Minutes

City of Mesa — City Council (2026-07-20)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 14808 characters
Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing 
June 10, 2026  
Page 2 
*2.
Approval of minutes of previous meetings as written. 
Minutes from the Study Session and Public Hearing meetings held on May 27, 2026. 
*3.
Take action on the following zoning cases: 
*3-a. 
ZON26-00333 "Faith Christian School," 9.9± acres located at 3761 South Power
Road. Council Use Permit and amending Conditions of Approval Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 12 
and 13 of Ordinance No. 4646. This request will allow for a Private School. (District 6) 
Planner: Jennifer Merrill  
Staff Recommendation: Approval with Conditions 
4.
Items not on the Consent Agenda
4-a. 
GPA26-00111 "San Antonio Tire Shop" 0.4± acres located at 1609 West University
Drive. Minor General Plan Amendment to change the Placetype from Urban Residential 
to Urban Center. (District 3). 
Planner: Emily Johnson 
Staff Recommendation: Approval with Conditions 
It was moved by Boardmember Peterson, seconded by Boardmember Carpenter, that case 
GPA26-001101 be approved.  
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed: 
AYES – Ayers, Peterson, Blakeman, Carpenter, Farnsworth, Montes, Pitcher 
NAYS – None 
ABSENT– None 
4-b. 
ZON25-00110 "San Antonio Tire Shop" 0.4± acres located at 1609 West University
Drive. Rezone from Office Commercial (OC) to Limited Commercial with a Bonus 
Intensity Zone Overlay (LC-BIZ) and Site Plan Review. This request will allow for an 
approximately 4,015± square foot Minor Automobile Repair facility. (District 3). 
Planner: Emily Johnson 
Staff Recommendation: Approval with Conditions 
Representative for the applicant, Alex Hayes displayed a PowerPoint presentation for the 
proposed case number GPA26-00111 and associated Zoning case ZON25-00111. (See 
Attachment 4) 
Mr. Hayes reiterated the applicant’s request for the General Plan amendment, rezone, and site 
plan review to support the locally owned, father-and-son business. He emphasized that the 
impacts of the tire shop are already known and non-theoretical, as it has operated for over a 
year with zero neighborhood complaints. Mr. Hayes addressed the board's parking concerns by

Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing 
June 10, 2026  
Page 3 
clarifying that installations take only 15 to 25 minutes with no overnight staging required, making 
the four proposed spaces operationally sufficient. He indicated a willingness to incorporate 
parking solutions directly into their Good Neighbor Policy as a condition of approval, moving 
forward to City Council and remained available to answer any questions. 
 
Vice Chairperson Peterson questioned the recourse available to neighbors if the proposed 
parking reduction from 11 to 4 spaces creates an overflow issue in adjacent areas. Mr. Hayes 
responded that customers typically wait on-site for brief 15-to-25-minute installations, 
eliminating the need for extensive vehicle staging or overnight storage. He noted that a nearby 
church parking lot presents a potential future opportunity for an agreement if necessary. 
Planning Director, Mary Kopaskie-Brown, added that because parking is prohibited on 
Longmore, any overflow issues would be handled via code compliance. However, Mr. Balmer 
noted that the applicant could administratively apply for a formal, recorded shared parking 
agreement with neighboring underutilized properties if needed. Chairperson Ayers suggested 
integrating a parking contingency plan into the applicant's Good Neighbor Policy, which staff 
confirmed could be added as a formal condition of approval prior to advancing to City Council. 
 
Vice Chairperson Peterson further inquired about the historical timeline and what specific 
mechanism triggered the current application. Mr. Balmer clarified that the application was 
brought to the city's attention by a code compliance case regarding a sign violation. Mr. Balmer 
explained that the site's highly restrictive Office Commercial (OC) designation has been an 
issue since annexation in 1958, as none of the historical uses fully conformed to the zone. This 
application represents an opportunity to clean up a legal zoning mismatch that has persisted for 
decades. 
 
Boardmember Montes asked what alternative commercial uses would be permitted on the site 
under its current zoning if the tire shop application were denied. Mr. Balmer responded that 
Office Commercial (OC) is the city's least intense commercial zoning district and features a 
highly restricted use palette. It is limited primarily to low-intensity professional offices, strictly 
prohibiting auto repairs and placing severe restrictions on restaurant uses. 
 
The following citizens addressed the Board in opposition to case number GPA26-00111 and 
associated case ZON25-00110: 
 
• 
Reed Done, a Mesa resident 
• 
James Adamec, a Mesa resident 
• 
Jose Hernandez, a Mesa resident 
• 
Wendy Madison, a Mesa resident 
• 
Edward Delke, a Mesa resident 
• 
Matt Taylor, a Mesa resident 
 
• 
Don Klinker, a Mesa resident 
• 
Veronica Erran, a Mesa resident 
• 
Roxanne Jetson, a Mesa resident 
• 
Tess Taylor, a Mesa Resident 
 
The above speakers offered a series of comments in opposition to the case number GPA26-
00111 and associated case ZON25-00110 including, but not limited to the following: 
 
• Parking Concerns: Severe apprehension regarding the reduction from the code-required 11 
parking spaces down to 4 spaces on a highly constrained 0.4-acre parcel. Residents expressed 
concern that this configuration will trigger illegal overflow parking along Longmore, or force 
customer and employee vehicles to overflow directly into the adjacent residential cul-de-sacs 
and streets, such as Bedford Street and Henkel Street, impacting local residential spaces.

Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing 
June 10, 2026  
Page 4 
• Concerning 24-Hour Operations, Noise, Light, and Operational Disruption: Strong 
neighborhood opposition to the proposed 24/7 operating window. Residents noted that the 
surrounding residential area is quiet after 5:00 PM and voiced concerns over late-night light 
pollution from unshielded fixtures, structural noise from nocturnal impact tool usage, and 
general operational disruptions running directly counter to the peace and character of an 
established low-density neighborhood. 
 
• Public Safety: Concerns that a 24-hour commercial storefront will serve as an unwanted late-
night gathering hub or crime nexus. Neighbors noted existing ongoing struggles with late-night 
loitering from nearby apartment complexes and autonomous vehicle drop-offs and argued that 
keeping a business open all night will attract unnecessary vehicle and pedestrian traffic through 
residential streets during early morning hours. 
 
• Existing Code Violations and Visual Blight: Immediate frustration regarding the site's 
current unpermitted operations, highlighting that the applicant has already created a 
neighborhood eyesore by stacking tires high above the property line wall. Residents expressed 
skepticism that proposed aesthetic improvements, such as the mural, will be upheld or properly 
enforced over time. 
 
• Failure to Meet the Burden of Proof, Public Necessity, or Market Demand: Objections that 
the applicant provided no market study, demand analysis, or data proving a community need for 
a 24-hour tire shop on this specific corner. Neighbors highlighted that the applicant already 
operates a location blocks away on Broadway, and that an active direct competitor (Pineda 
Tires) is located immediately adjacent to the subject property. 
 
• Failure to Demonstrate Need for a General Plan Amendment and Consistency with Area 
Plans: Critical opposition to forcing a square peg into a round hole by shifting the site's place 
type designation from Urban Residential to an Urban Center. Residents argued that the Urban 
Center designation is a severe geographical outlier, given that approximately 9,300 acres 
directly surrounding the site are exclusively low-density residential, and that the closest 
established Urban Centers are located a full mile south along the light rail corridor. 
 
Mr. Hayes returned to the podium to address the public comments. He emphasized that the 
proposed site plan and landscaping layouts are fully reviewed by staff and are legally binding 
under the site plan review, representing a substantial capital reinvestment that will permanently 
eliminate current blighted conditions. He clarified that the property is an existing commercial 
corner, and the high volume of BIZ modifications reflects trying to bring an older corner parcel 
into compliance. Addressing the 24/7 concerns, Mr. Hayes explained that the request supports 
a mobile roadside service unit handling highway emergency, requiring only one employee on-
site overnight to retrieve tires from indoor storage. He added that the visual blight of tires 
stacked over the back wall would be resolved because outdoor storage is strictly prohibited. 
 
Boardmember Pitcher requested the draft Good Neighbor Policy be displayed and asked staff to 
confirm if the document is binding on future successors. Mr. Balmer confirmed that because 
compliance with the Good Neighbor Policy is included as a formal condition of approval 
alongside the site and landscape plans, it legally runs with the land and binds all future property 
owners. 
 
Boardmember Pitcher expressed concern for the neighbors on Bedford Street regarding 
potential customer and employee parking overflow, suggesting a formal parking contingency be 
added to the policy. Mr. Hayes noted that because operations run on an appointment basis with 
15-to-25-minute indoor service times, they have experienced no parking issues during 18

Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing 
June 10, 2026  
Page 5 
months of operation but agreed to incorporate a proactive parking table and remediation 
strategy into the Good Neighbor Policy. 
 
Boardmember Montes asked staff if any official citations or neighborhood complaints had been 
filed against the property regarding parking over the last 18 months of active operation. Mr. 
Balmer confirmed that no formal parking or noise complaints have ever been filed against the 
site, noting the sole code enforcement action that triggered this public process was strictly 
limited to a commercial sign violation. 
 
Boardmember Carpenter asked if the shop had been actively operating its 24-hour model during 
that 18-month trial window without generating complaints, and inquired if the new restricted 
traffic loop was currently active. Mr. Hayes confirmed that the shop did actively operate 24/7 
without neighborhood incident until the sign violation occurred, at which point they voluntarily 
ceased late-night hours pending board approval. He clarified that the new traffic loop, which 
closes two existing corner curb cuts, routes traffic in from University Drive and exits them onto 
Longmore, is not yet active and will be fully constructed upon project approval. 
 
Vice Chairperson Peterson questioned the absolute operational necessity of the 24-hour 
window and asked staff if any other surrounding businesses on that intersection currently 
operate 24 hours a day. Mr. Hayes maintained that 24/7 flexibility is a core component of the 
business model to support their mobile dispatch unit. Mr. Balmer noted they did not have the 
exact operational hours of the surrounding intersection on hand but stated that the large 
commercial shopping center directly to the north carries a variety of commercial uses that are 
legally permitted to maintain 24-hour or extended late-night operations under current zoning 
text. 
 
Applicant Joaquin Guadarrama clarified that the shop’s standard hours of operation are from 
8:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Prior to receiving the sign violation, the business did operate 24 hours a 
day without any neighborhood complaints. During that initial move-in and setup period, the 
operators established strong, friendly relations with both the immediate residential neighbor and 
the adjacent tire shop. The request for 24/7 flexibility is intended to support their mobile service 
truck operations. The family owns two shops in Mesa: a full-service major auto repair facility at 
Alma School Road and Broadway Road, and the subject site at 1609 West University Drive, 
which is strictly minor tire repairs and indoor tire inventory storage. Without 24/7 access to this 
localized inventory, the mobile dispatch truck would be forced to drive 20 minutes to their 
Phoenix (32nd Street and Van Buren Street) or Chandler locations, significantly increasing 
roadside wait times for stranded highway motorists. Mr. Guadarrama noted that the overnight 
model would require only one or two employees to pull inventory or perform occasional 
emergency flat repairs indoors. He stated the business was previously unaware of the 
neighbors' frustration regarding tires stacked above the rear fence line, pledged to resolve the 
visual issue immediately, and expressed a strong desire to maintain a collaborative relationship 
with the community. Lastly, he confirmed that the proposed exit drive aisle is located entirely on 
the shop's property and remains structurally separate from the residential alleyway to the south. 
 
Following a collaborative dialogue between the Board and staff, Mr. Balmer recommended 
addressing the parking issue via a separate, standalone condition of approval rather than inside 
the Good Neighbor Policy. This mechanism allows staff to work out a flexible solution before the 
case reaches City Council, such as utilizing alternative compliance provisions under the code to 
resolve any parking deficiencies within 30 days should operational or code violations arise. 
 
It was moved by Boardmember Peterson, seconded by Boardmember Carpenter, that case 
ZON25-00110 be approved subject to the added requirement that staff resolve potential parking

Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing 
June 10, 2026  
Page 6 
issues before the case proceeds to City Council should the four on-site spaces prove insufficient 
during operations. 
 
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:  
 
 
AYES – Ayers, Peterson, Blakeman, Carpenter, Farnsworth, Montes, Pitcher 
NAYS – None 
ABSENT– None 
 
Chairperson Ayers declared the motion carried unanimously by those present. 
 
 
5. 
Adjourn. 
 
Without objection, the Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing adjourned at 5:37 p.m. 
 
 
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Planning 
and Zoning Board meeting of the City of Mesa, Arizona, held on 10th day of June 2026. I further certify 
that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. 
 
 
 
__________________________________________ 
BENJAMIN AYERS, CHAIRPERSON 
 
DH 
(Attachments – 4)