Redevelopment Commission

TOWN OF GILBERT REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Minutes of February 20, 2019, 6:30 P.M. Municipal Center Building, Council Chambers 50 E. Civic Center Drive, Gilbert, Arizona 85296 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Tyler Hudgins, Chair Ryan Hamilton, Vice Chair Tyler Jones, Commissioner Peter Sciacca, Commissioner COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Boe Bigelow, Commissioner COUNCIL PRESENT: Scott Anderson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT: Daniel C. Henderson, CEcD Economic Development Director Amanda Elliott, Heritage District Liaison John Baird, Assistant Town Attorney Sydney Bethel, Planner II GUESTS PRESENT: Reese Anderson, Pew & Lakes CALL TO ORDER: The Redevelopment Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Hudgins at 6:31 p.m. ROLL CALL Amanda Elliott called the roll and declared that a quorum was present. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Chair Hudgins opened the floor to the public for any comments or communications on items not on the agenda. The Commission’s response is limited to responding to criticism, asking staff to review a matter commented upon, or asking that a matter be put on a future agenda. There were no communications from Citizens. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 1. Minutes – Consider Approval of the Minutes for the Meeting of January 16, 2019. MOTION: Commissioner Jones moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 16, 2019, seconded by Commissioner Sciacca. The motion passed 4-0. PUBLIC HEARING Items will be heard at one Public Hearing, at which time anyone wishing to comment on a Public Hearing Item may do so. Once the hearing is closed, there will be no further public comment unless requested by a member of the Commission. After the Public Hearing, the Commission may act on all items not requiring additional staff, public, or Commission comment with a single vote. Chair Hudgins opened the Public Hearing and invited staff to make a presentation on DR18-138 Aspire Heritage District.  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission February 20, 2019 Page 2 of 6 2. DR18-183, Aspire Heritage District: Site plan, elevations, floor plans, lighting, colors and materials, for approximately 2.47 acres, generally located at the northeast corner of Vaughn Avenue and Palm Street, and zoned Multi-Family/Low (MF/L). Planner Sydney Bethel presented the Design Review for Aspire Heritage District. The project site is located at the northeast corner of Vaughn Avenue and Palm Street with approximately 2.47 acres. The Design Review covers the site plan, elevations, floor plans, lighting, colors and materials for the project. This item was previously presented at a Study Session on November 21, 2018. The Redevelopment Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat for the same site last month, which was approved by the Planning Commission on February 6, 2019. The vehicular access for the site is at the corner of Vaughn Avenue and Palm Street. The site contains 32 units with a density of 12.97 dwelling units per acre. There are eight buildings in a four-plex style. There are three different unit types ranging from two to three bedrooms and 1633 to 2017 square feet. Pedestrian gates are located at the north end of the site against the canal and next to the vehicular access. At the prior Redevelopment Commission meetings, there were concerns on the refuse containers. The refuse and recycle containers will be stored within the garage units and rolled out to the street for pickup, which has been approved by Public Works. Colors and materials were reviewed, consisting of neutral tan and gray tones, corrugated metal, and brick veneer, similar to Whiskey Row and other buildings located in the downtown. There are two color schemes for each elevation type. Each unit type was reviewed with the location of garages, patios and entrances. The B and C units are combined, with the C units featuring rooftop patios which add height and outdoor space. The canopies are shown for reference only and can be added later by tenants. Staff recommends approval for the Design Review, DR-18-183, Aspire Heritage District. Questions/Comments from the Commission: Commissioner Sciacca asked if the refuse collection service would be provided by the Town of Gilbert. Ms. Bethel believed the Town of Gilbert would provide the collection service, although the applicant may choose a private agency for that service. Commissioner Jones asked if there have been other projects approved in Gilbert where the refuse containers were stored in garages. Ms. Bethel has not found a project that specifically stored the refuse containers in the garages. There are examples where those containers are stored in the backyards, which is more common in single family detached homes. This project is a condo-type product, which is single family. Storing refuse containers in garages has not been seen before in a condo-type complex in Gilbert. Commissioner Jones was concerned with the eight guest parking spaces in a gated enclosure. If residents were to use the guest parking, that would result in a shortage of parking with the potential to spill out onto nearby streets. Ms. Bethel acknowledged that parking has become an issue in Gilbert in complexes that have garages. Garages are preferred by the clientele and a portion is required by the Town of Gilbert. Storage within the units has caused some parking issues at other developments. One example in the area is Via Sorento. Some apartment complexes have started checking to make sure certain items are not stored in garages. Those checks cannot be done with condo units since they are individually owned. Staff has expressed some concern on the matter, although the project does meet code and the tight site makes it difficult to bring more options forward that would not result in the removal of a unit. Commissioner Jones asked for examples of the changes to the fencing at the entrance and along the canal.  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission February 20, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Ms. Bethel unfortunately did not have drawing of the changes to the fencing. Those changes were approved with the Preliminary Plat as part of the open space plan. She explained that the top view fencing originally had a metal mesh material which was changed to metal slats. There was no change in the height or the other fencing materials. Commissioner Sciacca asked for clarification that the refuse containers would be subject to the Town of Gilbert Municipal Code whether the refuse pickup was provided by the Town or a private entity. Section 66-290 states that refuse containers could be placed out on the street after 6 p.m. the evening before collection until 6 a.m. the day after collection, and on non-collection days the containers would be stored out of sight. Ms. Bethel stated that is correct, the containers would be stored in the unit and would only be permitted out after 6 pm the evening before pickup per the code. Commissioner Sciacca felt from a consumer standpoint, it would not be pretty with 32 containers out on pickup day. He asked whether the site would have CC&Rs or a homeowners’ association. Ms. Bethel stated the development is required make an HOA for the site. There is a statement in the report that if any issues arise from the refuse containers, that must be addressed by the HOA. Commissioner Sciacca noted that there could be policing by the Town of Gilbert as well as the HOA for refuse containers. Ms. Bethel stated that was correct. Code Compliance has the ability to write notices, although it is not done very often in gated communities unless it is not being handled by the HOA. Commissioner Sciacca noted similar developments in other Valley cities that have common area dumpster enclosures. He asked whether staff and the developer have explored dumpster enclosures for this site. He understood there is an aesthetic factor with people not wanting to live next to a trash enclosure, and a cost factor with the loss of a unit. Ms. Bethel stated staff and the applicant have briefly discussed other options, although no new refuse plan has been presented. Based on the number of units, the site would require two dumpsters, one dumpster picked up twice a week, or a compactor. Based on the discussions with Public Works, there are a few locations on the site that would work for dumpster enclosures, although it would result in the loss of units. She offered to have the applicant address that question in more detail. Chair Hudgins thanked staff for their diligence on this project, and thanked the applicant for the very nice design that will go well in the Heritage District. He would be willing to vote for approval with an additional condition regarding the refuse plan. The Commission has asked for options on the refuse plan in the past several meetings and it is discouraging that it has taken to this meeting to get to that point. Chair Hudgins opened the floor to members of the public who wished to speak on this item. There were no comments from members of the audience. MOTION: Chair Hudgins moved to approve the Findings of Fact and approve DR18-183, Aspire Heritage District: Site plan, elevations, floor plans, lighting, colors, and materials, for approximately 2.47 acres, generally located at the northeast corner of Vaughn Avenue and Palm Street and zoned Multi- Family/Low (MF/L), subject to conditions 1-4 listed in the Staff report, as well as an additional condition that states prior to construction document submittal, a revised site plan depicting fully-screened exterior refuse areas with details must be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. Amanda Elliott advised that the applicant should be allowed time to make a presentation or address any concerns. Chair Hudgins invited the applicant to make a presentation.  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission February 20, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Reese Anderson, Pew & Lakes, stated this is the first time the applicant has heard of this additional condition. He felt there may have been a slight misunderstanding regarding the refuse plan. The applicant has given considerable thought to refuse and how to include dumpsters. That was done internally in order to not waste staff time on options that were not viable. After considering options, the applicant concluded that the refuse containers belong inside the garages. He noted on the site plan there are notches on the ends of the A units with a 6-foot screened wall. Each refuse barrel takes up a space of 3 by 5 feet and the softness of those corners would be lost. The B and C units do not have that same notch, and barrels would need to go on the main drive or into the perimeter landscaping. This is a higher-end condominium ownership-based project, and dumpsters are not desirable. People expect to have barrels in better-quality projects. He confirmed that there will be an HOA and the CC&Rs will address parking, solid waste, and other items. He wants to make this project as successful as possible and there is every incentive to make sure those items are set in place from day one. He respectfully stated that the proposed condition number five was simply not needed. He would be happy to entertain ideas and discuss the matter further. Chair Hudgins understood and appreciated Mr. Anderson’s comments. His concern was that this development has come before the Commission for three meetings in which options for refuse were requested. Now it is at the point where the Commission will consider approval, and no options have been presented or discussed until today. It would have been helpful for the Commission to have information on the options that were explored. In all of the prior meetings, the Commission stated this was not a solution that they were happy with. He would like the applicant to work with Planning to find a solution moving forward. Mr. Reese stated the solution before the Commission is compliant with the code. The Solid Waste department has approved this plan. He would be happy to entertain other options and discuss the matter further with staff. There could always be a better plan, although he felt this is the best plan. Chair Hudgins felt it was unfortunate that the Commission has not had this discussion with the applicant before this point. He would like to see refuse alternatives. Mr. Reese felt there was a good plan before the Commission. He offered to show drawings where the applicant tried to fit in other options. Commissioner Jones asked whether the applicant had other projects that were successful with the refuse containers in the garages. He noted this area is a very congested historic district and was concerned that parking would spill out into the residential and commercial areas, which are already tight. Mr. Reese felt the concern regarding parking was fair. His earlier reference to the homeowners’ association and CC&Rs is critical in addressing that question. An HOA has to set the rules for parking so that residents will not use the guest spaces. As a gated community, the people coming in will be limited to those that have a code or their visitors. If a guest parks outside the development on the street, that is something none of us can control. He would welcome the involvement of Code Enforcement. He will make sure those rules are clear in the CC&Rs and enforced appropriately. With regard to solid waste, while it has not been done specifically in Gilbert, the code in Mesa requires garages to be 22 feet deep, as the storage of trash barrels in garages was anticipated. Mr. Anderson felt Gilbert was taking a similar approach where the garages are sized in order to store those barrels. It is done across the Valley. The architect was present at the meeting to address further questions. The applicant has a project in Mesa with a similar design with the garages sized appropriately to accommodate storage of the refuse containers. Commissioner Sciacca noted there is a nearby parking garage and asked whether the CC&Rs would contain language regarding the option for guests to park in the parking garage. He noted other places where the solution of storing trash containers in the garage exists for this kind of application. He felt  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission February 20, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Chair Hudgins was requesting screening for those containers for two days a week while they are out for pickup. He stated the Commission did not get enough information prior to this meeting to know that other solutions were explored. Vice Chair Hamilton had similar concerns with the trash and parking, although he felt there were mechanisms in place to address those items through the code. He felt the right place to regulate those items would be through the CC&Rs. His inclination was to have those concerns addressed in that manner and to approve the project with the recommendation of Staff as presented, without the additional trash condition. Commissioner Jones agreed and would support approval of the project. Ms. Bethel advised that the garages as proposed are 19 feet deep by 20 feet wide. Staff would like to see a standard of 25 by 20 feet, although unlike Mesa, Gilbert does not anticipate trash containers to be in the garages at this time and standards for garages are not included in the code. Ms. Bethel provided the Commission with a rough drawing for reference only showing what the site would look like with exterior refuse containers. There are conflicts with existing light poles and fire hydrants as shown on the drawing. The exterior trash containers are approximately 3.5 feet wide by 10 feet deep to avoid going into the setbacks as it is a tight space. Amanda Elliot advised that the Commission has the option to proceed with a motion tonight, or the item could be continued to another date if further conversation was needed. Chair Hudgins requested a brief recess to allow the Commission time to review the drawing provided by Staff. The meeting was recessed at 7:01 p.m. Chair Hudgins reconvened the meeting at 7:06 p.m. Amanda Elliott called the roll and declared that a quorum was present, with Commissioner Bigelow absent. Chair Hudgins believed there was a solution with the applicant moving forward on this item. Chair Hudgins again opened the floor to members of the public who may wish to speak on this item. There were no members of the audience who wished to speak. MOTION: Chair Hudgins moved to approve the Findings of Fact and approve DR18-183, Aspire Heritage District: Site plan, elevations, floor plans, lighting, colors, and materials, for approximately 2.47 acres, generally located at the northeast corner of Vaughn Avenue and Palm Street and zoned Multi- Family/Low (MF/L), subject to conditions 1-4 listed in the Staff report, and subject to an additional condition which states prior to construction document submittal, the applicant will work with Staff on a solution for the refuse plan, the details of such refuse plan are to be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. Vice Chair Hamilton provided a second. VOTE: The motion carried 3-1, with Commissioner Sciacca opposed. Chair Hudgins closed the Public Hearing. COMMUNICATIONS 3. Report from the CHAIR on current or future events. There was no report from Chair Hudgins. 4. Report from COUNCIL LIAISON on current or future events. Councilmember Anderson reported on a successful task force meeting on the 2020 General Plan Update. A public forum will  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission February 20, 2019 Page 6 of 6 be held on Thursday, February 28, 2019, 6 p.m., at the McQueen Park Activity Center. He encouraged Commissioners to attend as there are many items to be discussed that are relevant to the Redevelopment area. 5. Report from COMMISSIONERS on current or future events. Commissioner Jones noted there are currently several projects underway in the Heritage District. As these projects are approved, it is important to be cognizant of the parking implications with several projects going on at the same time causing congestion in the downtown area. There should be consideration to stagger projects in order to not overwhelm the district. 6. Report from STAFF LIAISON on current or future events. Amanda Elliott reported that the 600-stall parking garage is scheduled to open the end of March and we are on track with the Hearn Way and Bri-Comp Boulevard improvements in the surrounding area. Staff is working through the Heritage District Design Guidelines. The Town Council adopted the 2018 Redevelopment Plan in August, 2018, and the next step is to update the Design Guidelines to reflect the 10-year growth. The Planning Commission initiated a change to the Land Development Code earlier this month. Staff will continue with the public outreach meetings to discuss updates to the Design Guidelines. ADJOURN With no further business before the Commission, Chair Hudgins adjourned the meeting at 7:10 p.m. ___________________________________ Tyler Hudgins, Chair