bob Jacobious, Esther Jacobious, Karen Janota, Bob Juckniess, Mary Jo Juckniess, Robin Jurgens, Raffi Kramian, Betty Kaszycki, Mickey Keilman, Martha Keilman, Ed Kelso, Karen Kern, Karen Klaassen, Lynda Klensko, Nancy Labate, Joe Labate, Anne Larkin, Vincent Larkin, Jonas Levine, Jane Levine, Arlene Lila, Donna Lyons, Carol Malinski, Joe Marino, Betty Marino, Larry Mattingly, Cindy Mattun, Nora McClelland, Mike McClelland,J. McGonigle, John, Meredith, Holly Messel, Maryanna Milton, Morton Mitchell, Barbara Moore, Larry Morris, Roberta Morrone, Angie Neeb, Kelly O'brien, Beth O'Mea, Tim O'Rourke, Bill Pape, Gail Pape, Phil Parrish, Mike Parrish, Barb Pearlsen, Peter Pennell, A. L. Petersen, Marisa Phillippi, Nancy Plencner, Beth Pojman, Jan Post, Connie Purinton, Lynda Ranshe, Bruce Rava, Kelly Ray, Richard Rench, Patricia Reyes, Leslie Ridenour, Richard Ridenour, Shelly Richardson, Kenneth Rock, Anita Rock, Lucy Roth, Teresa Russo Cox, Sagrenti, Phil, Cathy Sandow, Jim Sandow, Gregory Schoen, Susan Schoen, Nancy Scimone, Stephen Scimone, Doris Scmeling, Renee Seidler, Lesbeth Sestina, Tammy Sherrill, Rick Sherrill, Marie Shutts, Nancy Sibert, Eden Silver, Karen Simons, James Skirington, Marilyn Spherico, Tracey Springstead, Craig Spungen, Chuck Stevens, Lloyd Tarr, Joey Thorley, Sandy Tucker Guiney, Lorraine Vlachos, Peter Volny, David Vuksanovic, Melissa Vuksanovic, Pat Wainwright, Candice Wallace, Peter Wilk, Linda Wilk, David Williams, Nanette Wright, Cynthia Zagurski, Wayne Zielinski, Dawn Zielinski, Mikey Zike, G. Zingsheim, Gary Zuanetti, and Karen Zubert. The following individuals addressed the commission. Robert Courtney, Fountain Hills resident, President of the Westridge Village Home Owners Association, addressed the commission stating that Westridge Village consists of 87 single-family residences on 35 acres in contrast to the proposed 400 units on 23 acres. This is a great illustration of the fact that regardless of how they want to call this; all of it is being compressed into one area. Mr. Courtney asked the commission not to approve the two items regarding the Daybreak project. Westridge Village is not opposed to development of this site as demonstrated by meeting with the developer of the last project (the resort) which resulted in Westridge Village's support. The resort had 268 rooms as opposed to 400 full time families proposed to live in the neighborhood. He asked that the land use not be approved unless it is known exactly what is going to exist on the property. The PAD is incomplete. It was stated tonight all the different things missing and needing to be resolved. Those matters should be put into an amended application and brought back to the commission, similar to what Keystone did.There are issues regarding traffic, the soil and the geotechnical report. There may be issues with blasting.The incompleteness of this application should give pause to look at this and not be under any pressure to make a decision. Mr. Courtney asked the Commissioners not PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 7 to approve either of the two proposals tonight and suggested the commission request the applicant to go back to the drawing board. Robert Hahn, Fountain Hills resident, expressed concerns regarding the traffic issues on Palisades. Mr. Hahn referenced a handout showing the proposed exits and entrances of the resort project and that of the Daybreak project. Daybreak recently added a roundabout that the Town engineer said would be similar to the one located near Costco in Scottsdale. Daybreak proposed an exit/entrance 600 feet from Shea Blvd. The resorts was located 2000 feet from Shea. There are reasons that this is located within 600 feet of Shea Blvd. One is that more units can be crammed into the space. The other is they can dump the fill from the site (into the OSR land) so they do not have to haul it away thus saving money. The roundabout proposal is not a good fit for this location. Roundabouts work well for the most part when the conditions are single lane, in flat low traffic areas where slowing to 20 mph or stopping is no big deal. The proposed roundabout will be two lanes in a hilly, curvy, fast area with high traffic volume located 200 yards off Shea Blvd. Mr. Hahn asked the commission to vote no to changes to the general plan, vote no to changes to the zoning and no to the Daybreak project. Emily Hemphil, land use lawyer, stated she is not representing a client or being paid by anyone to be here tonight. She said she is here tonight because Fountain Hills is an outstanding community and this PAD is a serious detriment to the community and a violation of the Fountain Hills General Plan. The proposed general plan amendment, if approved would anticipate no more than 230 units, 23 acres, 10 units per acre. Yet this project is proposing almost double that (400 units) on the exact same 23 acres that the general plan allows 230 units. To achieve this 75% density bonus the developer is asking to zone not just 37 acres but 60 acres multi-family and 37 of those acres on the general plan are designated as open space. They are essentially transferring 170 units of density from property that under the general plan has a zero density because they are designated as open space. Following the general plan, the maximum allowable density for the entire 60 acres should be 230 units and remaining zero for the open space area. They are relying on the general plans concept of clustering units. Clustering units is intended to encourage the increase in open space, not intended to be used as a tool to increase the density beyond what the general plan states. By staying with a minor amendment on the 23 acres, they could get this project done the easiest way possible. They did not try to do an amendment on the full 60 acres because that would require a major amendment. They are leaving 37 acres in open space yet taking the170 units from the 37 acres and moving it on to the 23 acres creating the densest property in Fountain Hills. This use of the clustering technique under the general plan requires that there be extraordinary dedications and enhanced site amenities. Instead, this project is offering unremarkable amenities and in return leveling the hillside. The mass grading needed for this project will come with tremendous environmental affects: noise and vibration from the blasting and trucks and massive disturbance of land that has not been disturbed before. The point is this project is too dense, bad planning, not in keeping with the general plan and it should be denied. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 8 Michael Webb, Fountain Hills resident, and vice president of finance and accounting at a major Scottsdale resort. Mr. Webb said he was there to talk about the financial aspect of the change in the amendment. He referenced Fannie-Mae and a 2018 multi-family economics research report that listed 14,500 units in progress for development of multi- family units. With Park Place, Ridge View Apartments, Keystone, and 70 plus additional rental homes, there is no need for additional multi-family homes in Fountain Hills. The application is proposing 270 rental units at $1750.00 a month, which would generate tax revenues (1.9%) of $90,700 a year if 100% occupied and 130 restricted living units at $5,000 a month for an annual total of$124,800 if 100% occupied or a little over$98,000 a year at 80%occupied. Alternatively if the property maintained the current zoning with a 250 room boutique/conference hotel with a daily rate of $137.00 at 70% occupancy that would generate tax revenues (6.9% tax rate) of $600,000 a year for the town. In addition, it would create jobs and a hotel of this size would employee approximately 350 employees. According to a 2018 Scottsdale tourism study, transaction lodging tax revenue collections have increased at an annually compound growth rate of 7.4 % as compared to the 2.5% in the multi-family sector. What the developers deliver to Fountain Hills is the desecration of the natural environment representing the western gateway of Fountain Hills and return minimal revenue for this right. Barbara Goldstein, a Fountain Hills resident, said she is speaking in opposition to the Daybreak project. She is concerned about the traffic safety and the density of the 400 units. One of her biggest concerns is lack of adequate parking. The Fountain Hills ordinance requires 563 parking spaces for the unrestricted apartments but the project only shows 481 parking spaces. The developers plan is short by 82 spaces and is asking for a 15% reduction waiver. The senior living apartments are allocated 130 parking spaces, 50 of which are in two car garages leaving 76 parking spaces. Assuming seniors will not drive, there still will be a parking need for caregivers, deliveries and visitors. Daybreak is looking to provide less than half the parking than what is required by the zoning ordinance. There is no off property parking available. If this was a hotel, there would be off site parking and shuttles would be available. Tourists would shop local. The Economic Development Director got it right when he said, "There is a reason this parcel is zoned for a hotel and not for multi-family. " Please vote no on zoning. Anne Traynor, a Fountain Hills resident, said she speaks for the audience and hundreds of concerned Fountain Hills residents. Collectively we agree that it is imperative to make an effort to safeguard and preserve the beautiful entry to the Town. These characteristics, unlike the bustle of Scottsdale are the reasons people live here. This area is in danger of irresponsible development and destruction of natural terrain, wildlife pathways and total disregard of the Fountain Hills vision detailed in the general plan. Daybreak contravenes the general plan. Ms. Traynor said she does not oppose development but believes development should be in harmony with the general plan. Georgeanna Zoros, a Fountain Hills resident, told the commission she is not opposed to development but is opposed to the Daybreak project. She said in the General Plan, Chapter 3, Land Use Element, Goal 5, states protect and preserve existing neighborhoods from incompatible land uses. A 400 unit multiple family rental complex is not compatible PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 9 to surrounding areas of low density single family homes. Also, in the General Plan, Objective 6.1., the Town should continue to preserve steeply sloping hillside areas and tracts of contiguous open space. The developer has proposed to remove 30 feet of the hill by possible blasting in order to accommodate height restrictions. How does such a drastic alteration of this hill comply with that goal? Also contained within the plan is the following; "undeveloped wash areas contribute to the quality of life for residents by providing significant open space, assisting with natural groundwater discharge and do support wildlife." Does this parcel not have two natural wash areas that could be altered or even destroyed? Multi-family complexes are encouraged to be located close to the town center where commerical businesses exist to serve the rental community. This is not the situation at Shea Blvd. and Palisades Blvd. The fact that ten variances would be required for the project is telling that this is the wrong development for this location. Ms. Zoros concluded with a reference from one of the planning department documents, the general plan of the town is developed with extensive public involvement and with input and direction from professional planners. The plans reviewed by staff and the council before approval and ratified by the voters in a general election. Changing land use designation is allowed and appropriate, but should be considered thoroughly and a change made only when the proposal is in harmony with the Plan and will provide an equal or better development pattern for the Town. This parcel is a prominent gateway to the town and it requires an exceptional development proposal. Daybreak would not be the one. At this time the zoning on the parcel should not be changed. The General Plan will be updated in 2020 which will allow all concerned to access all the development that occurred in the last 10 years and then to decide on any changes to be made for the future. Steve Messel, Fountain Hills resident, said he was there to talk about the Copper State Engineering Geotechnical report. Copper State Engineering did not do any geotechnical work. They relied on previous reports performed by Western Technologies Inc. The reports were part of the hotel project. In the 1999 geotechnical data consisted of seven seismic lines oriented for depths of 10-15 feet. Three of the lines appear to measure beyond 9 feet. All three seismic lines showed either very dense cemented soil or heavily cemented soil or rock. Copper State Engineering stated that 10 feet of cuts would be considered stable. Cemented depths below 10 feet may be stable with additional site geotechnical work. Copper State Engineering's report said that they reserve the right to expand or amend the suggestions, as information becomes available. With such a major project why would the developers rely on an old geotechnical data (14 and 20 year's old) and outdated technology? The surrounding residents are concerned that this project will require explosives resulting in property damage. Mr. Messel proposed that the commission require the applicant to obtain a comprehensive geotechnical test data to more accurately determine the excavating requirements. Also to provide written assurances of reimbursement for any property damage due to such actions. Scott Seidler, Fountain Hills resident, said he agrees with all of the previous speakers. He pointed out that the Daybreak renderings are not accurate. He said that the Daybreak low elevations from his home are atrocious. With the amount of traffic and speed on Palisades, the idea of a roundabout is foolish. Fountain Hills is 20 years older than it was PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 10 in 2000 when the town was starting to build out. As the town matured over 20 years, it realized there is a greater value to ecology and more nuances of municipality planner. As we move toward 2020 and are in the process of updating the general plan, perhaps that is when it is decided what the Town wants at this gateway. Larry Goldstein, Fountain Hills resident, said he was opposed to the "nightmare" know as Daybreak. He talked about the motivation for his attendance at the meeting. The community will continue to hear from many residents who are opposed to Daybreak. They are sharing their heartfelt concerns from traffic safety to inappropriate land use. The residents in close proximity to the town's main entrance know how wrong this development is for that location. These people should be listened to.Those that use Shea Blvd. and Palisades Blvd. intersection everyday know first-hand how disruptive to traffic safety the Daybreak project will be. These people are motived by love, pride, and fear. These are "human" emotions. They love their families and our charming town. They take pride in the fact they live in one of the most unique towns in the valley. They take pride in the community and want to see land developed correctly and appropriately. They fear the traffic safety. They fear that this development will forever change the "towns" calling card" for the worse. They fear for the loss of the "uniqueness" that our town is known for. The developer's motivation is for money and profit. These are not human emotions. They intend to spend money and make money with the development of this land and are proposing that the town will substantially gain due to the increase in business and tax revenue. Profit is essential in business and it is an accepted fact. If the developer were 4111, required to make the necessary changes that would alleviate the traffic safety, inadequate parking and high-density concerns it would cost them much more therefore cutting into profit. There is an important choice to be made. We live in a world where money is often given a higher priority than people. Mr. Goldstein asked the commission to reject that premise and listen carefully to all the human emotions and motivations. Stephanie Czopp, Fountain Hills resident, said she is opposed to changing the zoning of the land from resort to dense residential rentals. One of Arizona's biggest economies is tourism. "The Fountain Hills slogan is "get out of the valley and into the hills." This parcel is perfectly placed for success as a boutique resort not apartments. Copperwynd is expanding and We-Ko-Pa resort is under renovation. These two projects will be breathing new life into the local market, and what is better than some healthy competition. She encouraged the current owner of the property to be patient. The neighborhood is gaining momentum and the comps are improving. Prices are increasing. There is the new Economic Development Director along with our neighbors together could grow the resort business. Paradise Valley has over a half dozen hotels in 16.5 square miles. The revenues from these help them stay a sleepy dark sky community that does not have a property tax. Fountain Hills residential tax revenue is 1.6%, while resort tax revenue is 6.6%. Approving this zoning request would be leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table. As a town, we would not receive any benefit from this project. It would increase the burden on Town resources far more than any contribution it could make. Denise Reckitts, Fountain Hills resident, referenced information she received at a conference that said the home appreciation in Fountain Hills was at 2%, while Paradise PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 11 Valley home appreciation was in excess of 6%. The difference was that Paradise Valley has jobs and Fountain Hills does not. Paradise Valley is a lot like Fountain Hills in that it is a bedroom community but has many jobs because of the lodging industry not apartments. There are five major resorts in Paradise Valley. The population is around 14,000 compared to Fountain Hills 25,000. The average age is 53 years old much like Fountain Hills. There is no need for property tax in Paradise Valley because there is lodging that creates jobs and revenue. The proposed development is inconsistent with the general plan. She referenced a hand out given to the commissioners that stated home values decrease by 13.8%when located near a high concentration of rental property. Chairman Dempster called for a short recess from 8:23 p.m. —8: 30 p.m. Call to Public resumed. Nancy Stevens, Fountain Hills resident, told the commission that Daybreak's request is no ordinary zoning request. If it were, nobody would be here. Everybody knows the real facts of this deal.All the speakers tonight know the finer points of why this project should be denied. The traffic safety, roundabouts, blind corners, no guaranteed income for Fountain Hills and destroying the entrance to Town is not good for any future. The more this project is discussed the more the opposition. Reggie Court, Fountain Hills resident, referenced a letter he submitted to the Fountain Hills Times. He explained the Town has two similar problems; The proposed flight path the Town Council ruled against and the Daybreak development. Quoting Mayor Dickey, "The town opposes any modification that would significantly increase air traffic over Fountain Hills. This would drastically increase the noise and frequency of air traffic over the town, potentially decreasing property values and quality of life, and attractiveness of the town." Mr. Court said that the problems created by Daybreak are more immediate and possibly more deadly then that of a flight path change. By applying Mayor Dickey's statement to the Daybreak development, the property values and quality of life and attractiveness of the Town's major entrance. The traffic noise level and chances of more serious accidents would only be increased by the Daybreak.The size,design, and location of the proposed buildings would decrease the value of existing homes and change the entrance to the Town. If Daybreak is built, it will be occupying the last open space meant for a hotel. Patricia Green, Fountain Hills resident, said before purchasing a lot in Westridge Village the realtor said that a boutique hotel was planned for the corner of Palisades and Shea. Daybreak is not an appropriate structure for the area or the Town and asked that the commission consider the request to deny the project. David Lonn, Fountain Hills resident, said that all the views from his home are in the direction of the proposed Daybreak location. He moved to Fountain Hills from Carefree and before that Paradise Valley. He said this project would never be allowed there. It is cheap construction and wrong to take 30 feet off the hill top to put 400 apartments. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 12 Erica West, Fountain Hills resident, said that she opposes the Daybreak project because it destroys the reason people move and live here, (beauty, views, quiet, open space and natural desert environment), it creates high density and traffic hazards. Ms. West asked the commissioners to please save the beauty of the town and deny the Daybreak. Michelle Webb, Fountain Hills resident, said that after exhausted research and many discussions with the residents of Fountain Hills, that this is not a good choice for this location. In the Minor Plan Amendment Mr. Wesley pointedly states the general plan for the town is developed with extensive public involvement and with the input and direction of professional planners. Mr. Wesley continues to say the plan includes Visions, goals and objectives that the council and citizens believe are best for the future of the town. He continues to write that, changing land-use designations is allowed and appropriate but should be considered thoroughly and a change made only when the proposal is in harmony with a plan and will provide equal or better development patterns for the town. He further writes the questions become... Is a change from the lodging designation appropriate and beneficial to the town at this time? If so, does a change to a multi residence land-use category provide a better land use pattern for the town and is the proposed development the best use for the property and meet the objectives of the town. In the rezoning portion, Mr.Wesley's remarks on the study of the resort market showing it is not expanding; However, one resident who is in the Lodging industry in Scottsdale said that there is significant data stating the tax revenues for resorts are up 7.4% year-over-year. If there is no value here, why would Copperwynd be expanding by 270 new rooms and spend a hundred million dollars? Revenue from Lodging is 4.5 times more than a multi-family apartment complex. The residents of Fountain Hills are not opposed to development it just has to be responsible development that fits in with the environment and surrounding neighborhoods and will provide something to the Town - like jobs and much more revenue. There are many variances of the zoning code and General Plans goals and objectives asked for by the developers. Few which they recognized to the Planning and Zoning Department. Leveling the hillside and building 400 apartments 25 feet from Palisades should not be the signature of Fountain Hills.The developers said at the Chamber of Commerce meeting they had at Eagle Mountain in March, "it would be convenient to work in Scottsdale having these multi-family units at Shea and Palisades."Well if they work in Scottsdale,they will eat there and they will shop there. Kristen Skivington, Fountain Hills resident, said that decisions being made today would affect all of us. She asked the commission to consider when making a decision tonight that Fountain Hills is more than just a town it is a community: a feeling, a commitment, a belonging. Please decide to maintain the community and affirm the town will not sacrifice to become one more rental development. Carol Kelso, Fountain Hills resident, said her concern, along with others spoken this evening, for the project is the density. The density of the project is twice that of any apartment complex in Fountain Hills. The vote tonight will not include the final review. The commission will not get the final approval with the details. The planner will review the final. The Town Council will never get to vote on what will finally be built. The public PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 13 will not get any say. She urged the commission to vote no to the Daybreak. It is the Cr wrong type of building for that site. Dori Whittrig, Fountain Hills resident, said she owns a real estate business in town and is President of the I Love Fountain Hills organization, founder of the Leadership Academy and co-chair for Vision Fountain Hills. Vision Fountain Hills surveyed 2000 local residents and one of the key items from the survey was that this community needs younger people. This type of housing helps to bring people to the community that could not afford to purchase a home in Fountain Hills. In August, the average home sale price in Fountain Hills was $489,000. The average list price was $836,000. Those are daunting for young people. Today there are 183 homes on the market in Fountain Hills from $170,000 to God knows what. I have been part of the community since 1985 and seen a number of emotional zoning cases. I encourage you to consider this project. Fountain Hills needs this kind of housing and this developer seems to want to work with the Town. Cassie Hansen, Fountain Hills resident, said while serving as the first town clerk and as a Town Councilmember, she recorded, participated and survived many controversial agenda items that have faced the community since incorporation. Many of which pertain to zoning and development. Sunridge Canyon, Target, Fourpeak Vista, Firerock and Eagles Nest are just a few that were targeted as detriments' to the community, necessitating larger meeting venues resulting in late night adjournments, referendums fir and even litigation. Emotionally charged issues challenges staff, appointed and elected officials as well as the applicant, stirring the decision making process. All involved are placed in the position of balancing public opinion and emotion with the facts of the case, rule of and in compliance with ordinance and law, and benefit to the community. Hindsight is 20/20 and looking back at the controversial issues of the past that came to fruition; they did not destroy the community, rather contributed to the quality, diversity and opportunities in the community. Daybreak is the latest controversial emotional issue to come before the town. This project is fueled by surrounding residents who want this sight to remain vacant using worse case scenarios. I believe this project provides a unique housing opportunity not available in Fountain Hills. Daybreak is an opportunity for enjoying quality of life living without the challenges of ownership. Please deliberate and decide based on facts, not emotion. Daybreak is an opportunity to embrace not miss. Marti Parrish, Fountain Hills resident, said she is opposed to the Daybreak project. Daybreak is asking for too many exceptions. There is a reason the Town has rules and ordinances, to prevent building projects like Daybreak. Please use this land for a resort and keep it as a destination. Timothy Lasota, retained by the Summit at Crestview neighbors, said this is one of the most incongruous project he has seen in this area. The developer is asking to be trusted first before providing project details. The details are very few and should be questioned. It is striking how few questions have been answered by the developer during meetings and when replying to staff and the public. Sometimes he has to tell clients there are redeeming qualities to a project they oppose,this is not one of those. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 14 Larry Hering, Fountain Hills resident, said that Mr. Gilbert's presentation shows what the developers want to do to a comparison of a hotel that doesn't exist. The amount of blasting that would have to take place is absurd. He said he came to the meeting neutral but after listening to the presentations and speakers, he is against it. Larry Meyers, Fountain Hills resident, said he did not want to debate but wanted to talk about some headlines. Headline April 3, 2019 - Strategic Plans new priorities clarified. Art Tolis said "Many of these challenges that face the town and also the school district have a lot to do with demographics, I think this plan is right on target. There is a concern related to an aging population." At the Council Meeting on Aug 13, 2019, Councilman Tolis expounds on the "Tourism will save us" philosophy. It will increase sales tax revenue greatly. Headline Aug 16, 2019- Economic Development Director talks long-term stability. "As you approach build out,the land use needs to be optimal to collect sales tax to support the city." As to the Astroscience Center planned downtown which got him excited, "This hits on a couple of strategic goals set by the council, a more diverse demographic, attracting younger families and education." I want to help execute the council's vision to support the long-term stability for the town." Mr. Meyers said that Fountain Hills has more than enough apartments. The area is surrounded by apartments on the Avenue of the Fountains and on El Lago. Fire Rock has plenty of apartments. Families, not so much. Snowbirds, sure enough. They are gone half the year, not spending their money here. With this as the backdrop, how are more apartments good for the long-term stability of the town? Will more apartments foster a younger demographic and create more sales tax revenue than a resort. This parcel is reminiscent of the Trevino and Saguaro land only but bigger. A parcel owner who failed to build a resort looking to dump the land for any use so they can con this town into so they can cash out. That is the short view. The long View is five golf courses within two miles. Beautiful vistas. A resort will come and will be the "optimal land use" for long-term stability. Take the long view please and recommend against rezoning. Karen Klaassen, Fountain Hills resident, said she came to the meeting tonight because she cares and cares about the process. She said she understands why the developer has not presented more details. They have invested time and quite a bit of money already. She asked the commission to think about the future sustainability and affordable homes for lower income families in Fountain Hills. Vice Chairman Hansen asked who makes the definition of exceptional design and when will that decision be made. Mr. Wesley said that it would come back to him and staff for review. Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 9, would be used as the guide. If something were questionable, the higher end requirement would be used to ensure the best result. In response to Commissioner Jones, Mr. Wesley confirmed that if the General Plan changes tonight or at Council, but the zoning does not change,the existing zoning would 4111 remain in effect. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 15 Commissioner Gray asked if the Town's Economic Development Director had an opinion on this location. Mr. Wesley said there have been discussions with Mr. Smith. The feeling was there is still some hope for lodging or opportunities for education or medical related for this location. There was not a whole lot of enthusiasm for multi-family. Mr. Gilbert said he honestly believes he addressed the majority of the comments heard this evening. A comment was made that this is high density and the use of all 60 acres is not allowed. Mr. Wesley clarified that is what a PAD allows. It allows the use of the whole area and allows clustering. Using the whole 60 acres results in low density. The details that are not complete are not significant. We agreed to work with Mr. Wesley to tweak the details, design, amenities and some other things. That is not a reason to turn this applicant down. Traffic has been a major topic. A traffic light is not needed. The report provided confirms this and the Town Engineer and our engineer agree. In order to alleviate concerns of the neighbor a traffic light has been offered. The "scalping" of the hill is done to benefit the neighborhood by allowing the structures to sit lower. The 57 feet of fill is only in one place and is necessary to promote safety at the entrance. The structures are 400 feet from the closest residence. This piece of property does not have the same locational criteria as Copperwynd. Mr. Gilbert ended by saying that staff has said if a resort hotel is not going to go there, a multi-family use is an acceptable alternative and this multifamily will not have a deleterious effect on the neighborhood. For these reason we present a case that is worthy of your approval. Commissioner Jones asked what are the services provided exclusively to the age restricted area. Mr. Ginsberg said that the independent living will offer two meals per day, transportation, entertainment and all the amenities in the amenity court; bocce, pickle ball, pool, Jacuzzi, fitness center and spa/beauty salon. Mr. Wesley said what he heard explained was independent living. Assisted living is needing another person's help with daily tasks such as dressing, bathing and taking medications. In response to Commissioner Jones, Mr. Ginsberg replied that in general, the residents living there are seventy-five to eighty years old. It is a "want" driven not necessarily a family with children. In past projects, there has been a temporary allowance for a 55 and under to live there. The allowance is usually for one a month. There are a bank of elevators and there is an interior climate control. Mr. Hall said that there are two distinct communities. One is the garden apartments of 270 units, externally loaded with open stairways. The senior living is a separate entrance, separate building. It is internally loaded with climate control and elevators. There is a common shared space that contains a lounge, library, recreation center and dining. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 16 Commissioner Gray asked why the stipulations weren't resolved and presented this evening and do you see a way to get the parking ratio to improve. Mr. Wesley said that in terms of the level of design received; most of the items were minor design issues that can be worked out. The ultimate design would have to look very similar to what you see this evening. It could not drastically change. As far as parking, the only concern is the 55 plus section where some buildings may need to be moved in order to make that work. In response to Commissioner Jones, Mr. Wesley replied that assisted living is called out in a specific category in the zoning ordinance. Chairman Dempster said she had major concerns regarding the parking. Is it possible to separate an overview regarding the total parking spaces for each category? Mr. Hall said there is 130 parking spaces for the senior living. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual's parking standards for senior living is .5 spaces per unit. The reason being very few of these residents have cars. Part of what is paid for at a senior living facility is transportation. The national standard .5 per unit. Fountain Hills does not have a code for this parking. Phoenix is at one space per unit. Daybreak is twice what the national standard requires. In response to Chairman Dempster and Commissioner Jones, Mr. Hall explained that the traffic study considers the current traffic on Palisades. The decision to locate the entrances came from a pre application meeting held with Bob Rodgers, Randy Harrel, the Fire Marshal and Town Manager.These are the safest locations based on a full access median break left in and left out.These locations comply with the ASHTO guidelines. The plan is to construct dedicated right and left turn lane. This will get the traffic out of the main lanes. The civil engineer and traffic engineer considered all locations along Palisades. Chairman Dempster asked what considerations were taken regarding land disturbance. Mr. Hall said the ordinances allow 40 acres of disturbance of this site. The project disturbs far less than that. The goal was not to exceed what was approved by the resort. The goal was to match it or improve in every aspect. Daybreak has the same OSR space as the resort proposal. In response to Commissioner Jones question, Mr. Hall said that there is a financial incentive to disturb less land than more land. It can get very expensive. It becomes a tradeoff. The more land set aside in the natural state, the more disturbance occurs on what is left to cluster the density. It was more important to leave the open space. Mr. Gilbert said this project has established that multi-family is a real improvement over the resort hotel. It is very likely that would never come to fruition. There is a compelling PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 17 need for multi-family. The plan is designed to reduce the scarring from what would have been done under the hotel. Chairman Dempster closed the public hearing. 6. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2019-39, a proposed Minor Amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan 2010 to change the land use designation on approximately 23 acres of land located on the east side of Palisades Boulevard north of Shea Boulevard from Lodging to Multi-Family/Medium. If adopted, the amendment will allow for multi- family residential development. (Case # GPA2019 - 01) Commissioner Jones made a MOTION to forward a recommendation to the town council to approve RESOLUTION 2019-39, a proposed Minor Amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan 2010 to change the land use designation on approximately 23 acres of land located on the east side of Palisades Boulevard north of Shea Boulevard from Lodging to Multi-Family/Medium. (Case # GPA2019 - 01) The motion failed. In response to Commissioner Gray, Mr. Wesley stated that the general plan would be on the ballot in November 2020. The general plan is currently under review and revisions. The minor amendment would expire depending on what happens with the general plan. Commissioner Jones made a MOTION to forward a recommendation to the town council %ft. to DENY RESOLUTION 2019-39, a proposed Minor Amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan 2010 to change the land use designation on approximately 23 acres of land located on the east side of Palisades Boulevard north of Shea Boulevard from Lodging to Multi-Family/Medium (Case # GPA2019 - 01); Commissioner Boik SECONDED: passed 6/1. A roll call vote was taken with the following results: Commissioner Boik Aye Commissioner Corey Aye Commissioner Gray Aye Commissioner Jones Nay Commissioner Schlossberg Aye Vice-Chairman Hansen Aye Chairman Dempster Aye 8. CONSIDERATION of ORDINANCE 19-03, a proposed amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Map. If adopted, the amendment would rezone approximately 59.79 acres at 10825 N Palisades, from the "L-3 P.U.D" and "OSR" zoning districts to the "Daybreak PAD" zoning district. If approved,the rezoning will allow the construction of an apartment complex with up to 400 dwelling units. (Case #Z2018-10) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 18 (i1V Commissioner Gray made a MOTION to forward a recommendation to the Town Council to DENY ORDINANCE 19-03, a proposed amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Map. (Case #Z2018-10); Vice Chairman Hansen SECONDED: passed 7/0. A roll call vote was taken with the following results: Commissioner Boik Aye Commissioner Corey Aye Commissioner Gray Aye Commissioner Jones Aye Commissioner Schlossberg Aye Vice-Chairman Hansen Aye Chairman Dempster Aye 9. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/ REQUESTS FOR RESEARCH to staff. Chairman Dempster requested that the Economic Development Director, James Smith, attend the October 1, 2019, Town Council meeting. 10. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director. None. 11. REPORT from Development Services Director. Mr. Wesley said that the commissioners should plan to attend the meeting on September 26, 2019. A portion of the General Plan 2020 will be reviewed at that meeting. 12. ADJOURNMENT. The Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held September 12, 2019, adjourned at 10:15 p.m. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 12,2019 PAGE 19 Tow Fountain 'lls S Dempster, Chairman ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: ?akitifr il13dMA Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Session held by the Planning and Zoning Commission of Fountain Hills in the Fountain Hills Community Center on the 12th day of September 2019. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 26th day of September 2019. eam.04- ct)/T7/1A4ff Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant