Attachment B - Staff Report - PHO-2-19--Z-41-94-6.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2020-05-20)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 59730 characters

Staff Report: Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19)
APPLICATION:
Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19)
APPLICANT:
Rakesh Patel, Hillstone Restaurant Group
REPRESENTATIVE:
Heidi Short, Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
OWNER:

Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.
LOCATION:
Southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback Road
REQUEST:
1) Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance
to the site plan dated April 12, 1994.
2) Deletion of Stipulation 2 regarding conditional approval.
3) Deletion of Stipulation 3 regarding zoning being vested with
final site plan approval.
4) Deletion of Stipulation 5 regarding the existing oleander
hedge along the south boundary of the site.
5) Modification of Stipulation 6 regarding egress to 31st Street
and signage and hours of access for service driveway.
6) Technical corrections to Stipulations 7 and 9.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that this request be approved with modifications and additional
stipulations as recommended by the Planning Hearing Officer.
PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
On February 19, 2020, the Planning Hearing Officer took this case under advisement.
On February 28, 2020, the Planning Hearing Officer took this case out from under
advisement and recommended approval with modifications and additional stipulations.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The subject property is located at the southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback
Road and is approximately 1.92 gross acres. The property is zoned C-2 and is
developed with a restaurant. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 11,000
ATTACHMENT B

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 2 of 11

square foot, 25.5-foot tall restaurant and build a 4,966 square foot restaurant. The
proposed restaurant will be 13 feet to the top of the parapet and 15 feet, 8 inches to the
top of the mechanical screen. The proposed restaurant will have a residential, mid-
century modern aesthetic intended to complement the adjacent residential community.
The building will be located at the northwest corner of the property to provide maximum
separation from nearby residences and create visual interest at the corner of 31st Street
and Camelback Road. The applicant intends to create an inviting and vibrant
environment with awnings, trellises, and lush landscaping. A six-foot-high wall and Indian
Laurel Fig trees will screen the restaurant from residences to the south.

The applicant requested modification of Stipulation 1, regarding general conformance to
the stipulated site plan, to accommodate a new site plan and landscape plan. The
applicant’s proposed site plan was updated to reflect the smaller restaurant concept. The
applicant stated that they wanted to add conformance to a landscape plan to address
previous landscaping stipulations and depict landscaping throughout the site.

The applicant requested deletion of Stipulation 2, regarding conditional approval, and
Stipulation 3, regarding zoning being vested with final site plan approval, because the
zoning for the property has been vested following the development of the existing
restaurant.

The applicant requested deletion of Stipulation 5, regarding the existing oleander hedge
along the south boundary of the site, because the hedge was removed prior to the
applicant’s acquisition of the property. Additionally, the applicant intends to stipulate to a
landscape plan that depicts acacia and ficus trees along the south property line.

The applicant requested modification of Stipulation 6, regarding egress to 31st Street,
signage, and hours of access for the service driveway to allow proper site flow.
According to the applicant’s narrative, only right turn egress was proposed from the
driveway on 31st Street and signage would be provided to preclude left turns and use of
the driveway by adjacent commercial property. However, during the Planning Hearing
Officer hearing, the applicant clarified that three-quarter movement is proposed at the
driveway on 31st Street, allowing all movements except left-turn egress. The applicant
stated that the proposed restaurant will provide significantly more than the required
parking which would eliminate any concerns regarding potential neighborhood parking by
restaurant patrons. Additionally, the applicant stated that the owners of the office building
to the east rejected any proposal to create or retain cross-access driveways and noted
that the proposed site plan would remove the existing driveway on the east.

PREVIOUS HISTORY
On May 4, 1994, the Phoenix City Council approved the request from R1-6 (approved C-
O) to C-2 for approximately 1.92 acres at the southeast corner of 31st Street and
Camelback Road, subject to stipulations.

The proposed development consisted of a one story 9,775 square foot restaurant with a
small second story level for office/storage space. Traffic projections for the restaurant

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 3 of 11

included approximately 825 vehicle trips a day. 90 parking spaces were required based
on the proposed floor plan. Vehicular access was provided from Camelback Road and
an ingress only driveway was proposed on 31st Street for valet parking. The driveway at
31st Street was designed to eliminate left turn egress from the site. Previous
development proposals were for office buildings of approximately 50,000 square feet, so
the proposed restaurant was seen as a significant reduction in the potential intensity of
the property.

The subject property is located along an arterial street in close proximity to a major
intersection. Adjacent properties along Camelback Road were developed as commercial,
retail, and offices. Nearby single-family homes were separated from the subject site by a
proposed alley dedication and stipulations were proposed that addressed the property’s
boundaries adjacent to residential uses.

Neighbors expressed concerns regarding vehicular circulation, specifically regarding
access to 31st Street. The applicant revised the site plan to prohibit access to the
property from 31st Street for patrons. The site plan depicted a 12-foot wide service
vehicle access driveway that allowed right-turn egress only onto 31st Street. The rear
one-way service driveway was stipulated to be appropriately signed with directional
arrows and closed off at 5:00 p.m. to preclude any use of the driveway by patrons or
deliveries. Neighbors also expressed concerns regarding the future of the restaurant and
what would occur if the restaurant did not succeed or changed ownership.

An application for Planning Hearing Officer action was submitted in 2007 but was
withdrawn by applicant.

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS

Correspondence
37 letters of opposition were received regarding this request. Concerns included the
following:
• Opposition to the proposed driveway on 31st Street (34 items)
• The driveway on 31st Street should be restricted to emergency access only (two
items)
• Increased traffic in the neighborhood (five items)
• Wall on the south property line (one item)
• Alternative ingress/egress recommendations – second driveway on Camelback
Road or shared entry with the property to the east (one item)
• Negative impact to residents in the community (one item)

13 letters of support were received regarding this request. Points raised in these letters
included the following:
• Hillstone’s positive reputation related to community awareness (one items)
• The proposed restaurant has a smaller building footprint (five items)
• The building height will be lower (two items)

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 4 of 11

• The new development will provide greater distance between the restaurant and
residences to the south (two items)
• The proposed ingress/egress will allow traffic to flow easily, without distraction to
the neighborhood (one item)
• The restaurant will complement the neighborhood (three items)
• The restaurant will positively contribute to Arizona’s restaurant economy (one
item)

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Commercial

CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING LAND USE

Zoning

Land Use

On-site:
C-2
Restaurant

North:
C-1
Bank, commercial shopping center

South:
R1-6, P-1
Single family residential, vacant

/proposed parking lot

East:
C-2
Multi-tenant office building

West:
C-O
Multi-tenant office building

DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS

Archaeology
Not archaeologically sensitive.

Aviation
No response.

Fire Prevention
Fire prevention does not anticipate any problems with this case.

But the site or/and building(s) shall comply with the Phoenix Fire Code

Also, we do not know what the water supply (GPM and PSI) is at this site. Additional
water supply may be required to meet the required fire flow per the Phoenix Fire Code.

Floodplain Management
We have determined that the project is not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) but is located in a Shaded Zone X, on panel 1745 L of the Flood Insurance Rate

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 5 of 11

Maps (FIRM) dated April 07, 2017. Based on the project information provided, there are
no Floodplain Management requirements to fulfill.

Light Rail
No response.

Parks and Recreation
No trail or trail easement comments.

Public Transit
No comments.

Street Transportation
1. The developer shall provide a minimum 25-foot wide driveway along 31st Street
per City of Phoenix Standard Detail P-1255-1. The developer shall install and
maintain private signage on the property to restrict right turn egress and preclude
left turns or use of the driveway by adjacent commercial property.

2. The developer shall provide as enhanced pedestrian connection from the southern
parking lot to the primary pedestrian pathway leading to the building entrance, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

3. The developer shall provide a minimum 30-foot-wide driveway along Camelback
Road in accordance with City of Phoenix Standard Detail P-1255-1.

Pedestrian Safety Coordinator - Street Transportation Department, Traffic Services
Division
No comments.

Water Services
Domestic Water Stipulations:
• Existing System
Pressure zone 2A

Water mains: 8-inch CIP within Camelback Rd

Water mains: 18-inch RCP within Camelback Rd Do Not Use

Water mains: 6-inch ACP within 31st St

Water mains: 4-inch DIP substandard fire line within an easement south side of

project site

Water mains: 6-inch ACP within Mariposa St

• Main Extension and Upsizing Requirement

None

• Connection Points and Water Taps

¾-inch water tap off of the 8-inch CIP within Camelback Rd

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 6 of 11

¾-inch water tap off of the 6-inch ACP within Mariposa St

Field verification may be necessary to determine if services are still active.

• Easement Stipulation

A water main in an easement shall follow the easement requirements per the

DSM, Section 3.2 pages 8-11. No permanent structures are allowed within a water

easement.

Fire Flow Stipulations:
• Please provide fire flow requirements for the development according to the City of
Phoenix Building/Fire code with the pre-app/ preliminary site plan submittal.

Sewer Stipulations:
• Existing System

Sewer mains: 21-inch VCP within Camelback Rd

Sewer mains: 8-inch VCP within an easement south side of project site

• Main Extension and Upsizing Requirement

None

• Connection Points and Sewer Taps

(3) 4-inch sewer tap off of the 8-inch VCP within an easement south side of project

Site. Field verification may be necessary to determine if services are still active

• Easement Stipulation

A sewer main in an easement shall follow the easement requirements per the

DSM, Section 3.2 pages 8-11. No permanent structures of any kind are allowed

within a sewer easement. Extend the sewer main only to the point of need.

Miscellaneous Stipulations:
• Repayment

None

The proposed zone change has no stipulations. The proposed property has water

and sewer mains that can serve this development.

General Stipulations:
Per City Code Chapter 37-33, all public streets bounding (along property frontage) and
within a proposed development must have public water mains within them, if none exists,
developer must install.
The information contained above is based on existing conditions and circumstances.
Please be advised that available capacity is a dynamic condition that can change over
time due to a variety of factors. For that reason, the City of Phoenix is only able to
provide assurance of water and sewer capacity at the time of preliminary site plan
approval, building permit, or PCD master plan approval. If you are in the City's service
area, it is our intent to provide water and sewer service. However, the requirements for

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 7 of 11

such water and sewer service are not determined until the time of application for site
plan, PCD master plan, or building permit approval. These requirements will be based on
the status of our water and sewer infrastructure at the time the application is submitted.
For any given property, these requirements may vary over time to be less or more
restrictive depending on the status of our infrastructure.

VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Camelback East Village Planning Committee opted not to hear this case.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER FINDINGS

The Planning Hearing Officer’s recommendation was based on the following findings:

1) The original stipulated site plan depicted a 9,775 square foot restaurant with a
maximum height of 26 feet, with an approximately 25-foot setback from the south
property line, a shared property line with adjacent single-family residential homes.
The proposed site plan depicts a 4,996 square foot restaurant with a maximum
height of 15 feet 8 inches, with an approximately 65-foot setback from the south
property line. The reduced square footage, reduced height, and enhanced
building setback will better mitigate impacts of building massing and activity on
adjacent single-family homes to the south.

The stipulated site plan provided 90 parking spaces. Based on code requirements
at the time, the original restaurant required 90 parking spaces. The proposed site
plan depicts 94 parking spaces provided on both the subject property and the P-1
zoned property adjacent to the site to the southeast. Based on the smaller size of
the proposed restaurant, the proposed site plan would require 38 parking spaces.

A new sub-stipulation also is recommended to modify the proposed site plan to
require an enhanced pedestrian connection that will connect the southern parking
lot to the primary pedestrian pathway leading to the building entrance. The
pathway is depicted on the proposed site plan running east-west from the east
property line to the primary building entrance. The proposed site plan depicts 22
parking spaces in the south parking lot. A connecting pathway will ensure a safe
pedestrian route for users of that parking lot to the restaurant.

2) The conditions outlined in Stipulations 2 and 3 regarding conditional approval and
vesting of the approved zoning were met with the development of a restaurant and
the City Council’s approval of an Official Supplementary Zoning Map for the
existing C-2 zoning designation. Deletion of these stipulations is recommended.

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 8 of 11

screening for adjacent residences to the south. However, it should be noted that
the caliper size of the proposed trees is predominantly 1-inch caliper which would
not conform with current Ordinance requirements. Some trees will need to be
increased to a minimum 2-inch caliper size for compliance.

4) The original stipulated site plan depicted an approximately 12-foot wide drive aisle
along the south property line, behind the restaurant. Stipulated restrictions on this
driveway included right-turn egress only, limiting its use to delivery or service
vehicles, on-site signage, prohibiting access after 5:00 p.m., and other potential
measures to discourage use by patrons and deliveries to or from the adjacent
commercial property to the east.

The applicant’s request for modification of this stipulation included the removal of
the restrictions regarding delivery or service vehicles and the limitation on time-of-
use as well as additional language intended to preclude left-turns. It was unclear
whether the proposed new language regarding precluding left turns was intended
to discourage left-turn ingress or egress. At the hearing, the applicant clarified that
the intended use of the driveway was to allow three-quarter movement, prohibiting
left-turn egress only.

In the original rezoning case, there were concerns raised regarding the potential
impacts of restaurant patrons parking in the adjacent neighborhood which led to
the stipulated restrictions. Testimony provided in the current PHO hearing and in
correspondence received by staff indicate that these concerns remain.

The proposed restaurant represents an approximately 51% reduction in the
building footprint compared to the existing restaurant, from 9,775 square feet to
4,996 square feet. Additionally, the proposed 94 parking spaces comprises a
247% increase above the 38 required parking spaces. Finally, the applicant
intends to retain restrictions regarding signage and prohibit left-turn egress into the
existing neighborhood. Combined, these factors will mitigate the potential impacts
of the development and the revised driveway configuration on the neighborhood to
the south. The provision of significantly enhanced on-site parking will mitigate the
potential for customers of the restaurant to rely on street-parking or any off-site
parking in the surrounding area.

The applicant’s request is recommended to be approved with modifications. The
Street Transportation Department recommends that the driveway be restricted to
either developing in accordance with a modified Standard Detail P-1243-1 to
prohibit left-turn egress or limiting use of the driveway to emergency access only.
An additional stipulation is also recommended to preserve the original stipulation’s
requirement for the developer to install and maintain private signage
communicating the driveway movement restrictions and discouraging any use of
the driveway by users of adjacent commercial property. However, the proposed
site plan does not depict any driveway or vehicular cross-access along the east

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 9 of 11

property line and therefore there may be no actual opportunity for use of the
driveway on 31st Street for users of the adjacent commercial property.

5) The Street Transportation Department recommended an additional stipulation
requiring a minimum 30-foot wide driveway along Camelback Road in accordance
with City of Phoenix Standard Detail P-1255-1.

6) Adjacent to the southeast corner of the property is a parcel zoned P-1 (Parking
District) which was rezoned in case no. Z-4-10-6. This property was originally
rezoned to provide additional parking for the existing Donovan’s Restaurant. This
parcel remains undeveloped. The property is depicted on the site plans in this
case and is intended to provide additional parking for the proposed restaurant.
Modifications to the stipulations in this case are proposed in case no. PHO-1-9—
Z-4-10-6 which was also heard on this agenda.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS

1.
That THE development SHALL be in general conformance WITH to the site plan
AND LANDSCAPE PLAN DATE STAMPED FEBRUARY 11, 2020 dated April 12,
1994, as may be modified by the following stipulations, and APPROVED by the
PLANNING AND Development Services Department through the Development
Review process.

A. THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE AN ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN
CONNECTION FROM THE SOUTHERN PARKING LOT TO THE PRIMARY
PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY LEADING TO THE BUILDING ENTRANCE.

2.
That approval be conditioned on the development of a restaurant within 18
months of final City Council approval in accord with Section 506B of the Zoning
Ordinance.

3.
That zoning vest with final site plan approval by the Development Services
Department.

2.
4.
That nNo windows SHALL be located along the south side of the building. The
exterior courtyard wall on the south side of the building shall be of sufficient
height to screen dining room windows that open onto the courtyard.

5.
That the existing mature oleander hedge, located along the south boundary of the
site, be preserved as approved by the Development Services Department.

3.
6.
That only right turn delivery/service egress be allowed from the site to 31st Street,
as approved by the Development Services Department, and that the rear one-
way service driveway shall be appropriately signed with directional arrows and
closed off at 5:00p.m. (or whatever other measures are necessary shall be taken)
to preclude any use of the driveway by restaurant patrons or deliveries to or from

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 10 of 11

adjacent commercial property.

IF A DRIVEWAY IS PROPOSED ALONG 31ST STREET, THE DRIVEWAY
SHALL BE RESTRICTED IN ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WAYS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND STREET
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTS:

A.
THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED PER CITY
OF PHOENIX STANDARD DETAIL P-1243-1, AS MODIFIED TO
RESTRICT LEFT TURN EGRESS AND AS APPROVED BY THE STREET
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.

B.
THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO EMERGENCY ACCESS
ONLY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT.

4.
IF A DRIVEWAY IS APPROVED AND CONSTRUCTED ALONG 31ST STREET,
THE DEVELOPER SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN PRIVATE SIGNAGE ON
THE PROPERTY INTENDED TO PROHIBIT LEFT-TURN EGRESS AND
PROHIBIT USE OF THE DRIVEWAY BY THE ADJACENT COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY, AS APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

5.
7.
That aAny driveway to/from Camelback Road shall be right-in right-out only. If a
common driveway agreement with the parcel to the east can be obtained, left
turns out of the common driveway may be allowed, as approved by the
PLANNING AND Development Services Department.

6.
THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM 30-FOOT-WIDE DRIVEWAY
ALONG CAMELBACK ROAD IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF PHOENIX
STANDARD DETAIL P-1255-1.

7.
8.
That aA 10-foot sidewalk/landscape easement SHALL be dedicated along
Camelback Road.

8.
9.
That aAdditional easements and right-of-way dedications may be required by the
PLANNING AND Development Services Department at time of preliminary site
plan review.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
On February 19, 2020, the Planning Hearing Officer took this case under advisement.
On February 28, 2020, the Planning Hearing Officer took this case out from under
advisement and recommended approval with modifications and additional stipulations.

ATTACHMENTS

Staff Report – PHO-2-19—Z-41-94-6
April 2, 2020 Planning Commission
Page 11 of 11

A – Appeal Documents (2 pages)
B – Applicant’s Narrative (6 pages)
C – Aerial Map (1 page)
D – Zoning Map (1 page)
E – Approval Letter for Rezoning Case No. Z-41-94-6 (2 pages)
F – Sketch Map from Rezoning Case No. Z-41-94-6 (1 page)
G – Proposed Site Plan date stamped February 11, 2020 (1 page)
H – Proposed Landscape Plan date stamped February 11, 2020 (1 page)
I – Stipulated Site Plan date April 12, 1994 (1 page)
J – PHO Summary for Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19) (9 pages)
K – Correspondence regarding Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19) (66 pages)

- Opposition (45 pages)

- Support (19 pages)

ATTACHMENT A

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER APPEAL
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL HOLD
A PUBLIC HEARING ON:
APPLICATION NO:
Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19)
LOCATION:
Southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback Road
PHO HEARING DATE:
2/19/2020 (UA 2/28)
RECEIVED:
3/6/2020
APPEALED BY:

Opposition

Applicant
APPEALED TO:
PLANNING
COMMISSION
4/2/20
TENTATIVE DATE
CITY COUNCIL

TENTATIVE DATE
NAME/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
PHONE #
Colleen Geretti
4822 North 31st Place
Phoenix, AZ 85016

602-505-9777
RECEIPT NUMBER:

REASON FOR REQUEST:
Prohibition of access to North 31st Street. Applicant and PHO recommendation
include potential driveway access. Prohibition of access recommended.
Taken By: Adam Stranieri

c:
Ben Ernyei – Posting

Benjamin Kim, IS
PDD All

S:\Planning\Rezoning\Hearings\PHO\Appeals\PHO Appeal Form.doc

ATTACHMENT B

ATTACHMENT C

E CAMELBACK RD
E MARIPOSA ST
PRIVATE
N 31ST ST
Maricopa County Assessor's Office
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-19--Z-41-94-6
Property Location: The southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback Road
0
80
160
40
Feet ´

ATTACHMENT D

E CAMELBACK RD
E MARIPOSA ST
PRIVATE
N 31ST ST
C-O*
R1-6
C-1*
C-2*
C-2*
P-1*
C-2*
R1-6
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-19--Z-41-94-6
Property Location: The southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback Road
0
80
160
40
Feet ´

ATTACHMENT E

ATTACHMENT F

ATTACHMENT G

PROPOSED
4966 SF
RESTAURANT
CAMELBACK ROAD
31ST STREET
MARIPOSA STREET
EXISTING 30'
DRIVEWAY TO BE
REMOVED
EXISTING FIRE
HYDRANT
RELOCATE NORTH AND
WIDEN EXISTING DRIVEWAY
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING OVERHEAD
ELECTRICAL TO BE
UNDERGROUNDED PER SRP
REQUIREMENTS
EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE
TO REMAIN/ADJUST RIM
PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
LOADING ZONE
TRASH ENCLOSURE
12
5
3
11
10
9
7
4
3131 CAMELBACK ROAD LLC
A.P.N. 163-12-049
2017-0441702 M.C.R.
ZONING C-2
OFFICE
LOT 8
BRENTWOOD ESTATES
BK. 55, PG. 2, M.C.R.
A.P.N. 163-12-008
SBROCCA ANGELO
2003-0689007 M.C.R.
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOT 9
BRENTWOOD ESTATES
BK. 55, PG. 2, M.C.R.
A.P.N. 163-12-009
BAYNE MARIO A/REGINA A TR
2007-0885411 M.C.R.
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOT 10
BRENTWOOD ESTATES
BK. 55, PG. 2, M.C.R.
A.P.N. 163-12-010
WILLIAMS MARTHA J/ DENNIS M
2017-0918576 M.C.R.
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DAMBROSIO JASON/DIMURIA
ASJA M
APN: 163-12-011A
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
JBJM CAMELBACK LLC
APN: 163-12-003B
ZONING C-O
OFFICE
RICHER JOSHUA A
APN 163-12-037
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
BOOKSPAN TODD/TARA
APN 163-12-036
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
KALIL JOHN PHILIP
163-12-035
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
MORRIS SCOTT MICHAEL/HALL
163-12-034
ZONING R1-6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
4
4
11
6
8
PROPOSED GREASE
INTERCEPTOR
PROPERTY LINE
RECONSTRUCT RAMP
PER ADA AND CITY OF
PHOENIX REQUIREMENTS
10'X20' SVT
10' X 20' SVT
EXISTING
IRRIGATION
PRIVATE
EXISTING
IRRIGATION SRP
EXISTING FIRE
HYDRANT TO
REMAIN
EXISTING
6' BLOCK
WALL
EXISTING SRP
12" IRRIGATION
EXISTING 8" SEWER
5" CURB AND
GUTTER
PROPOSED
PAVEMENT
PROPOSED 2" DOMESTIC
WATER SERVICE
PROPOSED GATE
PROPOSED 6"
SANITARY SEWER
PROPOSED 1" IRRIGATION
WATER SERVICE
33'X33' SVT
PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
ADA ROUTE
(1:20 SLOPE)
ROOF
OVERHANG
30" VEHICLE
OVERHANG
TYP.
FF= 1206.50
PROPOSED 6' WALL
BEHIND EXISTING
BLOCK WALL FOR
SOUND
ATTENUATION
RESTAURANT
ENTRANCE
PROPOSED 6' WALL
BEHIND EXISTING
BLOCK WALL FOR
SOUND
ATTENUATION
PROPOSED 6' WALL
BEHIND EXISTING
BLOCK WALL FOR
SOUND
ATTENUATION
EXISTING
6' BLOCK
WALL
30" VEHICLE
OVERHANG
TYP.
30" VEHICLE
OVERHANG
TYP.
30" VEHICLE
OVERHANG
TYP.
30" VEHICLE
OVERHANG
TYP.
1600 N DESERT DRIVE
SUITE 230
TEMPE, AZ 85281
PH: 480.951.0517
FAX: 480.951.2353
www.imegcorp.com
MAJ
RR/AM
19000401
GENERAL:
1 4 7 S O U T H B E V E R L Y D R I V E
B E V E R L Y H I L L S, C A 9 0 2 1 2
P 3 1 0 3 8 5 0 3 4 0
F 3 1 0 3 8 5 7 1 1 9
3101 east camelback road
rev
remarks
date
drawn by
pic/pm:
sheet
job no
SEAL:
all designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings and specifications are the
property and copyright of the OWNER and shall
neither be used on any other work nor be used by
any other person for any use whatsoever without the
written permission from the OWNER.
written dimensions shall take precedence over
scaled dimensions and shall be verified at the
construction site. any dimensional discrepancy shall
be brought to the attention of the OWNER prior to
the commencement of work
this document is 'NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION'
unless the architect or engineer's signature and seal
appear below
ENGINEER of record:
PROJECT:
REVISION:
RESTAURANT
phoenix arizona 85016
concept
KIVA # 02-3746 CPGD # XXXXXX SDEV# 0400582 Q.S.# 18-34
1
PHO submission
12.06.19
2
Site parking revision
02.04.20
SITE
VICINITY MAP
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
FOR
HILLSTONE RESTAURANT
3101 E. CAMELBACK ROAD
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85016
SITE DATA
OWNER/APPLICANT
HILLSTONE RESTAURANT GROUP
IMEG CORP
CIVIL ENGINEER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Q.S.# 18-34
BASIS OF BEARING
PARCEL 2 - SPECIAL NOTES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ASP-1
SITE PLAN NOTES
ABBREVIATION LEGEND

ATTACHMENT H

10'-0" SIDEWALK
EASEMENT
8'-0" PUBLIC
UTILITY EASEMENT
1'-0" CONTROLLED
ACCESS EASEMENT
25'-0" LANDSCAPE
BUFFER
8'-0" OVERHEAD &
UNDERGROUND POWER
EASEMENT
1'-0" CONTROLLED
ACCESS EASEMENT
16'-0" PUBLIC
UTILITIES EASEMENT
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
TV
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
W
W
W
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
29
30
32
33
34
74
64
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
27
28
31
35
PLANT 8'-0"
ON CENTER
1
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
4
5
8
11
11
9
9
3
3
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
CAMELBACK ROAD
31ST STREET
1
3" CAL.
3" CAL.
3" CAL.
2
2
6'-0" CMU WALL. SEE SITE PLANS.
OVER HEAD ELECTRIC LINE(O.H.E.). .
EXISTING IRRIGATION LINES AND EASEMENTS.
FIRE HYDRANT -3'-0" CLEAR OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL
CALIFORNIA GOLD DECOMPOSED GRANITE IN ALL PLANTING AREAS
PROPERTY LINE / RIGHT OF WAY LINE
planting key notes
CURB. SEE CIVIL ENG. PLANS.
ACCESSIBLE RAMP. SEE CIVIL ENG. PLANS.
1
2
3
4
6
8
7
9
10
11
FIRE LINE BACKFLOW PREVENTOR - SCREEN
MAINTAIN 3' ACCESS & CLEARANCE PER MAG
STANDARD DETAIL 362.
SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, MAXIMUM MATURE
5'-0" SIDEWALK WITH MAX SLOPE OF 1:20.
5
PLANT MATERIAL HEIGHT IN THE SIGHT VISIBILITY
TRIANGLES IS 24 INCHES
NO TREES IN THIS AREA
TO BE BURIED UNDERGROUND
FICUS PUMILA
CREEPING FIG
PARKINSONI HYBRID 'AZT'
'AZT' THORNLESS PALO VERDE
LITTLE OLLIE DWARF OLIVE
OLEA EUROPAEA 'LITTLE OLLIE'
ASIATIC JASMINE
TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM
QUERCUS VIRGINIANA
SOUTHERN LIVE OAK
FICUS NITIDA
INDIAN LAUREL FIG
93
15
GAL
(6 @
1.0 GPH)
shrubs
trees
comments
qty
size
common name
botanical name
plant legend
vines
groundcover
emitters
53
STAKE IN PLACE
8.0H., 3.0W., 1.0CAL.
1"
CAL
(6 @
2.0 GPH)
6
STAKE IN PLACE
10.5H., 8.5W., 3.0CAL.
3"
CAL
1.0 GPH)
(5 @
31
10.0H., 5.0W., 2.0CAL.
2"
CAL
(6 @
2.0 GPH)
TRAIN TO WALL
37
5 GAL.
PLANT AT 4' O.C.
1 GAL.
444
inerts
DECOMPOSED GRANITE
CALIFORNIA GOLD
2" MINIMUM IN
ALL PLANTERS
22,059
1/4"
MINUS
2
SF
STAKE IN PLACE
33
STAKE IN PLACE
9.0H., 5.5W., 2.0CAL.
2"
CAL
ACACIA ANEURA
MULGA
1.0 GPH)
(5 @
8
STAKE IN PLACE
9.0H., 6.0W., 2.0CAL.
2"
CAL
SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
NORTH
0'
20'
40'
60'
1-800-STAKE-IT
(OUTSIDE MARICOPA COUNTY)
CALL TWO WORKING DAYS
BEFORE YOU DIG
602-263-1100
GENERAL:
1 4 7 S O U T H B E V E R L Y D R I V E
B E V E R L Y H I L L S, C A 9 0 2 1 2
P 3 1 0 3 8 5 0 3 4 0
F 3 1 0 3 8 5 7 1 1 9
3101 east camelback road
rev
remarks
date
drawn by
pic/pm:
sheet
job no
SEAL:
all designs, ideas, arrangements and plans indicated
by these drawings and specifications are the
property and copyright of the OWNER and shall
neither be used on any other work nor be used by
any other person for any use whatsoever without the
written permission from the OWNER.
written dimensions shall take precedence over
scaled dimensions and shall be verified at the
construction site. any dimensional discrepancy shall
be brought to the attention of the OWNER prior to
the commencement of work
this document is 'NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION'
unless the architect or engineer's signature and seal
appear below
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
PROJECT:
REVISION:
RESTAURANT
phoenix arizona 85016
concept
of record:
DESIGN ETHIC
l a n d s a p e a r c h i t e c t u r e
7525 EAST 6TH AVENUE SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251
480.225.7077
FORGING NEW ENVIRONMENTS
of
L.02
L.02
OF 2
19-062
B. PAUL
B. PAUL
REV 1
PHO SUBMISSION
12/06/2019
REV 2
SITE PLAN REVISIONS
02/04/2020
2
G
E
E
E
31
31
29
29
30
30
35
35
33
33
34
34
32
32
27
27
67
67
66
66
64
64
65
65
66
6
72
72
71
71
7
68
68
68
6
67
69
69
69
6
68
70
70
70
74
74
73
73
72
E
E
E
E
G
E
G
2
2
28
28
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
A
E
E
4
NUMBERED TREES ARE
EXISTING - TO REMAIN
NUMBERED TREES ARE
EXISTING - TO REMAIN
6
7
PLANTING ON 30" BERM
FOR SCREENING

ATTACHMENT I

ATTACHMENT J

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 1

REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Adam Stranieri, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Julianna Pierre, Planner I, Assisting

February 19, 2020

ITEM 2

DISTRICT 6
SUBJECT:

Application #:
Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19)
Zoning:
C-2
Location:
Southeast corner of 31st Street and Camelback Road
Acreage:
1.92
Request:
1) Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to
the site plan dated April 12, 1994.
2) Deletion of Stipulation 2 regarding conditional approval.
3) Deletion of Stipulation 3 regarding zoning being vested with final
site plan approval.
4) Deletion of Stipulation 5 regarding the existing oleander hedge
along the south boundary of the site.
5) Modification of Stipulation 6 regarding egress to 31st Street and
signage and hours of access for service driveway.
6) Technical corrections to Stipulations 7 and 9.
Applicant:
Rakesh Patel, Hillstone Restaurant Group
Owner:
Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.
Representative:
Heidi Short, Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

ACTIONS

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer took this case
under advisement. On February 28, 2020, the Planning Hearing Officer took this case
out from under advisement and recommended approval with modifications and
additional stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The Camelback East Village
Planning Committee opted not to hear this case.

DISCUSSION

Bill Lally, representative with Tiffany & Bosco, stated that the C-2 site (Z-41-94-6) and
P-1 site (Z-4-10-6) are a combined redevelopment for a new Hillstone Restaurant. He
gave background about the Hillstone Restaurant Group, including their mission and
values. He stated that the existing Donovan’s Restaurant is approximately 11,000
square feet and closer to the residential homes to the south than the proposed new
restaurant building. He stated that the proposed restaurant will be half the footprint of
Donovan’s and will provide two and a half times the amount of required parking. He

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 2

added that the proposed restaurant will be more residential in scale and built closer to
the intersection at 31st Street and Camelback Road. He added that the power poles on
the site will also be buried. Adam Stranieri asked for clarification regarding the location
of the power poles. Mr. Lally clarified that the power poles run east to west along the
southern boundary of the site. He added that this will not only benefit Hillstone, but also
beautify the neighborhood. He stated that modifications and deletions are necessary to
accommodate the new proposed restaurant.

Mr. Stranieri asked for clarification regarding the height depicted on the stipulated site
plan for the existing Donovan’s Restaurant, specifically the two-story element at the
southwest corner. Rakesh Patel, applicant with Hillstone Restaurant Group, clarified
that the second floor was for office and storage space. He added that the space on the
second floor was not for customer seating.

Mr. Lally stated that an updated site plan and landscape plan were submitted to the
Planning Hearing Officer on February 11, 2020. He added that both plans depicted a
10-foot landscape setback along the west property line of the P-1 zoned parking area.
He clarified that the applicant’s original request asked for deletion of Stipulation 4,
regarding a minimum 10-foot landscape setback along the west property line, but are
now requesting to withdraw their request for deletion of this stipulation.

Mr. Lally stated that he is aware of neighborhood concerns about Stipulation 6,
regarding egress to 31st Street and signage and hours of access for a service driveway.
He stated that the proposed site plan has been modified to create a circulation pattern
that does not encourage traffic to move south into the neighborhood. He stated that it is
logical for patrons of the restaurant to ingress and egress directly from Camelback Road
and that the proposed driveway was unlikely to be used for access to the neighborhood
to the south or to bypass Camelback Road. Mr. Stranieri asked for clarification
regarding proposed driveway movements on 31st Street. He noted that the applicant’s
conceptual site plan and request language address right-turn egress from the site to
31st Street only, while the applicant’s presentation suggests that right and left-turn
ingress is proposed. Mr. Lally stated that they are proposing multiple routes to and from
the site including left and right-turn ingress and right-turn egress on 31st Street.

Mr. Lally stated that there was extensive outreach to the neighborhood. He stated that
over the past nine months there were two mailers, ten meetings, twelve calls and/or text
messages, and fifty emails.

Colleen Geretti, President of Brentwood Estates Home Owners Association and
resident of the neighborhood, stated that the modification of Stipulation 6 is
inappropriate and would erode the preservation of the residential neighborhood to the
south. She stated that she submitted a letter discussing Stipulation 6 and opposition
letters from 80% of the homeowners in the Brentwood Estates subdivision, adjacent to
the subject property to the south. She stated that residents are excited at the prospect
of having Hillstone as a neighbor but had serious concerns regarding the driveway on
31st Street. She stated that the existing stipulated one-way service driveway posed
ongoing issues for the neighborhood while Donovan’s Restaurant was in operation.
She explained that employees, customers, and vendors used the neighborhood to enter

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 3

the restaurant’s parking area, drop off patrons, and/or park. She shared a graphic with
the applicant and Planning Hearing Officer depicting two proposed alternative access
options: a shared entry with the commercial office building to the east or a second
driveway on Camelback Road.

Mr. Stranieri asked if Ms. Geretti could provide any additional information regarding the
driveway on the east property line depicted on the stipulated site plan. Ms. Geretti
stated that the driveway does exist, and Donovan’s Restaurant used the driveway to
access the parking garage at 3131 East Camelback for overflow parking and valet. Ms.
Geretti added that the history of cross-access with this site is why a shared entry on the
east side of the site would make sense as an additional option for the proposed
development. Bryce Johnson, owner with Hillstone Restaurant Group, responded that
there is an existing driveway on the east, but that there was no cross-access
agreement. He stated that he spoke with the owners of the office building to the east
and they rejected the proposal to create any new cross-access driveways and that they
are now forced to close the existing driveway on the east. He added that City staff
stated that they would not allow the developer to build a second driveway on
Camelback Road.

Angelo Sbrocca, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that Hillstone would be an asset
to the neighborhood, but objected to access on 31st Street. He stated that while the
Donovan’s was in operation residents would often see produce trucks and rideshare
vehicles utilizing the driveway. He stated that he would encourage the ownership to
continue working with neighboring office buildings regarding cross-access.

John Kalil, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that the location is a great site for a
restaurant, but was faced with commercial traffic issues while Donovan’s was in
operation. He recognized that Hillstone is proposing a different size and style of
restaurant but feels that signage will not be effective to deter patron traffic on 31st
Street.

Jessica Wilson, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that she is excited to have
Hillstone in the neighborhood, but has concerns with the driveway on 31st Street. She
stated that people will use the driveway on 31st Street and drive through the
neighborhood to avoid congestion on Camelback Road. She asked the representatives
and ownership present why they needed the driveway on 31st Street and if the 94
parking spaces provided will be adequate.

Melissa Glissmeyer, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that the landscaping and
restaurant concept will benefit the neighborhood. She added that the existing P-1 lot is
vacant and an eyesore, so she is thankful that Hillstone decided to extend their parking
into that site. She stated that she understood the restaurant would need a secondary
entrance for fire safety reasons. She stated that she bought her home in the
neighborhood last year and as far as she knew, Brentwood Estates did not have a
home owners association.

Jay Swart, Chair of the Camelback East Village Planning Committee, stated that it is
important to embrace economically viable development while also protecting

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 4

neighborhoods. He stated that the Hillstone Restaurant Group is proposing a restaurant
that is conscious of the surrounding community. He stated that the median at 31st
Street may restrict people from turning onto that street. He noted that it may be
beneficial for the restaurant to provide brochures that discourage patrons from using the
driveway on 31st Street.

John Fagnani, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that traffic will utilize the driveway
on 31st Street. He added that there will be congestion, despite the median, as people
wait to turn left onto Camelback Road from 31st Street. He stated that he is excited for
the restaurant but noted that traffic will negatively affect the neighborhood.

Josh Richer, a resident of the neighborhood, stated that it will be natural for drivers to
use the neighborhood as a shortcut to 32nd Street.

Mr. Lally stated that he utilized Google Maps to determine the fastest route to the
restaurant, and that the suggested route was always via Camelback Road. He added
that the restaurant and its traffic generation will be vastly different from Donovan’s
because they are significantly decreasing the restaurant size with 24 tables and 24
seats at the bar. Mr. Stranieri clarified that neither seating nor tables are the metric
used to determine the parking requirement. He added that required parking for
restaurants is determined by square footage of dining area. He stated that based on
the size of the proposed restaurant, there would be 38 parking spaces required.

Mr. Lally stated that he believed people will use the driveway on 31st Street to go north
to Camelback Road. He stated that the road should not be restricted because the
dynamic between the restaurant and adjacent properties is not unique. He added that
commercial and residential uses interface along Camelback Road via collector streets
and are not restricted anywhere else. Mr. Stranieri asked for clarification regarding why
staff had suggested a second driveway on Camelback Road was not possible. Mr. Lally
stated that there was a spacing issue created by a flood irrigation line.

Mr. Stranieri asked for clarification regarding the applicant’s submittal for a variance
regarding a reduction in the building setback adjacent to Camelback Road. He asked if
there would be outdoor dining, alcohol, or dancing, or recreation within the outdoor
space. Mr. Lally stated that there would not be any outdoor uses in that space.

Mr. Stranieri stated that other than the remaining questions regarding the proposed
drive-through, he saw no major issues with the proposed site plan. He stated that it was
uncommon to see a modification to reduce intensity and scale on a property adjacent to
a major arterial street.

Mr. Stranieri stated that the deletion of Stipulation 2, regarding conditional approval, and
Stipulation 3, regarding zoning being vested with final site plan approval, could be
accurately characterized as an administrative action. He added that the conditions of
the stipulations were met with the development of Donovan’s Restaurant and adoption
of the Supplementary Zoning Map, which vested the C-2 zoning.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 5

Mr. Stranieri stated that Stipulation 5, regarding the existing oleander hedge along the
south boundary of the site, would not be enforceable since the hedge no longer exists.
He asked if the applicant intends to establish general conformance to a landscape plan.
Mr. Lally stated that was correct. He added that they wanted to conform to landscaping
that was agreed upon with the neighborhood. Mr. Stranieri stated that he had concerns
about the landscape plan because it only depicted one-inch caliper trees, which do not
meet Ordinance requirements. He added that this will have to be enhanced to include
two-inch caliper trees during the landscape review process to meet the Ordinance
standard of 60% one-inch and 40% two-inch caliper trees.

Mr. Stranieri stated that the Street Transportation Department submitted
recommendations regarding a minimum 25-foot wide driveway along 31st Street,
enhanced pedestrian connection from the southern parking lot to the building entrance,
and a 30-foot wide driveway along Camelback Road.

Mr. Stranieri stated that he received 46 pieces of correspondence within the 24 hours
prior to the hearing, 37 of which were received after close of business the day before.
He stated that he would like more time to review the material and review the ingress
and egress concerns raised by the speakers with a traffic reviewer. He stated that he
also wanted to speak with the Street Transportation Department regarding any traffic
calming options regarding the proposed driveway on 31st Street. Because of these
reasons, the PHO stated that he would take Z-41-94-6 (PHO-2-19) under advisement.

Regarding Z-4-10-6 (PHO-1-19), Mr. Stranieri stated that he had no issues with the site
plan or landscape plan. He stated that he was inclined to recommend approval of the
deletion of Stipulation 2.e, regarding the landscape palette, because the palette of the
adjacent office building is not appropriate for the site. He stated that he was inclined to
recommend denial as filed of the deletion of Stipulation 4 since the applicant intends to
retain the stipulation.

Mr. Stranieri asked if the applicant would prefer both cases to be taken under
advisement. Mr. Lally stated that he wanted to keep the cases together. For this
reason, the Planning Hearing Officer stated that he would take Z-4-10-6 (PHO-1-19)
under advisement as well.

FINDINGS

1) The original stipulated site plan depicted a 9,775 square foot restaurant with a
maximum height of 26 feet, with an approximately 25-foot setback from the south
property line, a shared property line with adjacent single-family residential
homes. The proposed site plan depicts a 4,996 square foot restaurant with a
maximum height of 15 feet 8 inches, with an approximately 65-foot setback from
the south property line. The reduced square footage, reduced height, and
enhanced building setback will better mitigate impacts of building massing and
activity on adjacent single-family homes to the south.

The stipulated site plan provided 90 parking spaces. Based on code
requirements at the time, the original restaurant required 90 parking spaces. The

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 6

proposed site plan depicts 94 parking spaces provided on both the subject
property and the P-1 zoned property adjacent to the site to the southeast. Based
on the smaller size of the proposed restaurant, the proposed site plan would
require 38 parking spaces.

A new sub-stipulation also is recommended to modify the proposed site plan to
require an enhanced pedestrian connection that will connect the southern
parking lot to the primary pedestrian pathway leading to the building entrance.
The pathway is depicted on the proposed site plan running east-west from the
east property line to the primary building entrance. The proposed site plan
depicts 22 parking spaces in the south parking lot. A connecting pathway will
ensure a safe pedestrian route for users of that parking lot to the restaurant.

2) The conditions outlined in Stipulations 2 and 3 regarding conditional approval
and vesting of the approved zoning were met with the development of a
restaurant and the City Council’s approval of an Official Supplementary Zoning
Map for the existing C-2 zoning designation. Deletion of these stipulations is
recommended.

3) The oleander hedge identified for preservation in Stipulation 5 is no longer
present on the site. Additionally, the applicant has proposed new language
requiring general conformance to a landscape plan that depicts a large quantity
of acacia and ficus trees along the south property line, both trees with dense
foliage. This language is recommended for approval and will promote the intent
of enhanced screening for adjacent residences to the south. However, it should
be noted that the caliper size of the proposed trees is predominantly 1-inch
caliper which would not conform with current Ordinance requirements. Some
trees will need to be increased to a minimum 2-inch caliper size for compliance.

4) The original stipulated site plan depicted an approximately 12-foot wide drive
aisle along the south property line, behind the restaurant. Stipulated restrictions
on this driveway included right-turn egress only, limiting its use to delivery or
service vehicles, on-site signage, prohibiting access after 5:00 p.m., and other
potential measures to discourage use by patrons and deliveries to or from the
adjacent commercial property to the east.

The applicant’s request for modification of this stipulation included the removal of
the restrictions regarding delivery or service vehicles and the limitation on time-
of-use as well as additional language intended to preclude left-turns. It was
unclear whether the proposed new language regarding precluding left turns was
intended to discourage left-turn ingress or egress. At the hearing, the applicant
clarified that the intended use of the driveway was to allow 3/4 movement,
prohibiting left-turn egress only.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 7

The proposed restaurant represents an approximately 51% reduction in the
building footprint compared to the existing restaurant, from 9,775 square feet to
4,996 square feet. Additionally, the proposed 94 parking spaces comprises a
247% increase above the 38 required parking spaces. Finally, the applicant
intends to retain restrictions regarding signage and prohibit left-turn egress into
the existing neighborhood. Combined, these factors will mitigate the potential
impacts of the development and the revised driveway configuration on the
neighborhood to the south. The provision of significantly enhanced on-site
parking will mitigate the potential for customers of the restaurant to rely on street-
parking or any off-site parking in the surrounding area.

The applicant’s request is recommended to be approved with modifications. The
Street Transportation Department recommends that the driveway be restricted to
either developing in accordance with a modified Standard Detail P-1243-1 to
prohibit left-turn egress or limiting use of the driveway to emergency access only.
An additional stipulation is also recommended to preserve the original
stipulation’s requirement for the developer to install and maintain private signage
communicating the driveway movement restrictions and discouraging any use of
the driveway by users of adjacent commercial property. However, the proposed
site plan does not depict any driveway or vehicular cross-access along the east
property line and therefore there may be no actual opportunity for use of the
driveway on 31st Street for users of the adjacent commercial property.

5) The Street Transportation Department recommended an additional stipulation
requiring a minimum 30-foot wide driveway along Camelback Road in
accordance with City of Phoenix Standard Detail P-1255-1.

6) Adjacent to the southeast corner of the property is a parcel zoned P-1 (Parking
District) which was rezoned in case no. Z-4-10-6. This property was originally
rezoned to provide additional parking for the existing Donovan’s Restaurant.
This parcel remains undeveloped. The property is depicted on the site plans in
this case and is intended to provide additional parking for the proposed
restaurant. Modifications to the stipulations in this case are proposed in case no.
PHO-1-9—Z-4-10-6 which was also heard on this agenda.

DECISION: The Planning Hearing Officer took this case under advisement. On
February 28, 2020 the Planning Hearing Officer took this case out from under
advisement and recommended approval with modifications and additional stipulations.

STIPULATIONS

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 8

A. THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE AN ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN
CONNECTION FROM THE SOUTHERN PARKING LOT TO THE PRIMARY
PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY LEADING TO THE BUILDING ENTRANCE.

2.
That approval be conditioned on the development of a restaurant within 18
months of final City Council approval in accord with Section 506B of the Zoning
Ordinance.

3.
That zoning vest with final site plan approval by the Development Services
Department.

5.
That the existing mature oleander hedge, located along the south boundary of the
site, be preserved as approved by the Development Services Department.

IF A DRIVEWAY IS PROPOSED ALONG 31ST STREET, THE DRIVEWAY
SHALL BE RESTRICTED IN ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WAYS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND STREET
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTS:

A.
THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED PER CITY
OF PHOENIX STANDARD DETAIL P-1243-1 AS MODIFIED TO RESTRICT
LEFT TURN EGRESS AND AS APPROVED BY THE STREET
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.

B.
THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO EMERGENCY ACCESS
ONLY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of February 19, 2020
Application Z-41-94-6
Page 9

6.
THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM 30-FOOT-WIDE DRIVEWAY
ALONG CAMELBACK ROAD IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF PHOENIX
STANDARD DETAIL P-1255-1.

7.
8.
That aA 10-foot sidewalk/landscape easement SHALL be dedicated along
Camelback Road.

8.
9.
That aAdditional easements and right-of-way dedications may be required by the
PLANNING AND Development Services Department at time of preliminary site
plan review.

Upon request, this publication will be made available within a reasonable length of time
through appropriate auxiliary aids or services to accommodate an individual with a
disability. This publication may be made available through the following auxiliary aids or
services: large print, Braille, audiotape or computer diskette. Please contact the
Planning and Development Department, Tamra Ingersoll at voice number 602-534-6648
or TTY use 7-1-1.