Vote — approved

Steve Gallardo	yes
Jack Sellers	yes
Bill Gates	yes
Clint Hickman	yes
Steve Chucri	yes

14.SHORELINE FINANCIAL Case #: Z2021006 Supervisor District: 1 Applicant / Owner: Steven Nevala – FINN Architects, LLC / Leteston Industries LLC Request: Zone Change with Overlay from C-2 to C-2 CUPD with a Plan of Development (POD) for a financial office and barber shop Site Location: Generally located approx. 75’ east of the intersection of Gilbert Rd. & Long Meadow Dr. in the Gilbert area Commission Recommendation: On 6/17/21, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of Z2021006 subject

Item Text

14. SHORELINE FINANCIAL Case #: Z2021006 Supervisor District: 1 Applicant / Owner: Steven Nevala – FINN Architects, LLC / Leteston Industries LLC Request: Zone Change with Overlay from C-2 to C-2 CUPD with a Plan of Development (POD) for a financial office and barber shop Site Location: Generally located approx. 75’ east of the intersection of Gilbert Rd. & Long Meadow Dr. in the Gilbert area Commission Recommendation: On 6/17/21, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of Z2021006 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘g’: a. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan entitled “Shoreline Financial“ , consisting of 1 full-size sheet, dated May 18, 2021, and stamped received May 18, 2021, except as modified by the following conditions. b. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative Report entitled “Shoreline Financial”, consisting of 7 pages, dated May 3, 2021, and stamped received May 3, 2021 except as modified by the following conditions. c. The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 1. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; Maricopa County Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Regulation and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of application for construction. 2. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only and does not represent final design approval nor shall it entitle applicants to future designs that are not in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance and Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; Maricopa County Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Regulation and the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. d. The following C-2 CUPD Zoning District standards shall apply: 1. Min. Front Yard – Min. 2’ for the north 75’ of the west zoning boundary line, min. 10’ for the south 75’ of the west zoning boundary line 2. Min. Side Yard – Min. 2’ for the north zoning boundary line, min. 10’ for the south zoning boundary line 3. Landscaping – Min. 2’ landscaping strip required along Gilbert Road 4. Sight Visibility Triangles – Sight visibility triangles shall conform to Town of Gilbert sight visibility triangle standard GIL-212 as illustrated on page 7 of the narrative 5. Uses Permitted – All uses are prohibited except for the following uses: barber and beauty shops, interior decorator shops, offices, photographers/artist studios, shoe repair shops, tailor shops and; accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to the above listed uses. e. Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for initiating a revocation of this Zone Change as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. f. The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions. g. The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant, with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application, subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, and at the time of expiration of the Zone Change, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the Zone Change, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation or expiration of the Special Use Permit. The Zone Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted. (C-44-22-281-X-00)