Letters of Concern

Taylor Manemann
From:
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2026 12:45 PM
To: Taylor Manemann;
Subject: Proposed New Community Chandler Heights and Cooper
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Dear Members of the City of Chandler Planning Commission,
I am writing regarding the proposed K. Hovnanian development adjacent to our neighborhood, McKinley
Glenn, and specifically the proposed treatment of Lot 53, which sits directly behind our property.
First, I want to express our appreciation to K. Hovnanian and particularly to Brendan Ray for listening to
the concerns we have raised and working to identify a potential solution for Lot 53. Mr. Ray recently
shared with me the option K. Hovnanian intends to submit to the City, which would place a single-story
home on Lot 53 with an increased setback providing approximately 20 feet between our shared wall and
the home itself.
We genuinely appreciate that effort. A single-story home with an increased setback is a meaningful
improvement and demonstrates a willingness by the builder to listen to the concerns of existing
homeowners and work toward a solution.
However, one important concern remains regarding the long-term protection of that setback.
I asked Mr. Ray what restrictions would apply to the 20-foot area after the home is sold. For example,
could a future homeowner construct a shed, accessory structure, pool equipment enclosure, or another
improvement immediately adjacent to our shared wall?
Our request is very simple: we would like the entire 20-foot area between our wall and the residence
to remain a true buffer, free from structures and equipment. We respectfully ask the Commission to
consider how such a restriction could be formally established and preserved for future homeowners—
whether through zoning stipulations, the plat, CC&Rs, a deed restriction, or another enforceable
mechanism.
While Lot 53 directly affects our home, our concern is also part of a broader issue we hope the
Commission will consider when evaluating this development.
The Character of the Surrounding Area
1

When we purchased our home in McKinley Glenn, our property carried a premium in part because of the
additional space and privacy behind it. We fully understood that the property behind our neighborhood
would likely be developed someday. We were not opposed to that then, and we are not opposed to it
now.
We love Chandler. We welcome new neighbors, and we are happy to share the city and community we
love with more families and allow more people the opportunity to call Chandler home.
What we reasonably expected, however, was that when this property was eventually developed, the City
would be mindful of the development pattern that had already been established in this part of Chandler
and that new development would be reasonably consistent with the character of the surrounding area.
The communities surrounding or immediately neighboring this proposed development demonstrate that
pattern:
 McKinley Glenn: Lots generally exceed 10,000 square feet, with many approximately 10,600–
14,000+ square feet and larger premium lots.
 Hawthorn Manor by Tri Pointe Homes: Lots typically average approximately 0.25–0.27 acres, or
roughly 11,000–12,000+ square feet.
 Symmetry at Magnolia by Shea Homes: Lots typically range from approximately 0.20–0.25
acres, or roughly 8,500–11,000+ square feet. The community also features intentionally generous
lot widths, including approximately 75-foot and 114-foot-wide configurations, allowing for more
spacious layouts and greater separation between homes.
 Tierra Linda: Approximately 20,000-square-foot lots.
 Riggs Ranch Meadows: Lots typically range from approximately 0.16–0.30 acres, or roughly
7,000–13,000+ square feet, with some rare oversized pie-shaped or cul-de-sac lots reaching
approximately 0.45 acres or more.
 Circle G at Riggs Homestead Ranch: Lots commonly approximately 35,000–38,000+ square
feet, with some exceeding one acre.
Against that surrounding development pattern, a new community with lots averaging
approximately 5,000 square feetrepresents a significant departure.
Perhaps particularly relevant is Symmetry at Magnolia because it demonstrates that this development
pattern is not simply a reflection of older neighborhoods. Magnolia is a newer community in this same
area of Chandler, yet its lots are approximately 8,500–11,000+ square feet and include generous 75-foot
and 114-foot-wide configurations. Even recent development in this area has continued to recognize the
larger-lot, more spacious residential character that surrounds this property.
Our Preference Is Consistency With the Area
We want to be clear that our preference would be for the development itself to be more consistent with
the surrounding communities and the character of this area of Chandler.
We chose to live here because of what makes this particular part of Chandler special—the larger lots,
wider homesites, greater setbacks, lower density, and the sense of openness those characteristics
create. Those qualities are not unique to McKinley Glenn. They are reflected throughout the surrounding
communities.
2

We never expected the land behind us to remain vacant. What we did expect was that future
development would be reasonably consistent with the character that had already been established in
this area. We did not anticipate that the property would be developed at a density so substantially
different from virtually every community surrounding it.
For that reason, our first preference would be to see larger lots and a lower-density development that
is more compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. We believe that would represent the most
natural and appropriate continuation of the development pattern in this part of Chandler.
We understand that communities evolve and that every new development does not need to replicate the
neighborhood next door. But there is a meaningful difference between reasonable evolution and
introducing a residential density that is significantly different from the communities surrounding a
property.
If the Proposed Density Moves Forward
If the City ultimately determines that the proposed higher density and approximately 5,000-square-foot
lots are appropriate, then we believe it becomes even more important to create meaningful and
permanent transitions where this development directly borders established neighborhoods.
Those protections could include larger transition lots, increased setbacks, single-story homes where
appropriate, landscape buffers, and permanent restrictions ensuring that those buffers cannot later be
filled with accessory structures, sheds, pool equipment, or other improvements.
The proposed solution for Lot 53 is a positive step in that direction, and we sincerely appreciate K.
Hovnanian and Mr. Ray working with us.
However, for the proposed 20-foot setback to provide meaningful long-term protection, we respectfully
ask that it be preserved as a true 20-foot buffer—not simply a setback for the primary residence that
could later be filled with structures or equipment.
More broadly, we hope the Commission will consider not only how to buffer existing homeowners from a
substantially higher-density development, but also whether that level of density is consistent with this
particular area of Chandler in the first place.
Chandler has grown successfully because it has found ways to welcome new development while
respecting the communities that are already here. We believe those two goals can coexist.
We welcome responsible development of this property. We welcome new families to Chandler. And we
sincerely appreciate the efforts K. Hovnanian has made to listen to our concerns.
We simply ask that, as this project moves forward, the City protect the character of an area that existing
homeowners chose and invested in, maintain an appropriate transition between new and established
neighborhoods, and continue the thoughtful approach to development that has made this part of
Chandler such a desirable place to call home.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and service to our community.
3

Sincerely,
Michelle Wood
McKinley Glenn
4


8/26/2026
Brennan,
Listed below are the concerns that we have about the new neighborhood Vale Sereno on the corner of Chandler Heights
Rd. and Cooper in Chandler. We feel our property will have the biggest impact on Privacy because the new
development would share more border with ours than any other property (around 528 feet). According to the current
plan that would be 10 lots shared on our border. Privacy is a major concern. We want the same privacy we have now
and so house type, distance from our property line, and landscaping are all major concerns.
1. We would like to know the distance from our south wall to the property line of the lots and then the distance to
the houses.
2. We would like to know the distance from our west wall to the property line of the lots and then the distance to
the houses.
3. We would like single story houses on the first street south of our property. The reason behind this is for us to
keep the privacy we have now. With two story houses that close to our backyard they would be able to see our
whole yard giving us no privacy.
4. We would like Lot 53 to be a single-story house. The reason behind this is for us to keep the privacy we have
now
5. We would like the Landscaping bordering our property to provide more privacy. This would include privacy
trees on both sides of the fence and include a watering system.
6. We are concerned that the 5-acre lot on the corner is higher than our side of the fence since that lot was full of
dirt piles from dump trucks before the Chandler Heights Road expansion project started. When that project
started the dirt was just spread out and not removed. This essentially raised the entire lot, and the block wall no
longer gives us the same amount of privacy. We would like the dirt taken out before they start developing the
property or some resolution since the fence will be too low for privacy. Also, when it rains all the water flows on
to our property because that lot is now higher than ours.
7. We would like to be compensated for our block fence. This is common and we were reimbursed by the builder
on the East side of our property.
We wanted to state that we also have the same concern as others at the meeting about the small lot sizes compared to
all other developments in our area, 85249.
From our experience working with the city on the Chandler Heights Rd expansion project and having to deal with a
change in project management, we have learned that we need these agreements acknowledged by everyone and in
writing.
Thank you,
Jeff and Tammy Gehling

Taylor Manemann
From:
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 10:12 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Development North of Tierra Linda / South of McKinley
Glen
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Dear Ms. Manemann,
I am a resident of the Tierra Linda community in Southeast Chandler, and I am writing to share my
concerns about the proposed residential development planned directly north of our neighborhood and
south of McKinley Glen.
I understand this property will eventually be developed, and I am not opposed to responsible growth.
My concern is that the current proposal appears inconsistent with the established character of the
surrounding neighborhoods. Specifically, I would like the City to consider:
 Housing density — The proposal reportedly includes more than twice the number of homes
found in surrounding neighborhoods, on significantly smaller lots. I'd ask that density be
brought more in line with the established area.
 Two-story homes — Two-story homes placed near our predominantly single-story
communities represent a notable departure from the existing character. I'd ask that their
placement be carefully considered.
 Buffering and setbacks — Meaningful landscape buffers, larger setbacks, and open space
along the neighborhood boundaries would help create a smoother transition between the
existing and proposed communities.
 Traffic and safety — I am concerned about increased traffic along Cooper and Via de
Palmas, particularly given the planned access point via Via de Palmas Road. These are
streets where families walk, bike, and jog, and I'd ask that traffic and safety impacts be
carefully evaluated.
I respectfully ask the City and the Planning Commission to encourage a development that reflects the
thoughtful planning principles that have long defined Southeast Chandler.
Thank you for your time and for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Vaibhav Thokia
1

Taylor Manemann
From:
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 1:01 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: New Development north of Tierra Linda in Chandler Heights
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Hello Taylor!
My husband and I have been residents in Tierra Linda (Cloud & Cooper Roads) for 9 years now. We have
enjoyed the peaceful quietness of this section of Chandler immensely. We are cyclists and long distance
walkers and use the surrounding streets daily for our enjoyment. Our home is located in the far NE
corner of Tierra Linda and backs up to Via de Palmas and the existing county island properties.
We have been away for 4 weeks now in Europe attending our son's wedding and vacationing. As a result
we have not been able to attend the recent planning meeting to discuss our concerns in person regarding
the proposed development.
While we love Chandler and all it has to offer its residents, the lack of MASTER PLANNING, such as was
found in Ahwatukee where we lived for 24 years, is quite evident. It seems to be the nature of this area
where farmlands dominated and over time each small parcel was being developed independently. This
has created what I call a number of SLOT COMMUNITIES, one street in and out, with little aesthetics in
the surroundings. I do not know how a city planner can overcome this type of small parcel development,
which does not "flow" so well. However, it needs to start at some point in south Chandler to make a
difference in our future development, aesthetics, and safety.
Michael and I are strongly opposed to multi story housing in this area. It is inconsistent with the
surrounding communities. It will affect privacy and values on existing lots in adjacent communities. The
density is really going in the wrong direction! Our Tierra Linda Community is a very intimate community
of only 59 homes on 1/2 acre parcels. Although they are custom homes, I feel that the layout (6 cul de
sacs with a center median, one way in/out, wide streets and large set backs) is so very desirable. I wish
that someone in planning would be able to enact a change that would REQUIRE less density such as
Tierra Linda. It would improve the desirability. People would pay more for larger lot opportunities and
space between their homes. It's the developers who are driving maximum profit by these 2 story, small
parcel homesites. Who should win? I contend that you and your planning department are in the drivers
seat here and are able to say NO to this type of development. The development of these tightly clustered
homes with little frontage, garage forward, courtyard style (can't see front doors) must be
slowed/stopped. We can do better in Chandler! If this is what we offer, people will have no choice but to
purchase based upon location. However, if we offer a product that is much more aesthetic and
appealing to people who want something better, it will sell. It will create a much more desirable place to
live in our community.
1

I kindly ask you to look to the greater good for our Chandler Heights section of town and start NOW by
making a difference. Please do not approve the plans as submitted. It is NOT what our area
needs. Buffers along perimeters are something, yet not enough. Access points like on Via de Palmas,
are not a good idea. Two story homes are easily avoidable by planning. Please do what is right in your
heart for our beautiful Chandler, not what the developers want. Ask them to plat a community like Tierra
Linda with tract homes that are visually pleasing, open in front, set back from the WIDE STREETS.
I thank you for taking the time to read my opinions and requests. PLEASE make a difference and make
some changes beginning today!
Kind Regards,
Susan Phlipot
former HOA Board President of Tierra Linda HOA
Retired Engineer
2

Taylor Manemann
From: mike Topete
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 10:51 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: New development NORTH OF TIERRA LINDA AND SOUTH OF MCKINKEY GLEN
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Ms. Manemann,
I want to express my concerns about the new development going in just north of my home in Chandler.
The development is going to be putting a lot of 1 and 2 story homes and crowded housing in that area.
This area is known for beautiful, expensive home sites, and a way of living we have come to love in the
southeast Chandler area. I believe a development like this is going to lower our home value, make it un
enjoyable for people like myself to experience the quiet that Chandler has to offer. Our home directly
backs up to this piece of land that is proposed for this development. My understanding is that via De
Palmas will be used as an entry point to this development and I’m hoping that another solution can be
found.
Below are some solutions that we are asking the city to consider.
WE ARE ASKING THE CITY TO CONSIDER
膆  Better buffering between neighborhoods
膆  Larger setbacks along the McKinley Glenn boundary
膆  More meaningful open space where the communities meet
膆  A development that is compatible with the surrounding single-story neighborhoods
膆  Planning that continues the vision that has made Southeast Chandler a wonderful place to live
I feel like this development can be planned better and more in line with the communities that surround
it.
Thank you,
Mike and Chelsea Topete
Tierra Linda community homeowners
Sent from my iPhone
1

Taylor Manemann
From:
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 1:20 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Proposed development near tierra linda
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
I respectfully ask the City of Chandler to encourage a development that reflects the same successful
planning principles found throughout Southeast Chandler by:
膆  Providing a meaningful landscape buffer along the northern edge of the proposed development
where it borders McKinley Glenn.
膆  Increasing setbacks between existing and proposed homes.
膆  Adding meaningful open space to create a smoother transition between neighborhoods.
膆  Carefully considering the placement of two-story homes so the development is compatible with the
surrounding single-story communities.
膆  Designing a neighborhood that complements the quality, character, and thoughtful planning that
have made Southeast Chandler one of Chandler's premier residential areas
Michael Phlipot
1

Taylor Manemann
From:
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 8:03 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Proposed Development: Chandler Heights and Cooper Rd
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
In regards to the proposed development on the Southeast corner of Chandler Heights and Cooper. I have the following
concerns/comments
1) Traffic
a. Unless turning lanes are created for residences making right turns into the proposed community, traffic
is going to be slowed/back up on either one or both Chandler Heights and Cooper Rd.
b. Entrances to this neighborhood would be very close to the intersecƟon and potenƟally cause a lot of
traffic issues.
c. I have seen a fair number of accidents with people suddenly slowing down to make a right turn into
neighborhoods without turning lanes.
2) Two story homes
a. Puƫng two-story homes right next to the single-story homes in McKinley Glenn is not fair to
them. Their concerns should be taken into account.
b. I would not want to suddenly have a lot of two-story homes with views into my backyard go up aŌer I
purchased my home.
3) Density and Style
a. The density and style of the homes does not seem to be in line with the character of this immediate
area.
Michael J. Boles
1

Taylor Manemann
From: ken mcalister
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 4:53 PM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Case #: PLH26-0021
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Taylor,
For this housing development I am in strong opposition to a couple of things. First the density. The density of this
development does not match the surrounding developments in the area. It is way too dense and really needs to stay
consistent with the surrounding developments to be a cohesive community. Second, this development borders county
island properties. These current properties need to continue to have their privacy. I would request that ALL houses
boarding the surrounding of the development be single story just like Treeland, Haywood and McKinley Glenn which are
the most recent developments in the area. Third I would request that egress be eliminated on the south side of the
property and not allowed to dump onto Via de Palmas. It should be just like Hawthorne Manor and be an emergency exit
only. Again to stay consistent with the surrounding area development.
Please make sure this gets to P&Z and also city council.
Ken
1

Taylor Manemann
From: D Hong
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 7:28 AM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Comments Regarding Proposed New Home Development South of McKinley Glenn and
North of Tierra Linda communities
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Dear Mr. Manemann,
I am a resident of the Tierra Linda community/sub-division, located south of the proposed development site. I
support responsible growth and understand that this property will ultimately be developed. My primary concern is
not the development itself, but rather the proposed density and inclusion of two-story homes.
For many years, our area of Southeast Chandler has been characterized by single-story neighborhoods, larger lots,
generous setbacks, and a lower-density residential feel. Communities throughout this area, including Tierra Linda,
Circle G, McKinley Glenn and neighboring subdivisions, reflect this planning vision and contribute to the character
that attracts residents to the area.
The proposed development's higher density and two-story homes appear inconsistent with the established pattern
of surrounding neighborhoods. I respectfully ask the City to consider whether a lower-density, predominantly
single-story design would be more compatible with the existing character of Southeast Chandler and better align
with the thoughtful planning principles that have shaped this area and our homeowner investments.
Thank you for your time and consideration of resident feedback during the review process.
Sincerely,
Darian Hong
Tierra Linda Resident/Homeowner
1

Taylor Manemann
From: Sri Reddy
Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2026 2:14 PM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Reg: Mckinley Glenn neighborhood proposed Plan Vale Sereno
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Hi Taylor,
Hope you are doing well.
FYI, I sent the email below but have not received any response whatsoever. I am deeply concerned that
this high-density housing development could negatively affect the value, appeal of our homes.
Many thanks,
Reddy
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sri Reddy
Date: Wed, Apr 1, 2026 at 12:43 PM
Subject: Request for Clarification on Build Plans – Vale Sereno Development
To: bray@raylawaz.com <bray@raylawaz.com>
Hi Ray Law Firm,
Good morning.
I hope you are doing well. I am writing to request clarification regarding the buildable plans for
the development (attached for reference).
Specifically, we would like to understand the plans for the lots highlighted along the eastern boundary
(the row backing up to our property). Could you please confirm whether these homes are planned as
single-story or two-story constructions?
We purchased our home less than a year ago and paid a significant premium with the understanding and
expectation that there would be no direct obstruction to our backyard view. The newly proposed plans
appear to potentially impact that view, which is a concern for us.
Given this, we kindly request consideration that any homes along this particular row be limited to single-
story construction.
1

We would greatly appreciate your clarification on the current plan and any flexibility regarding this
matter.
Thank you for your time and assistance. We look forward to your response.
Best regards,
Reddy
Mckinley Glenn (Cachet Homes)
2

Taylor Manemann
From: Chris Leason
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2026 1:24 PM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Chandler Zoning Case # PLH26-0021 - K. Hovnanian Vale Sereno
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Dear Ms. Manemann:
I am writing as a resident of the McKinley Glenn community in opposition to the proposed K.
Hovnanian Vale Sereno development that is pending before the Chandler Planning Division. As you
are aware, the proposed development is contemplated for the southeast corner of Copper Road and
Chandler Heights Road. The proposed development (1) deviates from the Southeast Chandler Area
Plan (Sept. 16, 1999), (2) is inconsistent with existing, single-story communities adjacent to the
proposed development (e.g, McKinley Glenn, Tierra Linda, Circle G, and the County island homes
directly north, south, and east of the development), and (3) will create unsafe conditions on Copper
Road with the additional volume of traffic turning into and out of the proposed development.
As noted in the Southeast Chandler Area Plan (page I-7), the proposed development sits in an area
designated as “Rural/Agrarian Character” where “[d]ensity transitions and overall development
compatibility are issues that must be considered.” (page I-9). By comparison, the area to the south
of the development is identified as “Traditional Suburban Character,” where “residential development
densities of 2.5 dwelling units per acre may be the norm, but [] opportunities exist to increase
density to 3.5 dwelling units per acre should certain amenities be provided.” (page I-9). The
distinction between a “Rural/Agrarian” character and a “Traditional Suburban” character suggests
that a lower density is contemplated in the “Rural/Agrarian” portion of southeast Chandler where the
development is planned.
By contrast, the proposed development shows a density of 4.21 dwelling units per acre. This
saturated density of homes is in opposition to the nature of a “Rural/Agrarian” character and the
surrounding, premium custom/semi-custom developments such as McKinley Glenn, Tierra Linda, and
Circle G. As an example, the average lot size in McKinley Glenn is slightly over 11,000 square feet,
while the average lot size for the proposed development appears to be roughly half the size. Many of
the homes around the proposed development, such as Circle G, have lot sizes much larger than the
proposed development.
Further, the mix of single and two-story homes is entirely inconsistent with the adjacent
communities. The homes on the County island surrounding the development are all one story,
McKinley Glenn and Tierra Linda have only one-story homes, and Circle G has one-story homes on
the lots closest to the development. In addition, while amenities and buffer zones are provided in
the development adjacent to the County island homes to the east and south of the development, no
1

such buffer zones are provided to the north adjacent to McKinley Glenn and to the east adjacent to
the County island homes on E. Via de Palmas.
Finally, the increase in traffic on Copper Road is a concern from a safety standpoint. The primary
gate access is close to the intersection of Copper Road and Chandler Heights Road. Traffic heading
to the development from the north will need to make a left hand turn into the development, crossing
two lanes of traffic on the widened Copper Road, with the community entrance being close to the
intersection. Also, traffic exiting the community on E. Via De Palmas and making a left onto Copper
Road to head south will need to cross two lanes of traffic.
In closing, I note that a similar high-density development was proposed roughly 14 years ago at the
site of the current Hawthorn Manor community on Chandler Heights Road. When that high-density
community, comprised of similarly sized one and two-story homes on similarly sized lots, was before
the Planning and Zoning Commission, numerous affected residents, including myself, spoke out in
opposition to the development. Given the numerous concerns expressed by the community, the
Planning and Zoning Commission tabled a vote on the proposed development. Ultimately, the land
was sold to Maracay Homes, who developed Hawthorn Manor into a larger lot community with
exclusively single-story homes. This subsequent development was approved by both the Planning
and Zoning Commission and the City Council.
I anticipate without significant modifications to the planned development, consistent with the
requirements of the Southeast Chandler Area Plan and taking into consideration the existing,
premium single-story homes around the development, similar opposition to Vale Sereno will exist
before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council (if the development as currently
contemplated is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission).
Thank you for your consideration of my comments.
Chris Leason
2180 E. Nolan Place
Chandler, AZ 85249
2

Taylor Manemann
From: Michelle Wood
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2026 1:18 PM
To: Taylor Manemann
Subject: Proposed Residential Development – Southeast Corner of Cooper Road & Chandler
Heights Road
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Report Suspicious
Dear Planning Commission Members,
My name is Michelle Wood, and I am a resident of the McKinley Glenn community. I am writing to
respectfully express my concerns regarding the proposed residential development at the southeast
corner of Cooper Road and Chandler Heights Road.
When we purchased our home, we understood that the property behind us would likely be developed
one day. We also expected that any future development would be thoughtfully designed to be
compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods and provide an appropriate transition between the
existing and new communities.
McKinley Glenn is an upscale, single-story community surrounded by neighborhoods with similar quality,
character, and thoughtful planning. The established development pattern in this area emphasizes
compatibility, privacy, generous setbacks, and smooth transitions between neighborhoods. We believe
any new development should continue those same design principles.
This request is also consistent with the City of Chandler’s stated planning priorities. Chandler’s General
Plan, Strategic Framework, and planning policies emphasize preserving and enhancing established
neighborhoods, maintaining each neighborhood’s distinct character, and balancing new development
with neighborhood preservation and community character. The City’s planning policies also recognize
the importance of evaluating a proposed development’s responsiveness to its setting and its relationship
to adjacent properties.
When we purchased our home at 2141 E. Nolan Place, we paid a premium because of its size and its
location backing to open land. While we understood that the open land would eventually become
residential, we reasonably expected that future development would maintain setbacks and design
standards consistent with the surrounding communities.
Unfortunately, the current proposal raises significant compatibility concerns.
Under the proposed site plan, Lot 53 would place the side of a new home directly adjacent to the rear of
our property, creating a relationship unlike any that currently exists in the surrounding neighborhoods.
1

This design significantly reduces privacy, changes established sight lines, and creates an abrupt
transition between the existing neighborhood and the proposed development.
One of our greatest concerns is that the northern boundary, where McKinley Glenn meets the proposed
development, receives virtually no meaningful transition treatment. Elsewhere in the development, the
plan includes:
 Open space
 A dog park
 Landscaping
 Wider internal streets
 Community gathering areas
Yet along the McKinley Glenn boundary, residential lots are placed directly against the existing
neighborhood with little buffering. This creates an inconsistent design approach and places a
disproportionate burden on the existing homeowners.
The lack of a meaningful buffer along this boundary appears inconsistent with Chandler’s goal of
balancing new development with the preservation and enhancement of established neighborhoods. A
well-designed transition should protect the privacy and character of existing homes rather than placing
the most direct and intrusive lot configuration against the neighborhood boundary.
I respectfully ask the Planning Commission to consider modifications that would better protect adjacent
residents, including:
 Increasing the setback or landscape buffer along the northern boundary adjacent to McKinley
Glenn.
 Reconfiguring or relocating Lot 53 to create a more compatible transition.
 Incorporating additional open space or enhanced landscaping between the existing neighborhood
and the proposed homes.
 Ensuring the transition between the neighborhoods reflects the same thoughtful planning found
throughout the rest of the project.
My family has invested significantly in our home and chose McKinley Glenn because of its quality,
privacy, and consistent residential character. I respectfully ask the Planning Commission to require a
more appropriate transition along the northern boundary before the project is approved.
Thank you for your time, your service to our community, and your thoughtful consideration of these
concerns.
Sincerely,
Michelle Wood
2141 E. Nolan Place
Chandler, AZ 85249
2