Redevelopment Commission

TOWN OF GILBERT REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Minutes of April 17, 2019, 6:30 p.m. Municipal Center Building, Council Chambers 50 E. Civic Center Drive, Gilbert, Arizona 85296 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Tyler Hudgins, Chair Tyler Jones, Commissioner Boe Bigelow, Commissioner COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Ryan Hamilton, Vice Chair Peter Sciacca, 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: Doralise Machado-Liddell CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the Gilbert Redevelopment Commission was called to order by Chair Hudgins at 6:52 p.m. ROLL CALL Amanda Elliott called the roll and declared that a quorum was present. COMMUNICATION 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. Doralise Machado-Liddell is a Gilbert resident in the Heritage District. She asked that the Master Plan, the Design Guidelines and the Sign Guidelines be made a priority in order to speed up the process. She feels that decisions are being made without the proper back-up in place. The Master Plan reflects the town policies so that property owners and developers do not need to spend time and resources determining what can and cannot be developed on any parcel. It seems like the town is making text amendments and changes to the code because developers decide that they want something that is not in the town’s plan. If developers are aware of and have the ability to review the Design Guidelines, Sign Guidelines, and the Redevelopment Plan, they will be more informed and will not have to waste their time or the public’s time to attend meetings. In addition, when establishing the Design Guidelines, she believed that noise pollution must be a part of those guidelines. Whiskey Row is extremely noisy between 12:45 and 2 a.m. on the weekends and it is very difficult for residents to  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission April 17, 2019 Page 2 of 6 sleep. The developments have to co-exist with the residents. Although it is an entertainment district, it is also a residential district. She asks that the Redevelopment Commission and town staff please develop these guidelines so that everyone will have the same vision and direction. Without that, we will have street signs that do not match, lighting that does not match, etc. She noted the streetlights currently do not match in the area. Culinary Dropout has street signs that do not incorporate into the Heritage District. That is taxpayer money and should be part of the design. That is why it is so important that those plans and guidelines are established now. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 1. Minutes – Consider Approval of the Minutes for the regular Meeting of March 20, 2019. MOTION: Commissioner Bigelow moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 20, 2019, seconded by Commissioner Jones. The motion passed 3-0. 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 Public 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. 2. Z19-04 LDC Text Amendment – Heritage Sign Plans; Request to amend the Town of Gilbert Land Development Code, Chapter I Zoning Regulations, Division 4 General Regulations, Article 4.4 Sign Regulations, the Glossary of General Terms, and the Appendix 1 Graphics, to allow for a new type of rooftop sign in certain locations within the Heritage Village Center Zoning District. Sydney Bethel, Planner, presented the request for an Amendment to the Land Development Code related to the addition of new nostalgic or historic rooftop signs within the Heritage Village Center (HVC) Zoning District. The Redevelopment Commission will review the proposed amendment and recommend either approval or denial. This item will be heard by the Planning Commission on May 1, and by Town Council on May 16, 2019 for final approval. These dates are tentative. A downtown interest has shared the idea for a nostalgic rooftop identification sign for the historic and symbolic center of Gilbert, which is the Heritage District. Currently, the Land Development Code prohibits rooftop signage. In researching other municipalities within the Valley and across the country, it was found that many do not currently permit rooftop signs. A lot of the rooftop signs existing today are either restored or are on the national registry. There are very few cities that actually permit new rooftop signs to be erected, and they are typically only allowed in historic districts to bring back the nostalgic feel of the 50’s and 60’s when that type of sign peaked in popularity. The Heritage District has a very distinctive character in which staff believes this type of sign would be appropriate. The amendment would only permit this type of sign within the HVC Zoning District as other types of projecting and neon signs are allowed to encourage a sense of place and unique style. Proposed Amendment The draft Text Amendment would only permit identification rooftop signs within the HVC Zoning District and along Gilbert Road within the Heritage District. Rooftop signs could only be placed on three-story or taller buildings. In the Heritage District, the maximum building height is 55 feet.  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission April 17, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Not many buildings currently exist that are above that height. There will be a separation requirement of 1,000 feet between rooftop signs. The distance from Juniper Avenue to Elliot Road is approximately 4,100 feet. That distance would allow for three to four rooftop signs according to the separation requirements. The sign area must not exceed 300 square feet; the height must not extend more than ten (10) feet above the roof line or parapet; the width must be greater than its height; and the copy must be mounted as stylized individual letters and graphics. This rooftop sign will not be included in the overall Heritage Sign Plan (HSP) allowable sign area for existing buildings. Staff is recommending approval of this item and looks to the Redevelopment Commission for comments or questions, and a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Next Steps: May 1, 2019 Planning Commission May 16, 2019, Town Council (final approval) Questions/Comments from the Commission: Chair Hudgins noted that the Water Tower has become a very important part of the downtown and Gilbert as a whole. It is a well-known icon for everyone in Gilbert and in the Valley. He noted the Water Tower was almost destroyed at one point in the town’s history. Thankfully, it was not. He felt it important to preserve that icon. He was concerned if this amendment was approved that a sign would be proposed that prohibits viewing of the Water Tower. Is there a process that would allow the Redevelopment Commission to vote on a sign that would obstruct that view? Ms. Bethel advised that the Commission would be able to provide input into why something should be approved or denied. She will need to research whether a denial could explicitly be based on the view of the Water Tower. If that is not specifically called out in the town’s standards, it could not be stated as a reason for denial. It can become difficult with measuring the viewpoints and distances to determine what would constitute an obstruction. The Water Tower is approximately 120 feet in height. The current maximum building height is 55 feet, and a rooftop sign could increase that height to 65 feet. The intent of the standards is for rooftop signs to be much smaller than the Water Tower. That may help to mitigate some of those issues. Staff will conduct further research as to how that could be implemented into the code. Chair Hudgins was leaning towards postponing the vote on this item in order to resolve such issues. He was interested to hear the Commissioners’ perspectives. Commissioner Bigelow felt the addition of rooftop signs could greatly benefit the district, although he stressed making sure it is done in the right way to not obstruct the view of the Water Tower or become too clustered. He noted that the roof signs would be considered non-commercial signs not promoting a particular business or service. Whiskey Row could not go up 10 feet and place a big sign with their name or logo. He mentioned the Starlite Motel in Mesa with a neon sign of a lady diving. He was unsure what kind of signs this amendment to the Sign Plan would attract. He wondered what loopholes there might be and what people might propose. Ms. Bethel stated it would have to be a non-commercial sign and could not be used as advertising. It gets a bit trickier when it comes to the content of a sign. Preventions can be created to specifically state that it is a district identification sign with a definition provided within the code. The sign in Mesa is designed more as a piece of art as opposed to a sign. It may be difficult to regulate, although the definition of that sign type in the code will determine whether it meets the  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission April 17, 2019 Page 4 of 6 criteria for an identification sign for the district. As Commissioner Bigelow pointed out, it will depend on what is determined to be an identifier and how that is interpreted as we cannot regulate the content of a sign. We can look into how to mitigate those issues. She felt he made some great points on sign content. Commissioner Bigelow referred to Mrs. Machado-Liddell’s earlier comments. Everyone is excited about downtown Gilbert and how it is developing. It has come a long way in the past few years, although there are a lot of moving parts and variables. The Guidelines will help to ensure that everyone is on the same page and that there is a consistent feel throughout. He noted the required spacing of the signs and asked if it would be on a first come, first serve basis. If someone puts up a sign, no one else within 1,000 feet in any direction would be able to have such a sign. Ms. Bethel stated that is correct. Once a sign is placed, that would create a point of measurement for the distance requirements. Chair Hudgins stated he was overall in support of the signs and felt it was a good direction. He thought it was putting the cart before the horse as we need to finish the Design Guidelines, the Redevelopment Plan, as well as district branding process. He suggested postponing the decision on this item until all of those guidelines are completed and then come back and iron out some of the loopholes and other details as well as gather more input from citizens. Commissioner Jones asked how this idea came about and whether it was proposed by a specific applicant. Ms. Bethel stated there was a downtown interest that originally brought the idea forward to staff about a year ago. Staff has been researching how this would look in Gilbert and where it might be appropriate. This amendment is the product of staff’s research in response to the downtown interest. Commissioner Jones asked for clarification that this would not allow billboards, but individual letters. Ms. Bethel stated that is correct. A background panel or billboard-style backer would be prohibited, as included in the proposed code text. The standards also specify that it has to be stylized lettering, or individual letters. Commissioner Jones agreed with Chair Hudgins that it is important to have those updated Design Guidelines in place before the new sign regulations are approved. As these signs may become historical landmarks, there needs to be some check in place as a proposed sign may not be in the best taste for Gilbert. Commissioner Bigelow felt the diving lady sign in Mesa was a cool iconic sign, although he felt the proposed standards were too vague in outlining what people could or could not do with such a sign. Developers would be very excited to do something creative to catch the eye over all the other buildings. He would like to see additional guidelines as to what we are looking for in terms of the intent of these signs. Commissioner Jones agreed. He felt it was great to have this change and to open the possibility that does not exist today. It would be good to move forward with something like this as long as it means that somewhere along the line, we can approve what actually goes on a sign. Chair Hudgins noted that the district is growing and there is more interest and more people who want to be part of the district. As we do not have consistency or a consistent brand identified yet,  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission April 17, 2019 Page 5 of 6 people are doing whatever they want. It is important to get the Design Guidelines ironed out and the district branding figured out, and then we will have something to work off of moving forward. Chair Hudgins opened the floor for Public Comment. Doralise Machado-Liddell believed the proposed Text Amendment goes directly against the Redevelopment PUBLIC COMMENT Plan. She had made her concerns known to staff and received an email reply stating that the amendment does not go against the Redevelopment Plan. She still believes it does. In the Redevelopment Plan on page 14, the Character and Vision Objectives refer to the preservation of the picturesque views of the Water Tower and Gilbert Road storefronts. On page 22, the Placemaking Strategy focuses on preserving the town’s history and states that the prominence and views of the Gilbert Water Tower are celebrated and development regulations help ensure that new development does not overpower this historic icon. Page 32 of the Gilbert Land Development Code, Signage, provides standards that limit the size and location of signage and branding elements to ensure consistency with the Heritage District character. Page 37 of the Redevelopment Plan, Building Height Limitations, states in order to preserve the views and prominence of the Gilbert Water Tower within the Heritage District, development of adjacent lots indicated on the map (Gilbert Road and Vaugh Avenue) should not exceed the maximum building height of 55 feet. Buildings with frontage on Gilbert Road should not be approved to exceed the 55-foot maximum. Mrs. Machado-Liddell felt that this signage Text Amendment will put the height of the buildings to 65 feet, therefore changing substantially the Redevelopment Plan. She stated such a substantial change to the Redevelopment Plan has to go back to the public for input through a process that notifies property owners of the proposed changes to the Plan. Part of the Redevelopment Plan is the vision of the town. The taxpayers, stakeholders, and businesses spent time to develop this 10-year plan. To change it because a developer wants a sign is stepping beyond the intent of the Redevelopment Plan. Many municipalities have banned rooftop signs as they clutter the skyline and are determined as sign blight. The reason why the town has a Redevelopment Area is to get rid of blight, not bring it in. Signage to many people means an iconic sign or symbol. We already have one—the Water Tower. It has been here since 1927. That is the iconic symbol for Gilbert. These signs will change the landscape. She noted that signs when not illuminated are ugly, they are sign pollution just like noise pollution. The public vision in every survey is to maintain the small-town feel. We are not Portland or Seattle. The reason Portland had that sign up on a building is because there was an overpass and they wanted people driving to be able to see it. Gilbert is flat. The intent of the sign is to advertise Gilbert. She felt business owners would not want to advertise Gilbert, but themselves. If the signs are meant to advertise Gilbert, then the town should put up the signs as branding. Property owners have rights and business owners would not put up a sign and not get anything out of it. She hoped the Commission and town staff would look into the issues and questions raised. She felt the proposed Text Amendment goes directly against the Redevelopment Plan, and for that reason it should not move forward to the Planning Commission. Chair Hudgins, before closing the Public Hearing and considering a motion, asked staff to remind the Commission on the role and purpose of the Redevelopment Plan. Amanda Elliott advised that the role of the Redevelopment Plan is to serve as a visioning document for the next 10 years that guides the growth and development of the Heritage District.  Gilbert Redevelopment Commission April 17, 2019 Page 6 of 6 With no further public comment, Chair Hudgins closed the Public Hearing. MOTION: Based on the current efforts to bring forth an update to the Heritage District Design Guidelines in alignment with the 2018 Council adopted Redevelopment Plan, Chair Hudgins moved for postponement of Z19-04, LDC Text Amendment—Heritage Sign Plan until after Council adoption of the updated Heritage District Design Guidelines. Commissioner Jones asked about the expected timeline for the Design Guidelines to be published. Chair Hudgins asked staff to include the timing on the district branding process. Amanda Elliott stated staff has been working on the Design Guidelines and the goal, dependent on public input and moving it along through both Redevelopment Commission and Planning Commission, is to have it to Town Council by August or September. We have not yet started the district branding process, although Ms. Elliott can certainly speak with staff about how we could expedite that process as well. SECOND: Commissioner Bigelow provided a second on the Motion to postpone Z19-04, LDC Text Amendment—Heritage Sign Plan. Chair Hudgins called for a vote. The Motion passed 3-0. COMMUNICATIONS 3. Report from CHAIR on current or future events. None. 4. Report from COUNCIL LIAISON on current or future events. None. 5. Report from COMMISSIONERS on current or future events. None. 6. Report from STAFF LIAISON on current or future events. Amanda Elliott reported that Culinary Dropout is now open and the 600-stall parking garage is open with the right-of-way improvements opening within the next week or so. By the end of April, both Hearne Way and Bricomp Avenue will be open as well. Next week is Gilbert Kindness Week. We will be celebrating acts of kindness in the Heritage District throughout the week, as well as at events such as the Farmers Market, Made with Love Market, and the Concert in the Park. There are a number of events that will feature Gilbert and the kindness of our community. ADJOURN With no further business before the Commission, Chair Hudgins adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. ___________________________________ Tyler Hudgins, Chair