Extracted text (via pymupdf)
114924 characters
February 26, 2025
Z2021169
Page 1 of 5
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Board Hearing Date:
February 26, 2025
Case #/Title:
Z2021169 – The Fairview
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant/Owner:
Lauri Torgeson/LMC Trust I
Request:
Special Use Permit (SUP) for a Special Events Venue in the Rural-
43 zoning district
Site Location:
Generally located at the NEC of Higley Rd. and Fairview St. in the
Gilbert area
Site Size:
Approx. 1.15 acres
County Island Status:
Yes, Town of Gilbert
Additional
Comments:
The applicant seeks a Special Use Permit (SUP) to operate a special
events venue for weddings, baby showers and other life events. The
Town of Gilbert is opposed primarily due to the venue’s
inconsistency with the general plan designation and compatibility
concerns of an event venue in a residential neighborhood. Staff
received eight (8) letters of support, and notes that all properties
that directly abut the venue have submitted a letter in support.
Including the Town, eleven (11) oppose the case. Individuals
opposing the case are concerned primarily with event traffic and
traffic safety, on-street parking, litter and noise. The applicant
provided a letter agreeing to an additional community meeting with
Commissioner Lindblom in attendance and addressing opposition
comments about their family members and character. The owner
and resident of the property (mother of the applicant) wrote a
support letter addressing opposition claims that the applicant took
control of her property due to her age.
Commission
Recommendation:
On 1/23/25, the Commission voted 4-0 (motion by Vice-Chairman
Lindblom D1, seconded by Commissioner Montoya D5) to adopt a
motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve
Z2021169 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘o’:
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the site plan entitled
“16732 E Fairview St“, consisting of 1 sheet, stamped received June 17, 2024 except as
February 26, 2025
Z2021169
Page 2 of 5
modified by the following conditions and that a except that a revised site plan shall be
submitted within 60 days of Board approval that addresses all remaining MCDOT
concerns. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance
with the approved site plan. Minor and major amendments to the site plan will be
determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the narrative report
entitled “The Fairview”, consisting of 3 pages, dated October 22, 2024, and stamped
received October 23, 2024, except as modified by the following conditions.
c.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1. For building permit issuance, a C-value per DPSM Table 6.3 for commercial must be
used to size the retention volume required.
2. For building permit issuance, plans must clearly identify the bottom of basin and water
surface elevation along with retention required and provided.
3. For building permit issuance, plans must clearly show how runoff is directed to
retention basins, and historic inflow/outflow from the lot are maintained.
4. For building permit issuance, retention basins must provide 1-foot of freeboard to the
finished floor elevation.
5. Plans submitted for building permits must include on the grading and drainage plan
the statement that the retention basin(s) will drain within the required 36 hours, (MCZO
1205.7.6.3).
6. Plans must provide a callout stating that the east driveway gate shall remain locked
for any events.
7. For Building Permit issuance, paved entrances off Fairview Road and MCDOT driveway
permits will be required with the application for Building Permits or as agreed to in an
approved TIS. Plans submitted for building permit must show these paved/concrete
entrances.
8. Prior to issuance of building permits, receive approval in the form of a Roadway Design
Manual Design Exception for the sight visibility triangle. The traffic report/design
exception should include the most recent 5-year crash history at the Higley Rd. and
Fairview St. intersection (and existing driveways) to document any safety concerns at
the location. The exception request should also state if the first driveway will be locked
and will not be used by the property owner thus alleviating safety issues.
9. Prior to issuance of building permit , a modified traffic study shall be submitted to and
approved by both MCDOT and the Town of Gilbert. The study shall include the
following:
a. Show 30 required spaces inclusive of 2 ADA spaces;
b. State “Vehicles shall not park on Fairview St.”;
February 26, 2025
Z2021169
Page 3 of 5
c. State that the semi-circular driveway connecting to Fairview shall not be used for
event traffic circulation and that entry will be barred to that access by a locked
gate;
d. State that event traffic will turn right to enter and left to exit the property; and,
e. State that there will be directional signs directing event attendees to turn right in
to enter the venue and left out to exit onto Fairview.
10. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only. All
development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of
the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain
Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; and current
engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of application for
construction.
11. Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes to the
site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the site’s drainage
infrastructure.
12. Detailed Grading and Drainage (Site Infrastructure) Plans must be submitted with the
application for Building Permits.
d.
The following SUP standards shall apply:
1. Min. Screening – Adjacent to rural or residential zoning districts automobile parking
shall be screened from view. A solid masonry wall, six feet in height, is required
adjacent to side property lines abutting any rural or residential zoning district. View-
obscuring screening of 80% or more, six feet in height shall be required along the rear
property line.
2. Min. Parking - Minimum of thirty (30) parking spaces required including two (2) ADA
spaces
3. Sight Visibility Triangles – Five (5) required sight visibility triangles waived at entrance
and exit points and intersection corner
4. Pavement - Rolled and compacted decomposed granite permitted for internal
driveways and parking spaces with a dust control permit approved by Maricopa
County Air Quality Control. Driveway aprons shall be paved in accordance with
MCDOT standards.
5. Landscaping – The 5’ landscape strip required to screen parking shall be waived.
e.
There shall be no more than fifteen (15) commercial events held annually.
f.
Events may be held from Friday through Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Events shall
not be held Monday through Thursday.
g.
Amplified music is permitted between the hours of 12:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. during
events only.
February 26, 2025
Z2021169
Page 4 of 5
h.
A traffic director shall direct traffic on-site and off-site an hour prior to an event and for an
hour post event.
i.
All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward and shielded in accordance with Section
1112 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
j.
A fair disclosure agreement and covenant, which would include the following disclosure,
should be recorded as a condition of development approval: “This property, due to its
proximity to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, will experience aircraft overflights, which are
expected to generate noise levels that may be of concern to some individuals. The mix of
aviation activities and types of aircraft expected to be located and operate at the Airport
now and in the future include: scheduled and unscheduled commercial charters,
commercial air carriers and commercial air cargo operations, all of which are expected to
use large commercial aircraft; general aviation activity using corporate and executive jets,
helicopters, and propeller aircraft; aviation flight training schools using training aircraft;
and military activity using high performance military jets. The size of aircraft and
frequency of use of such aircraft may change over time depending on market and
technology changes.
k.
The SUP is valid for a period of 5 years and shall expire 5 years from the date of BOS
approval. The SUP timeframe may be extended with an application for a Modification of
Conditions.
l.
Prior to occupying the existing residence or any portion thereof for any use associated
with the Special Use Permit, the applicant shall obtain a Building Permit to retrofit the
existing residence to meet current commercial building code requirements as applicable
and shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the retrofitted building prior to occupancy.
m.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County regulation shall be grounds for initiating a
revocation of this SUP as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
n.
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the
County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions.
o.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant,
with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to
enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application,
subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, and at the
time of expiration of the SUP, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the
date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the
failure to comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the SUP, does not reduce any
rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property
and that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the
date of application due to such revocation or expiration of the SUP. The SUP enhances
the value of the property above its value as of the date the SUP is granted and reverting to
the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the SUP had never been
granted.
Presented by:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Darren Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments:
1/23/25 P&Z Packet (64 pages)
1/23/25 P&Z Handout (3 pages)
February 26, 2025
Z2021169
Page 5 of 5
Applicant Response to Opposition (1 page)
Owner Response to Opposition (1 page)
Additional Opposition Correspondence (8 pages)
Additional Support Correspondence (1 page)
Area Opposition Map (1 page)
300’ Support/Opposition Map (1 page)
Note:
1/23/25 Draft P&Z Minutes are not available as of the writing of this report, but can be
provided upon request later when available.
Z2021169
Page 1 of 11
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case:
Z2021169 – The Fairview
Hearing Date:
January 23, 2025
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant:
Lauri Torgeson
Owner:
LMC Trust I
Request:
Special Use Permit (SUP) for a Special Events Venue in the Rural-43 zoning
district
Site Location:
Generally located at the NEC of Higley Rd. and Fairview St. in the Gilbert
area
Site Size:
Approx. 1.15 acres
Density:
N/A
County Island:
Yes, Town of Gilbert
County Plan:
Maricopa County Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan –
Rural Development Area (0-1 d.u./ac)
Municipal Plan:
Town of Gilbert – Residential (0-1 d.u./ac)
Municipal Comments:
Town of Gilbert - Opposed
Support/Opposition:
7 Support / 7 Opposed / 1 Neutral
Recommendation:
Approve with conditions
Z2021169
Page 2 of 11
Project Summary:
1.
The applicant is requesting a SUP for a Special Events Venue in the Rural-43 zoning district. The
subject property is located in the Gilbert area in unincorporated Maricopa County, and is
designated as Rural Development Area (0-1 d.u./acre) in the Maricopa County Vision 2030
Comprehensive Plan. The Town of Gilbert General Plan designates the subject property’s land
use as Residential (0-1 d.u./acre).
2.
The subject property is approximately 1.15 acres (approx. 49,934 sq. ft.) and zoned Rural-43. The
SUP request is to allow for a special events venue that hosts weddings and other celebrations.
The applicant expects 12-15 events occurring seasonally between November and May. No events
will exceed 10:00 p.m. There will be up to five (5) employees which includes contracted staff by
the event holder such as photographers, officiants and caterers. According to the applicant’s
narrative, the events will be operated from a casita which includes a changing room, storage
room, guest bathrooms and caterer operations area. The residence is owner-occupied and will
not be utilized for events. No new structures are anticipated for construction.
3.
The property received zoning violations (V202100645 & V202200024) for operating an
unauthorized special events venue without appropriate entitlements in 2021 and 2022. Code
enforcement closed the 2021 violation upon follow-up investigation as the events hosted
previously were predominantly family events and as the owners removed the sign advertising the
event venue. The 2022 violation remains open, but is under a compliance agreement which sets
deadlines to obtain entitlements and permits, permanently abate the use or otherwise face fines
and penalties.
4.
Access is available to the site from Fairview St. Attendees will enter the site by turning right into
the site from Fairview St. Exiting traffic will be directed and required to make a left out on Fairview
leading to Higley Rd. in order to decrease traffic traveling west into the neighborhood. The
driveway access nearest to Higley Rd. will be gated and closed to event traffic.
5.
The lot is flat and traditionally shaped. Structures on the subject property include the existing
residence and casita (barn). There is a brick area and grass lawn which serves as the venue
gathering area. The applicant’s site plan proposes thirty (30) parking spaces paved with rolled
and compacted decomposed granite to serve the site including two (2) ADA spaces. All outdoor
lighting will be shielded, directed downward and in conformance with Section 1112 of the
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. The perimeter of the property and use will be screened with
a minimum 6’ screen wall along the east and west sides of the property. There is an existing 4.5’
wall along the north property line. Per the narrative, a thick hedge will be added to screen the
remainder to 6’ in height. Screening along the front of the property will include a 2’ brick
landscaping wall.
Z2021169
Page 3 of 11
Exhibit 1 – Site Plan Excerpt
Z2021169
Page 4 of 11
6.
The subject site is zoned Rural-43. The applicable standards for this district and the Rural-43 SUP
are listed below:
REGULATION
BASE ZONING
DISTRICT REGULATIONS
(RU-43)
PROPOSED ZONING
REGULATIONS
(RU-43 SUP)
Max. Height
30’
30’
Min. Front Yard
40’
40’
Min. Side Yard
30’
30’
Min. Street
Side Yard
20’
20’
Min. Rear Yard
40’
40’
Min. Lot Area
43,560 sq. ft.
43,560 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width
145’
145’
Max. Lot
Coverage
25%
25%
Min. Screening
Adjacent to rural or residential zoning
districts automobile parking shall be
screened from view. Solid masonry wall, six
feet in height adjacent to any side or rear
property line abutting any rural or residential
zoning district. View-obscuring wall or
fence, six feet in height, on perimeter of site
with outdoor industrial use adjacent to
district other than rural or residential.
Adjacent to rural or residential zoning districts
automobile parking shall be screened from
view. Solid masonry wall, six feet in height
adjacent to any side or rear property line
abutting any rural or residential zoning district.
View-obscuring wall or fence, six feet in height,
on perimeter of site with outdoor industrial use
adjacent to district other than rural or
residential.
Min. Pavement
Pavement required for all driveways, parking
spaces and access points
Rolled and compacted decomposed granite
permitted for internal driveways and parking
spaces with a dust control permit approved by
Maricopa County Air Quality Control. Driveway
aprons shall be paved in accordance with
MCDOT standards.
Min. Parking
1 per 200 sq. ft of floor area
Minimum of thirty (30) parking spaces required
including two (2) ADA spaces
Sight Visibility
Triangles
(SVTs)
25’x25’ SVTs required at the property line
along all driveways
Five (5) required sight visibility triangles
waived at entrance and exit points and
intersection corner
Min.
Landscaping
5’ landscaping strip required along property
frontage
Landscaping strip waived
7.
The applicant is requesting to vary the screening, parking, landscaping, SVT development
standards and pavement. The request to vary screening is to allow for screening to include a
thick hedge in addition to an existing 4.5’ wall along the rear property line. In order to relocate
vehicle parking during events on Fairview St., the applicant requested to vary the parking standard
to require thirty (30) parking spaces inclusive of two (2) ADA spaces. The applicant is requesting
to waive five (5) required SVTs for driveways on the property and the corner SVT. Two (2) of the
SVTs are associated with the residential driveway and are unnecessary because that driveway
will only be used for residential purposes. SVTs at the driveway utilized for events would
encumber the existing development of the property and a neighboring property. Traffic direction
at events will be required. Applying an intersection corner to the site would require reconstruction
of the property wall on the east property line. The landscaping strip is requested to be waived as
there is existing frontage landscaping and décor. Lastly, the applicant is requesting to vary the
standard for pavement to allow for decomposed granite with an approved dust control plan.
Z2021169
Page 5 of 11
Exhibit 2 – Aerial Map
Exhibit 3 – Rural-43 Zoning District and Surrounding Zoning Districts
Z2021169
Page 6 of 11
Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use:
8.
On-site:
Rural-43 / Single-family residence
North:
Rural-43 / Single-family residence
South:
Rural-43 / Single-family residence
East:
Town of Gilbert SF-7 / Single-family residence
West:
Rural-43 / Single-family residence
Utilities and Services:
9.
Water:
Town of Gilbert
Wastewater:
On-site Septic
School District:
Higley Unified School District #60
Fire:
Gilbert County Island Fire District
Police:
MCSO
Right-of-Way:
10.
The following table includes existing and proposed half-width right-of-way and the future
classification based upon the Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) Major
Streets and Routes Plan.
Street Name
Half-width Existing R/W
Half-width Proposed R/W
Future Classification
Fairview St.
30’
30’
Local Road
Higley Rd.
Varies
Varies
Town of Gilbert
Adopted Plans:
11.
Vision 2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan (Adopted 2016): The land use on site is
designated as Rural Development Area (0-1 d.u./ac.). The Rural Development Area land use
designation encourages low-density rural residential and agricultural uses.
12.
Town of Gilbert General Plan (Adopted 2020): The Residential (0-1 d.u./ac) classification
designates areas for very low-density single-family residential development of a semi-rural
character. Non-commercial agriculture uses may be located in these areas.
Public Participation Summary:
13.
The applicant complied with the Maricopa County Citizen Review Process with the required
posting of the site and notification by first class mail to adjacent property owners and HOA’s
within 300’ of the subject parcel and notification to interested parties. Two signs were posted on
site in accordance with applicable regulations.
14.
A public participation results report was submitted to staff in accordance with County
requirements. The applicant held two neighborhood meetings on August 17, 2021 (prior to
application) and June 28, 2022. Both meetings were attended by 20 – 25 people. The results
report indicates that the residents who attended were opposed due to traffic and the proliferation
of businesses in the neighborhood, and that they did not want to work with the applicant to
ameliorate concerns. The applicant responded that they cannot enforce which businesses or
home-based businesses that others operate, but did address traffic concerns by committing to
one access point on the west for event traffic (right in, left out only), a designated ride share area
Z2021169
Page 7 of 11
to reduce or eliminate street blockage, directional signage and a traffic director an hour before
and an hour after each event.
15.
In their results report, the applicant also provided a rebuttal to individuals opposed to the
application. The applicant states that the opposition has, among other activities, trespassed their
property, blocked ingress/egress to their property, fraudulently filmed reckless driving in front of
the property and harassed the applicant. The applicant notes that there has been no attempt
from individuals who are opposed to contact the applicant to attempt resolution and that all direct
neighboring property owners support the proposal.
16.
Staff received support letters from seven (7) individuals and seven (7) opposition letters. The
support letters (some of which are from direct neighboring property owners) defend the event
operators. The support letters note that there are many other businesses operating in the County
island and that events and the associated traffic is well-managed. The opposition letters are
concerned with the personal behavior of the event operators, vehicle traffic, on-street parking,
litter from events, unruliness of event attendees, trespassing and safety of drivers attending
events. A couple of opposition letters reference an alleged incident where a child was almost hit
by a vehicle from a party attendee. The last opposition letter is from the Town of Gilbert.
17.
The Town of Gilbert issued three (3) separate letters opposing the SUP. The most recent letter
indicates a number of concerns associated with the development including inconsistency with
the general plan designation, compatibility of an event venue in a residential neighborhood, safety
due to the proximity of the venue to Higley Rd., insufficiency of information associated with event
operations (lighting, noise and traffic) and concerns with development standards variations to
SVTs. Staff provided conditions in the event of approval to attempt to mitigate Town concerns
associated with the venue.
18.
The Town of Queen Creek had no concerns with the proposal. Mesa Gateway Airport noted that
event venues are generally considered to be compatible with the operations of the airport and
requested to have a standard condition disclosing that the property may be impacted by noise
from flights.
Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies:
19.
MCDOT has not issued sign-off or approval for the SUP proposal. MCDOT requested the
submittal of an updated traffic study and adjustments to study prohibiting access event traffic
from using the driveway nearest to Higley Rd., a statement prohibiting parking on Fairview St.,
designating the ingress/egress as right-in and left-out only and directional signs for event traffic.
Staff is requesting a revised site plan in addition to the revised traffic study to memorialize many
of these requests.
Staff Analysis:
20.
Staff supports the SUP request for a limited special events venue. While there is a lack of
consistency between the proposed use and the land use designations of Rural from Maricopa
County and Residential from the Town of Gilbert, Staff notes that private events are, at this time,
permitted by-right in most zoning districts. Private events are unregulated, often causing
disturbance with no ability for staff to issue a violation if a nuisance complaint is received. Some
such events include backyard weddings, quinceñeras, celebrations of life, birthday parties, and
mitzvahs, among others.
Z2021169
Page 8 of 11
21.
As opposed to a private event, Staff believes that a home commercial event use can be properly
conditioned to ensure that the parking of the vehicles, noise and lighting is less of a nuisance to
the community than a private event. As such, Staff is including conditions that limits the number
of annual events to fifteen (15) events annually, limits the days of operation to Friday through
Sunday, limits the hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and prohibits amplified music
past 10:00 p.m. Staff will also require that all outdoor lighting is fully-shielded and directed
downward. The applicant will be required to address outstanding MCDOT concerns prior to
receiving a building permit. Staff recognizes the Town’s comments and believes that the limited
nature of the events venue will cause minimal impact to the neighborhood. Also, per the
comments received, all direct neighbors of the property support the application.
Recommendation:
22.
Staff recommends the Commission adopt a motion recommending that the Board of Supervisors
approve Z2021169 subject to the following conditions ‘a’ – ‘o’:
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the site plan entitled
“16732 E Fairview St“, consisting of 1 sheet, stamped received June 17, 2024 except as
modified by the following conditions and that a except that a revised site plan shall be
submitted within 60 days of Board approval that addresses all remaining MCDOT
concerns. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance
with the approved site plan. Minor and major amendments to the site plan will be
determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the narrative report
entitled “The Fairview”, consisting of 3 pages, dated October 22, 2024, and stamped
received October 23, 2024, except as modified by the following conditions.
c.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1. For building permit issuance, a C-value per DPSM Table 6.3 for commercial must be
used to size the retention volume required.
2. For building permit issuance, plans must clearly identify the bottom of basin and water
surface elevation along with retention required and provided.
3. For building permit issuance, plans must clearly show how runoff is directed to
retention basins, and historic inflow/outflow from the lot are maintained.
4. For building permit issuance, retention basins must provide 1-foot of freeboard to the
finished floor elevation.
5. Plans submitted for building permits must include on the grading and drainage plan
the statement that the retention basin(s) will drain within the required 36 hours, (MCZO
1205.7.6.3).
6. Plans must provide a callout stating that the east driveway gate shall remain locked
for any events.
Z2021169
Page 9 of 11
7. For Building Permit issuance, paved entrances off Fairview Road and MCDOT driveway
permits will be required with the application for Building Permits or as agreed to in an
approved TIS. Plans submitted for building permit must show these paved/concrete
entrances.
8. Prior to issuance of building permits, receive approval in the form of a Roadway Design
Manual Design Exception for the sight visibility triangle. The traffic report/design
exception should include the most recent 5-year crash history at the Higley Rd. and
Fairview St. intersection (and existing driveways) to document any safety concerns at
the location. The exception request should also state if the first driveway will be locked
and will not be used by the property owner thus alleviating safety issues.
9. Prior to issuance of building permit , a modified traffic study shall be submitted to and
approved by both MCDOT and the Town of Gilbert. The study shall include the
following:
a. Show 30 required spaces inclusive of 2 ADA spaces;
b. State “Vehicles shall not park on Fairview St.”;
c. State that the semi-circular driveway connecting to Fairview shall not be used for
event traffic circulation and that entry will be barred to that access by a locked
gate;
d. State that event traffic will turn right to enter and left to exit the property; and,
e. State that there will be directional signs directing event attendees to turn right in
to enter the venue and left out to exit onto Fairview.
10. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only. All
development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of
the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain
Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; and current
engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of application for
construction.
11. Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes to the
site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the site’s drainage
infrastructure.
12. Detailed Grading and Drainage (Site Infrastructure) Plans must be submitted with the
application for Building Permits.
d.
The following SUP standards shall apply:
1. Min. Screening – Adjacent to rural or residential zoning districts automobile parking
shall be screened from view. A solid masonry wall, six feet in height, is required
adjacent to side property lines abutting any rural or residential zoning district. View-
obscuring screening of 80% or more, six feet in height shall be required along the rear
property line.
Z2021169
Page 10 of 11
2. Min. Parking - Minimum of thirty (30) parking spaces required including two (2) ADA
spaces
3. Sight Visibility Triangles – Five (5) required sight visibility triangles waived at entrance
and exit points and intersection corner
4. Pavement - Rolled and compacted decomposed granite permitted for internal
driveways and parking spaces with a dust control permit approved by Maricopa
County Air Quality Control. Driveway aprons shall be paved in accordance with
MCDOT standards.
5. Landscaping – The 5’ landscape strip required to screen parking shall be waived.
e.
There shall be no more than fifteen (15) commercial events held annually.
f.
Events may be held from Friday through Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Events shall
not be held Monday through Thursday.
g.
Amplified music is permitted between the hours of 12:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. during
events only.
h.
A traffic director shall direct traffic on-site and off-site an hour prior to an event and for an
hour post event.
i.
All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward and shielded in accordance with Section
1112 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
j.
A fair disclosure agreement and covenant, which would include the following disclosure,
should be recorded as a condition of development approval: “This property, due to its
proximity to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, will experience aircraft overflights, which are
expected to generate noise levels that may be of concern to some individuals. The mix of
aviation activities and types of aircraft expected to be located and operate at the Airport
now and in the future include: scheduled and unscheduled commercial charters,
commercial air carriers and commercial air cargo operations, all of which are expected to
use large commercial aircraft; general aviation activity using corporate and executive jets,
helicopters, and propeller aircraft; aviation flight training schools using training aircraft;
and military activity using high performance military jets. The size of aircraft and
frequency of use of such aircraft may change over time depending on market and
technology changes.
k.
The SUP is valid for a period of 5 years and shall expire 5 years from the date of BOS
approval. The SUP timeframe may be extended with an application for a Modification of
Conditions.
l.
Prior to occupying the existing residence or any portion thereof for any use associated
with the Special Use Permit, the applicant shall obtain a Building Permit to retrofit the
existing residence to meet current commercial building code requirements as applicable
and shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the retrofitted building prior to occupancy.
m.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County regulation shall be grounds for initiating a
revocation of this SUP as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
Z2021169
Page 11 of 11
n.
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the
County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions.
o.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant,
with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to
enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application,
subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, and at the
time of expiration of the SUP, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the
date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the
failure to comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the SUP, does not reduce any
rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property
and that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the
date of application due to such revocation or expiration of the SUP. The SUP enhances
the value of the property above its value as of the date the SUP is granted and reverting to
the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the SUP had never been
granted.
Presented by:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments:
Case Map (1 page)
Site Plan (reduced 8.5”x11”, 1 page)
Narrative Report (3 pages)
Engineering Comments (3 pages)
MCESD Comments (1 page)
MCDOT Comments (4 pages)
Mesa Gateway Airport Comments (7 pages)
Town of Queen Creek Correspondence (2 pages)
Town of Gilbert Correspondence (16 pages)
Support Correspondence (7 pages)
Opposition Correspondence (8 pages)
/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ
1
Gross Acres: 2 approx.
Generated December 31, 2024 12:38 PM
Z2021169
Application Name:
Legal Description
The Fairview
Applicant
Case Address
1S 6E 34
LAURI TORGESON
16732 E FAIRVIEW ST
Applicant Phone/Email
Parcel Primary:304-47-052N
4803438014
lauritorgeson@yahoo.com
GILBERT, AZ 85295
Map scale 1:745
Supervisor District No.
The Fairview
N89°29'19"E
169.26'
N00°21'08"W(R4)
139.33'(M)
139.32'(R4)
S02°29'24"W(R4)
141.17'(R4)
S89°29'03"W
160.05'
N00°17'05"W
298.97'
L1
SUBJECT AREA
2000SF EX +/-
OUTDOOR GATHERING
UNCOVERED/ DETACHED
SIDEWALK
PARKING AREA
EXISTING UNCOVERED
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
(THIS PROJECT)
SIDEWALK
SUBJECT AREA
STORAGE (EX) 800SF +/-
DETACHED 1-STORY @ 8' T.O. EXT. WALL
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (EX)
1-STORY
(NOT IN SCOPE)
IRON GATE
16' W
IRON
GATE
18' W
BW
BW
2' H
WOOD
DECK
POOL
PATIO
BRICK
AREA
BRICK
AREA
GRASS
AREA
DIRT
AREA
DIRT
AREA
GRAVEL
AREA
GRAVEL DRIVE
SEE GEN. NOTE G
SIDEWALK
PAVEMENT
DIRT
AREA
BW
1' H
BW
1' H
BW
2' H
CHAIN LINK FENCE
BRICK
AREA
BRICK
AREA
TILE
GRASS
AREA
GRASS
AREA
GRASS
AREA
GATE
BW
BW
BW
BW
BW
GATE
GATE
GATE
BW
21'-1"+/-
DRIVE
SEE GEN. NOTE G
40'-0"
REAR
BSL
30'-0"
SIDE
BSL
20'-0"
SIDE
BSL
1
2 FRONT BSL
@
CORNER LOT
40'-0"
FRONT
BSL
39'-101
2" +/-
55'-9"+/-
42'-91
2" +/-
97'-61
2" +/-
54'-1" +/-
59'-6" +/-
48'-011
16" +/-
27'-0" +/-
37'-71
2" +/-
8'-6"
+/-
35'-9" +/-
GNRTR
SEPTIC
TANK
22'-6" +/-
53'-5 5
16"
12'-4"
7'-0"
19'-8"
16'-0"
BW
30' R/W
EXCEPTION
30' EASEMENT
HIGHWAY PURPOSES PER
DOC. 94-0692890, MCR
53.5'' R/W
BW (CITY INSTALLED
ALONG HIGLEY)
BW
4' H
E. FAIRVIEW STREET
S. HIGLEY ROAD
IRON GATE
3' W
30'-0"
CL
20'-4"
CL
16'-0"
DRIVE
PVT
26'-0"
DRIVE
SEE GEN. NOTE G
APN 304-47-796A RU-43
B&R GOTTWALD LIVING TRUST
DOC. NO. 20200188513 MCR
APN 304-47-052J RU-43
PAREDES LUIS C/ELISA E
DOC. NO. 20210616972 MCR
BW
2' H
BW
BW 2'H
25'X25'
SVT
GRAVEL DRIVE
SEE GEN. NOTE G
CONCRETE DRIVE/APRON
SEPTIC
TANK
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
30
(van)
SUBJECT AREA
2600 SF EX +/-
OUTDOOR GATHERING
9'-0"
9'-0"
TYP
9'-0"
9'-0"
9'-0"
9'-0"
6'-0"
26'-0"
18'-0"
TYP
5'-0"
18'-0"
2'-0"
9'-3"
+/-
5'-0"
12' +/-
18'-0"
26'-0"
18'-0"
TYP
GRAVEL
WATER LINE V.I.F.
SEWER LINE V.I.F.
LANDSCAPED AREA- GRASS
SITE WALL
LANDSCAPE WALL (LOW)
NATIVE GRADE/ DECOMPOSED GRANITE
CONCRETE
PAVINGS (NEW)
SEE NOTATIONS FOR TYPE
SITE GATE
DECORATIVE METAL FENCE - PER
OWNER'S STANDARD
PAVERS W/ PERMEABLE GAPS
BLOCK WALL @ 6' H , U.N.O.
BW
WOODEN/WIRED FENCE @ 6' H , U.N.O.
WF
WATER METER
GAS-PROPANE TANK
SD01
SITE PLAN
SITE PLAN - LAYOUT
10'15' 20'
40'
0' 5'
A.
THIS DOCUMENT AND INTENT IS FOR THE VISUAL
ILLUSTRATIONS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS &
PROPOSED NEW WORK.
B.
ALL CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE.
C.
REFER TO OWNER'S LOT SURVEY INCLUDED WITH
THIS PROPOSED SUBMISSION.
D.
REFER TO OWNER'S NARRATIVE INCLUDED WITH THIS
PROPOSED SUBMISSION.
E.
IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY
OWNER TO VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE
INFORMATION ILLUSTRATED HEREIN.
F.
ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING SHALL COMPLY WITH
SECTION 1112 OF THE MARICOPA COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE. ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED AND
DIRECTED DOWNWARD SO AS TO NOT CAST OR
REFLECT LIGHT ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
G.
NEW & EXISTING SITE PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS ARE
REQUIRED TO BE PAVED WITH A MINIMUM OF
ASPHALT MILLINGS BOUND WITH A LIQUID BINDING
EMULSIFIER UNLESS THE APPLICANT RECEIVES AN
APPROVAL ON A DUST CONTROL PLAN FROM
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL.
GENERAL SITE NOTES
TRUE NORTH
LEGEND
12 SEPT 2023
REVISED SHEET
16732 E FAIRVIEW ST
GILBERT 85295
APN 304-47-052N
Request: Special Use
Permit for Special
Events Venue
Zoning Case #: Z2021169
PARKING TABULATION
APN:
304-47-052N
OWNER
LMC TRUST I
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 16732 E FAIRVIEW ST
GILBERT 85295
MAILING ADDRESS:
16732 E FAIRVIEW LN
GILBERT AZ USA
DEED NUMBER:
20061086202
JURISDICTION:
NO CITY/TOWN- MARICOPA COUNTY
ZONING:
RU-43 (NO CHANGE)
LOT SIZE (SQ FT):
49,934 SF
FLOOR:
1
CONSTRUCTION YEAR:1987 (ORIGINAL)
PARCEL INFORMATION
MAIN RESIDENCE:
LIVABLE
3105 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
ATTACHED GARAGE:
400 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
REAR PATIO:
400 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
FRONT PATIO:
250 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
STORAGE DETACHED:
800 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
PROPOSED (N/A):
0 SF
4,955 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
AREA COVERAGE:
8.9%(EXISTING NO CHANGE)
AREA COVERAGE ALLOW: 25%
AREA TABULATION
UTILITY COMMITMENT TABLE
WATER:
CITY OF GILBERT
SEWER:
SEPTIC- PRIVATE/PERMIT ON FILE
GAS:
PROPANE-PRIVATE/PERMIT ON FILE
FIRE:
CITY OF GILBERT
POLICE:
CITY OF GILBERT
SOLID WASTE:
CITY OF GILBERT
SCHOOL DISTRICT:
HIGLEY UNIFIED
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REFER TO:
SHEET #1 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY - INCLUDED BY
OWNER W/ SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE)
CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING & UNCHANGED TYP., UNLESS
NOTED OTHERWISE
RECORDED EASEMENTS
REFER TO:
SHEET #1 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY - INCLUDED BY
OWNER W/ SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE)
VICINITY MAP
REFER TO:
SHEET #1 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY - INCLUDED BY
OWNER W/ SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE)
AUTHORIZED AGENT
OWNER:
JAMES TORGESON
2420 S BIRCH ST
GILBERT, AZ 85295
480-228-0309
PROPOSED SIGNAGE & TYPE: N/A THIS PROJECT
SIGNAGE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CHART.
AHJ PROVIDED
ALL CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
STREET /R.O.W. INFO/RECORDED ENCUMBRANCES
REFER TO:
SHEET #2 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY - INCLUDED BY
OWNER W/ SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE)
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
REFER TO:
SHEET #2 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY - INCLUDED BY
OWNER W/ SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE)
AHJ APPROVAL
STREET VIEW @ FAIRVIEW
KEY NOTES
ALL CONDITIONS ARE EXISTING UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE.
CAP EXISTING FLOOD IRRIGATION OUTLETS- PROVIDE
NEW IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS REQUIRED @ NEW
WORK / MODIFICATIONS FOR EXISTING LANDSCAPING
TO REMAIN
PROVIDE NEW IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS REQUIRED
AT NEW WORK / MODIFICATIONS FOR EXISTING
LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN
ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING SHALL COMPLY WITH
SECTION 1112 OF THE MARICOPA COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE. ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED AND
DIRECTED DOWNWARD SO AS TO NOT CAST OR
REFLECT LIGHT ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
UTILIZE EXISTING LIGHTING CIRCUITS/ AVAILABLE
AMPERAGE @ EXISTING ELECTRICAL PANELS- UTILIZE
TIMER & PHOTOCELLS @ OWNER'S OPTION
NEW & EXISTING SITE PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS ARE
REQUIRED TO BE PAVED WITH A MINIMUM OF
ASPHALT MILLINGS BOUND WITH A LIQUID BINDING
EMULSIFIER UNLESS THE APPLICANT RECEIVES AN
APPROVAL ON A DUST CONTROL PLAN FROM
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL.
EDGING @ NEW PARKING TO EX LANDSCAPING AS
SELECTED BY OWNER, TYP.
ADA COMPLAINT PARKING SIGNAGE -POLE MOUNTED
CONC. SIDEWALK @ ACCESSIBLE ROUTES- NEW TO
MATCH EX. ELEVATIONS MAX 2% CROSS SLOPE -PER
MAG DET #230, OR APPROVED EQ.
ADA COMPLIANT CONC RAMP AS REQ'D @ EX. GRADE
MAX SLOPE 1:12 , MAX RISE: 6" TO EXISTING G
SIDEWALK.
PARKING STRIPING PER ADA & AHJ REQUIREMENTS.
REMOVE PORTION OF BLOCK WALL & GATE WALL FOR
NEW PAVING/DRIVE LANE.
POLE MOUNTED 'NO PARKING' SIGNAGE & STRIPING @
MANEUVERING AREAS PER AHJ STANDARDS.
PARKING BUMPER PER OWNER STANDARDS.
SUBJECT AREAS:
STORAGE DETACHED:
800 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
OPEN PAVED AREA:
2000 SF EXISTING NO CHANGE)
OPEN GRASS AREA:
2600 SF EXISTING NO CHANGE)
5400 SF (EXISTING NO CHANGE)
ZONING ORDINANCE
1102.1.2.
- PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES = 1 SPACE/ 200 SF
SUBJECT AREA @ 5400 SF= 27 SPACES REQ'D ~
30 PROVIDED PER ZONING STAFF
W/ 28 STANDARD 9'X18'
+ 2 ACCESSIBLE (1 VAN)
1
1
2
3
1
2
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
3
3
3
4
4
4
5 TYP.
5 TYP.
12
11
12
6
11
10
9
7
7
8
NARRATIVE
The Fairview
Gilbert, AZ
SUP Application: Z2021169
October 22, 2024
16732 E Fairview St
Gilbert, AZ 85295
PURPOSE OF REQUEST
Special Use Permit for Outdoor Venue for Private Events
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
The Fairview is intended to operate as an outdoor event venue for special occasions
such as weddings and receptions.
The Fairview will operate on the weekends (Friday-Sunday). The Fairview
will run seasonally from November 1st to May 1st. We expect 12-15 events per
season. The hours of operation will never exceed 10pm. The Fairview will have no
hired employees. For events there could be up to 5 staff persons contracted by the
event holder (photographers, officiants, caterers). The events will be held on the
pasture side of the property (north) and operated from the casita located on the
west side. The casita has a changing (clothes) and storage room, guest bathrooms,
and caterer operations area. The casita’s exterior appearance is cohesive with the
main house and is not an overt distraction. There is no permanent signage
identifying the property as The Fairview. There is an 8’ wall on the east side of the
property and a 6’ wall on the west side. There are tall, thick shrubs planned to be
planted to enhance privacy to the north along the 4.5’ wall. There will also be a
partition installed to separate the event area from the parking area.
RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Onsite Zoning/Land Use: Rural-43/Single Family
Residential North: Rural-43/Single-Family Residential
South: Rural-43/Single-Family Residential
East: Town of Gilbert SF-7/Single-Family Residential on east side of Higley Road
West: Rural-43/Single-Family Residential
LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY
The Fairview is easily accessed from Fairview St. through the west gate of the
property. The east gate will be locked and inaccessible. Signage will be provided to
alert of no entry/exit. Traffic will be averted from traveling through the neighborhood
by being directed to turn left only onto Fairview when exiting the property. A solid
concrete connection from the street to the property will be installed.
CIRCULATON SYSTEM
Attendees will enter the site through the west gate by turning right ONLY into the
site from Fairview. From the entrance they will travel internally to a DG surfaced
parking area in the rear of the property where 30 spaces will be available. When
leaving the property, attendees will be directed to turn left ONLY from the property
onto Fairview St. This eliminates any traffic traveling west through the
neighborhood.
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULING
The Fairview doesn’t plan to build any new structures. Any development would only
include what is requested by the County and general landscaping/beautification.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
School District: Higley School District
Parks: Discovery Park (at West end of Fairview St.)
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES
The property is serviced by the following
Police: Maricopa County Sheriff supported by Gilbert PD
Fire: Gilbert County Island Fire District
Water: Town of Gilbert
Sewer: On-site Septic
School District: Higley
All services are already provided or existing.
RUPDs
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The gated pool will be closed/locked and off limits to guests.All incoming/outgoing
traffic will be directed by a traffic attendant.
REGULATION
BASE ZONING
DISTRICT REGULATIONS
(RU-43)
PROPOSED ZONING
REGULATIONS
(RU-43 SUP)
Max. Height
30’ / 2 stories
30’ / 2 stories
Min. Front Yard
40’
40’
Min. Side Yard
30’
30’
Min. Street Side Yard
20’
20’
Min. Rear Yard
40’
40’
Min. Lot Area
43,560 sq. ft.
43,560 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width
145’
145’
Max. Lot Coverage
25%
25%
Screening
Adjacent to rural or residential
zoning districts automobile
parking shall be screened from
view. Solid masonry wall, six feet
in height adjacent to any side or
rear property line abutting any
rural or residential zoning district.
View-obscuring wall or fence, six
feet in height, on perimeter of site
with outdoor industrial use
adjacent to district other than
rural or residential.
Adjacent to rural or residential zoning
districts automobile parking shall be
screened from view. Solid masonry
wall, six feet in height adjacent to any
side or rear property line abutting any
rural or residential zoning district.
View-obscuring wall or fence, six feet in
height, on perimeter of site with outdoor
industrial use adjacent to district other
than rural or residential.
Pavement
Pavement required for all
driveways, parking spaces and
access points
Rolled and compacted decomposed
granite permitted for internal driveways
and parking spaces with a dust control
permit approved by Maricopa County
Air Quality Control. Driveway aprons
shall be paved in accordance with
MCDOT standards.
Parking
1 per 250 sq. ft. of floor area for
commercial uses, 1 per 200 sq.
ft. of floor area
Minimum of thirty (30) parking spaces
including two (2) ADA spaces.
Sight Visibility Triangles
(SVTs)
25’x25’ SVTs required at the
property line along all driveways
Five (5) required sight visibility
triangles waived at entrance and exit
points and intersection corner.
Landscaping
5’ landscaping strip required
along property frontage
Landscaping strip waived
Doug Jones, P.E., CFM
Planning & Development
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Phone: (602) 372-0790
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Email address:
Doug.Jones@maricopa.gov
Planning & Development
Engineering Plan Review
Date:
January 2, 2025
Memo To: Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager, Department of Planning &
Development
Attn:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner, Planning & Development
Services
cc:
Bob Fedorka, PE, Engineering Manager, Planning and Development
From:
Doug Jones, P.E., CFM, Engineering Supervisor, Planning &
Development
Subject:
Z2021169 – POD Request for Special Use Permit – The Fairview
APN(s):
304-47-052N
Engineering Review has reviewed the 1st submittal G&D plans (4th submittal)
routed for review on 12/23/2024, for the subject application and has no objections
provided the following stipulations are part of any approval:
1. For building permit issuance, a C-value per DPSM Table 6.3 for commercial
must be used to size the retention volume required.
2. For building permit, plans must clearly identify the bottom of basin and water
surface elevation along with retention required and provided.
3. For building permits, plans must clearly show how runoff is directed to
retention basins, and historic inflow/outflow from the lot are maintained.
4. For building permit, retention basins must provide 1-foot of freeboard to the
finished floor elevation.
5. Plans submitted for building permits must include on the grading and drainage
plan the statement that the retention basin(s) will drain within the required 36
hours, (MCZO 1205.7.6.3).
6. Plans must provide a callout stating that the east driveway gate shall remain
locked for any events.
7. For Building Permit issuance, paved entrances off Fairview Road and
MCDOT driveway permits will be required with the application for Building
Permits or as agreed to in an approved TIS. Plans submitted for building
permit must show these paved/concrete entrances.
Page 2 of 3
8. Prior to issuance of building permits, receive approval on the formal Roadway
Design Manual Design Exception for the sight visibility triangle. The traffic
report/design exemption should include the most recent 5-year crash history at
the Higley Rd. and Fairview St. intersection (and existing driveways) to
document any safety concerns at the location. The exception request should
also state if the first driveway will be locked and will not be used by the
property owner thus alleviating safety issues.
9.
Prior to issuance of building permits, a modified traffic study shall be submitted to and
approved by both MCDOT and the Town of Gilbert. The study shall:
a. Show 30 required spaces inclusive of 2 ADA spaces;
b. State “Vehicles shall not park on Fairview St.”;
c. State that the semi-circular driveway connecting to Fairview shall not be used
for event traffic circulation and that entry will be barred to that access by a
locked gate;
d. State that event traffic will turn right to enter and left to exit the property; and,
e. State that there will be directional signs directing event attendees to turn right
in to enter the venue and left out to exit onto Fairview.
10. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design
only. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies
and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT
Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and best
practices at the time of application for construction.
11. Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes
to the site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the
site’s drainage infrastructure.
12. Detailed Grading and Drainage (Site Infrastructure) Plans must be submitted
with the application for Building Permits
Please contact me with any questions.
Page 3 of 3
DRAINAGE PLAN REVIEW REFERENCES:
The Drainage Regulations are listed in Section 1205 of the MCZO:
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/272
Maricopa County Drainage Policies and Standards Manual:
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/2369
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/1635/Drainage-Review
FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF MARICOPA COUNTY REFERENCES:
Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County:
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/630
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/3847/Flood-Control-District
PND TRANSPORTATION REFERENCES:
Residential Driveway Guidelines
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/362
Roadway Design Manual
http://www.mcdot.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24883
Maricopa County Resolution for ROW Permits
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/364
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/156/MCDOT
PND STORMWATER QUALITY (SWPPP) REFERENCES:
Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Regulation
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6577
Air Pollution Control Regulations Rule 310
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5354
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/3980/Water-Sewage-Stormwater-Waste
Page | 1
Subdivision
Infrastructure
& Planning Program
301 W. Jefferson St.
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Subdi vi sio n@mari co pa.go v
esd.mar i co pa.go v
The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) has completed review
for the The Fairview planning case(s). Please note the following MCESD requirements for site
development:
Onsite Wastewater –
A Minor Plan Review application must be submitted for any existing system(s) if being
utilized and if the applicant believes the existing system(s) are adequate in size to support
the new use; otherwise, a new septic permit/install may be required.
For Onsite Wastewater related questions, please contact the Onsite Program at (602) 506-
6666 or by email at septicquestions@maricopa.gov.
Additional Notes –
*It should be noted that this document does not approve the referenced project. Comments are provided
for the benefit of the applicant for MCESD permit requirements and as an advisory to Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department. Other Maricopa County agencies may have additional
requirements. Final review and approval will be made through Planning and Development Department
procedures. Applicant may need to submit separate applications to the Maricopa County Environmental
Services Department for approval of proposed facilities regulated by the Department. Review of any such
application will be based on current regulations at the time of application.
Project Name: The Fairview
Primary Contact Name: Lauri Torgeson
Planning Application Type: Special Use
Permit
APN(s): 304-47-052N
Reviewer: Ryan Hall, P.E.
Email: Ryan.Hall@maricopa.gov
Phone: 602-918-1241
Planner Name: Adam Cannon
Planning Case #: Z2021169
Date: July 8, 2024
Water and Waste Management Division
From:
Steven Wilcox (DOT)
To:
Jesse Gutierrez (DOT); Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
Rachel Applegate (PND); Doug Jones (PND)
Subject:
RE: Z2021169 - The Fairview
Date:
Thursday, January 2, 2025 10:53:09 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
To all,
In reviewing the proposed site plan, I would offer the following regarding the sight triangle issue:
Once the revised site plan and traffic study is completed and submitted, I would
recommend the property owner (or consultant ) submit a formal RDM Design Exception
Request for MCDOT approval for the site triangle. I believe the design exception document
would be straight forward (and we would likely approve) since the existing intersection is a
“T” configuration and the traffic volumes at the intersection, on Fairview Street and the
development are anticipated to be fairly low.
The traffic report/design exception request should include the most recent 5-year crash
history at the Higley Rd/Fairview Street intersection (and existing driveways) to document
there are no safety concerns that currently existing at this location.
Include the commitment the first driveway will be locked and will not be used by the
property owner thus alleviating the potential safety issues.
The specific requirement of the Design Exception Request is noted in Section 1.3 of the RDM.
I would encourage the property owner/consultant to proactively coordinate with our Permits
and Records Branch team early in the development of the document to make the process as
efficient as possible.
Steven Wilcox
Deputy Director
Transportation
Director’s Office
2901 W. Durango Street Phoenix, Arizona 85009
O: 602-506-2400 C: 602-399-2144
E: steven.wilcox@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
From: Jesse Gutierrez (DOT) <Jesse.Gutierrez@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2025 9:53 AM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Rachel Applegate (PND) <Rachel.Applegate@Maricopa.Gov>; Doug Jones (PND)
<Doug.Jones@Maricopa.Gov>; Steven Wilcox (DOT) <Steven.Wilcox@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: RE: Z2021169 - The Fairview
Adam,
Everything looks good but just verifying the turns from Higley according to the RDM.
I believe the concern is mitigated with the closed gate. I’ll get back to you ASAP.
Thanks,
Jesse
Jesse Gutierrez
Director/County Engineer
Transportation
Directors Office
2901 W Durango Phoenix, AZ 85009
O: 602-506-4700 C: 602-489-0050
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2024 2:15 PM
To: Jesse Gutierrez (DOT) <Jesse.Gutierrez@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Rachel Applegate (PND) <Rachel.Applegate@Maricopa.Gov>; Doug Jones (PND)
<Doug.Jones@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: Z2021169 - The Fairview
Hi Jesse,
We are going to hearing with The Fairview on 1/23/25. We have not yet received a revised site plan
or modified traffic study. I have prepared a draft of the staff report which includes conditions
intended to satisfy MCDOTs remaining comments on the proposal. Please review these conditions
and let me know if they work.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the site plan entitled “16732
E Fairview St“, consisting of 1 sheet, stamped received June 17, 2024 except as modified by
the following conditions and that a except that a revised site plan shall be submitted within 60
days of Board approval that addresses all remaining MCDOT concerns. Staff may determine
slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan. Minor
and major amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of the
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
The following MCDOT conditions shall apply:
1. Prior to issuance of building permits, a modified traffic study shall be
submitted to and approved by both MCDOT and the Town of Gilbert. The
study shall:
a. Show 30 required spaces inclusive of 2 ADA spaces;
b. State “Vehicles shall not park on Fairview St.”;
c. State that the semi-circular driveway connecting to Fairview shall not be
used for event traffic circulation and that entry will be barred to that
access by a locked gate;
d. State that event traffic will turn right to enter and left to exit the property;
and,
e. State that there will be directional signs directing event attendees to turn
right in to enter the venue and left out to exit onto Fairview.
Also, I attached the prior site plan. We are intending to allow the applicant to waive the zoning
ordinance sight visibility triangle which requires a 25x25’ SVT along the corner of the property, but
do not want to do so if there is a safety issue with DOT. Tom and briefly looked at 9.2 of the RDM
this morning. The town and neighboring residents are concerned about “blind turns” from Higley
onto Fairview. Would turns from Higley meet the RDM requirements?
Thank you. Also, have a Happy New Year!
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St. Phoenix, AZ 85003
O: 602-372-0292
E: adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
Maricopa County is developing the Framework 2040 Comprehensive Plan – a document which guides growth and
development for the next decade and beyond.
Visit Framework 2040 to learn how to participate, attend meetings and be heard!
MCDOT -- TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
REVIEW COMMENT SHEET
1 of 1
Project Name: Gilbert Reception Venue
Location: NWC of Fairview Street and Higley Road, Maricopa County
MCDOT File No.: Z2021169
Date: August 22, 2022
Reviewer: Laxmikanth Narwa, P.E.
Phone No.: 602-506-8677
Consultant: Summit Land Management
Project No.:
Plans Sealed By: Paul E. Basha, PE, PTOE
Consultant Code:
A = Will Comply B = Deleted
C = Consultant to Evaluate
Item
Number
Sheet
Number
Comments
Consultant
Reply
= = =
1
2
3
4
5
= = =
General
General
Page 4
Page 4
Page 4
1st REVIEW (TS)
Consultant: Please use the code and respond to each comment in the
Consultant Reply Column. This sheet is for our record, please answer every
question and sign and date your acknowledgement or the plans will be
sent back to complete the process. Send back the marked-up plans and a
new set of plans along with this comment sheet. Thank you for your
cooperation.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Project Summary
The project proposes to operate a reception facility on an existing 49,937
square-foot parcel of land located at 16732 East Fairview Street, Gilbert,
Arizona. No new access proposed, and access will be provided to the facility
from the existing semi-circular driveway connecting to Fairview Street.
The project anticipates having a maximum of 35 vehicles per event for
approximately two-dozen events in a year. The facility will use employees only
on a by event basis, with no permanent employees. No additional buildings,
driveways, or pavement beyond what is already existing will be constructed.
General Comments
The parcel APN # 604-47-052N is within Maricopa County. It is surrounded by
Higley Road on west side and Fairview Street on the south side. Higley Road
is under the Town of Gilbert jurisdiction, while Fairview Street is under
Maricopa County jurisdiction.
A copy of this Traffic Statement must be submitted to the Town of Gilbert for
their review and approval.
No vehicles are allowed to park on the Fairview street during the events.
Number of vehicles that can be accommodated on site must be shown on the
site-plan.
For the shared parking arrangement immediately south of the facility to be
accepted as parking facility for the events, written permission from the owner
is required. The neighbor’s property must be included in the associated plans
of Gilbert Reception Venue Special Use Permit request.
Traffic Statement is NOT Approved.
Signature: _____________________________________ Date: ___________
Use CODE "A",
"B","C" in this
column next to
every comment.
= = = =
From:
Tony Bianchi
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
Bob Draper
Subject:
RE: Z2021169 - Special Use Permit for Special Events Venue
Date:
Monday, July 25, 2022 9:31:24 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Fairview_Events_Ctr_Z2021169_AOA-3_25Jul2021.pdf
Hi Adam:
Attached is the Gateway Airport response letter for the proposed Fairview Events Center.
It is within Overflight Area III so we are requesting the standard airport noise disclosure condition be
included.
Take a look and let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks for routing this for our review.
Tony Bianchi, A.A.E., AICP, GISP
Planning Manager
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority
5835 S Sossaman Rd
Mesa, AZ 85212-6014
Office: 480-988-7649
tbianchi@gatewayairport.com
www.gatewayairport.com
Please be advised that our office hours are Monday - Thursday 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. We are closed Fridays.
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
To: swilken@azmag.gov; vwolfley@azmag.gov; ccrossman@acg.com; Carl D'Acosta
<CD'Acosta@gatewayairport.com>; Tony Bianchi <TBianchi@gatewayairport.com>; Eva Cutro
<Eva.Cutro@GilbertAZ.gov>; planning.info@mesaaz.gov; nana.appiah@mesaaz.gov; Kyle Mieras
<Kyle.Mieras@gilbertaz.gov>; brett.burningham@queencreek.org; Erik Swanson
<erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>; Eileen Baden (PRK) <Eileen.Baden@maricopa.gov>;
kcotner@azmag.gov; pe@azland.gov; Bruce Fenske <bfenske@azdot.gov>; jgarcia@azdot.gov;
Dkrantz@citytocitycre.com; Frank McWilliams (MCSO) <FrankMcWilliams@MCSO.maricopa.gov>;
josh.rogers@gilbertaz.gov; Ashlee MacDonald <Ashlee.MacDonald@GilbertAZ.gov>;
kelly@azfireadvisor.com; david.delatorre@chandleraz.gov; Derek.horn@chandleraz.gov;
Kevin.Mayo@chandleraz.gov
Cc: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Z2021169 - Special Use Permit for Special Events Venue
Good afternoon all,
This e-mail serves as notification of an application we have received from The Fairview LLC for a
Special Use Permit for a Special Events Venue. Applicable documents for review are available on the
Online Permit Manager at: https://accela.maricopa.gov/CitizenAccessMCOSS/Default.aspx. You can
search for the case by using the Special Use Permit case number Z2021169.
A virtual TAC meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:45 p.m. If you would
like to participate, please contact me and I will send you access details.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-372-0292
adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital for construction permit applications.
Find information on our new permit process here.
PHOENIX-MESA GATEWAY AIRPORT AUTHORITY
5835 SOUTH SOSSAMAN ROAD
MESA, ARIZONA 85212-6014
PHONE (480) 988 7600
Operated by the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, a cooperative effort by Mesa, Gilbert, Queen Creek, Gila River Indian Community, Phoenix, and Apache Junction.
July 25, 2022
Adam Cannon, AICP
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 West Jefferson Street, Suite 170
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Re:
Fairview Event Center (Z2021169)
Description:
Special Use Permit
Location:
North of NWC of Higley & Pecos Roads
This is a Special Use Permit request to allow a Special Events Venue (outdoor events center) at 16732 E.
Fairview St, located north of the northwest corner of Higley & Pecos Roads.
This site lies within Airport Overflight Area (AOA) III, as identified in Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport
Authority’s Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). It is disclosed that this location will
experience frequent aircraft overflights and will be affected by noise. Attendees may hear and see
aircraft landing and taking off from the Airport and will experience aircraft overflights that generate
noise levels considered by many to be “annoying”.
Outdoor event & public assembly facilities are generally considered a compatible land use in proximity to the
airport. The airport would request that the following condition be included with any possible motion for
approval:
1- A fair disclosure agreement and covenant, which would include the following disclosure, should be
recorded as a condition of development approval: “This property, due to its proximity to Phoenix-
Mesa Gateway Airport, will experience aircraft overflights, which are expected to generate noise
levels that may be of concern to some individuals. The mix of aviation activities and types of aircraft
expected to be located and operate at the Airport now and in the future include: scheduled and
unscheduled commercial charters, commercial air carriers and commercial air cargo operations, all of
which are expected to use large commercial aircraft; general aviation activity using corporate and
executive jets, helicopters, and propeller aircraft; aviation flight training schools using training
aircraft; and military activity using high performance military jets. The size of aircraft and frequency
of use of such aircraft may change over time depending on market and technology changes.”
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please contact me at
(480) 988-7649.
Sincerely,
Anthony Bianchi, A.A.E., AICP
Planning Manager
Attachment
1- Recorded Avigation Notice & Public Airport Disclosure Map
FAA Traffic Pattern Airspace
FAA Traffic Pattern Airspace
60 DNL
65 DNL
Airport Overflight Area III*
(Airport Influence Area)*
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c)
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
±
0
1
2
3
Miles
LEGEND
PUBLIC AIRPORT
DISCLOSURE MAP
Day Night Level (DNL)
Noise Contour / Airport
Overflight Area Boundary
FAA Traffic Pattern
Airspace Boundary
AIRPORT BOARD EFFECTIVE DATE:
February, 21, 2017
1. This exhibit has been prepared in
accordance with Arizona Revised Statutes,
Sections 28-8485 & 28-8486
2. FAA Traffic Pattern Airspace boundaries
established in accordance with guidelines
provided in FAA Order 7400.2
3. Airport noise contours were developed
using the Aviation Environmental Design
Tool (AEDT, Version 2c), based on
total annual operations (take-off and
landings) of 498,000
NOTES
* Applicable to new development
From:
Erik Swanson
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Re: Z2021169 - Special Use Permit for Special Events Venue
Date:
Tuesday, July 26, 2022 9:10:29 AM
Adam,
I hope all is well. Queen Creek has no concerns with this request.
Erik Swanson
Planning Manager
t: (480) 358‑3013
e: erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov
22358 S Ellsworth Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town business are public
records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email correspondence is regularly reviewed by
members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open Meeting Law, members of the Town Council, Commissions
and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to other members of the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply
all when responding to this message. Any questions should be directed to the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 5:36 PM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
wrote:
Good afternoon all,
This e-mail serves as notification of an application we have received from The Fairview
LLC for a Special Use Permit for a Special Events Venue. Applicable documents for review
are available on the Online Permit Manager at:
https://accela.maricopa.gov/CitizenAccessMCOSS/Default.aspx. You can search for the
case by using the Special Use Permit case number Z2021169.
A virtual TAC meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:45 p.m. If
you would like to participate, please contact me and I will send you access details.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-372-0292
adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital for construction permit applications.
Find information on our new permit process here.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Brad Gottwald
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Lauri, Leni weddings and Events
Date:
Wednesday, October 23, 2024 4:46:15 PM
Adam,
I live directly behind Lauri and Leni. My property joins theirs. The events they have
do not bother us one bit. In fact we walk to the back of the property to enjoy the
entertainment due to it is very hard to hear. They are very respectful by providing
dates and event types in advance.
They have mine and my wife’s full support on what they are doing.
Thx
Brad Gottwald
480.322.3815
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Melissa Resch <azresch@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, January 30, 2023 3:01 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Z2021169
Good afternoon, this is in regards to the reception center on Fairview Street in Gilbert Arizona. The neighborhood does
not want it. Fairview is already a street that people use as a short cut and go way too fast on. There are many families
with small kids. Kids play all day and all weekend outside. We live on this county island for a reason. We live here for the
peace and quiet.Please come out and observe so you can see what we are dealing with. This is not a safe place for it to
be. Please listen to us please let us have a word. When’s the hearing where we can have a voice? The sign in front of
the property is so vague. I have already witnessed firsthand a car Carelessly speeding away driving too fast down
Fairview on a Saturday afternoon, passing me and almost hitting a kid on his bike. A police report was filed.
Melissa Resch
16830 S164th ST
Gilbert,Az 85295
2
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Jessica Allen <thursochick@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Monday, January 30, 2023 1:58 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
THE FAIRVIEW event venue
Adam,
I am sure you are getting lots of emails about this event center. It has
caused quite a stir in the neighborhood for the past 2 years. I live at
16517 East Fairview. My family and I have serval concerns about this event
center. We have attended the 2 meetings that the couple applying for the
permit have held. They do not live at the residence. I met the owner when
all the neighbors helped do a service project for her right before her
son-in-law decided he wanted to make it an event center. At both meetings
which had at least 20 neighbors in attendance who were ALL against the
event center, many concerns were raised. Parking and traffic. There is
no parking on the property. At 2 different events that were held there as
I turned the blind corner for Higley to Fairview I almost hit a parked
car. One car opened the door to exit and if I did not swerve into the
oncoming traffic lane both cars would have been damaged. Another time as I
was again turning that blind turn, I had to slam on my brakes to avoid
hitting people walking in the street from their car to the event center.
There are no sidewalks for people to walk on so when cars are parked in
the easement people walk in the street.
Every day I slow down to see if they have posted a date for the meeting in
Phoenix so I can go protest this event center again. The people wanting
this event center don't live here or care about our street. All the
meetings I have attended they don't want to hear our concerns. I know they
say they are not getting alcohol permits but all they have to do is hire a
caterer that has one. We have already had issues with guests from that
venue not obeying the traffic laws of the street and almost hitting a
neighbor kid, let alone if they have been drinking. This is a street for
families and their residences. It is no place for an Event Center. WE are
greatly concerned about this. Thank you for all your help.
-David and Jessica Allen
3
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Kelli Mullins <kellijmullins@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, January 30, 2023 1:34 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
The Fairview
Hi Adam!
Hope you're having a great day so far. I hear you're the unlucky one who gets to deal with all the angry
neighbors over the Fairview ;)
Just wanted to tell my story as a lifelong resident on Fairview and my deep opposition to the proposed center.
On August 17th, 2021 we attended a neighborhood meeting that the potential reception owner organized. She
stated her goal was to get feedback of the idea of using her mom’s private residence as a reception center.
The majority of the neighbors in attendance were opposed to the idea and were very vocal and detailed about
why they weren’t on board. The potential owners are not even residents on the street as it's her mother's
private residence yet hope to profit from it commercially.
The main concerns of the meeting were that it would bring more traffic on our small, dark road. The busy
elementary school at the other end of the street already adds traffic and speeding drivers. The event center
would be yet another surge of traffic on a 25MPH road. Alcohol is often served at parties so drunk drivers could
potentially have access to our street. The lack of parking would guarantee that guests would attempt to drop off
in front of the home. This home is on a blind corner because of the walls that the homeowner insisted the town
of Gilbert install while Higley Road was being improved years ago. The corner is very hard to negotiate with
normal traffic and poses a huge danger to drivers and guests alike as you have almost no time to react as you
arrive on the street. Our street doesn’t have sidewalks or street lights so there is nowhere for residents to
safely walk when a party is in full swing. These were just a few of the many concerns that were expressed at
the initial meeting.
Fast forward to Saturday, March 5th 2022. A neighbor called me in a panic as she had just witnessed a near-
miss with my then 14 year old son being hit by a speeding vehicle who was driving on the wrong side of the
road, illegally passing her. My son was on the side of the road driving a lawnmower from his grandpa’s house
to my house next door when he pulled onto the street in his own lane to go around the speed hump sign which
is permentenly cemented in the dirt. It was at the same moment the guest decided to pass the neighbor, nearly
hitting my son who had no idea the driver would pass on speed humps on a no-passing street.
In an attempt to address the issue, I went to the residence where a reception was in full swing and spoke with
the reception owners. I told them what happened with tears in my eyes and pleaded to discontinue receptions
as we predicted this is exactly what would happen and it did. At that point, they became confrontational with
me, insistent it wasn’t one of their guests who was on the wrong side of the road. I told them I knew for a fact it
was as the guest dropped off a car full of people off at their home then proceeded to follow the same neighbor
who soon called me about my son.
Instead of the apology or empathy that I expected, I was met with hostility and accusations. My hope was that
there would be some form of responsibility taken but instead, I was made out to be the enemy.
I called the county police to report a complaint who ended up coming out to investigate personally. Upon
investigation from MCSO, the deputy confirmed it was indeed a guest from the party who took responsibility for
his actions, saying he was in a hurry to get to Discovery Park where he was instructed to park his vehicle
during the event. Once he parked at Discovery, the reception owners would pick him up in a van and transport
him back to the party. When the deputy told me the guest admitted it, I again expected the owner to take
4
responsibility and have some form of sympathy as my 14 year old son was put in a dangerous situation as a
result of the party but the deputy told me they were instead frustrated that a neighbor called the police on them
during their event.
A few days later, I was informed by a personal friend who works for The Town of Gilbert that Jim Torgeson
*attempted* to file an order of harassment against me but didn't know my name and instead falsely accused a
different neighbor who wasn't even in the state at the time. As I did nothing illegal or inappropriate, the order
was denied. This shows the lack of character from the Torgesons and paints a picture of pettiness, instead.
I also attended the meeting they held at the library, under the guise of a being a county led meeting. We later
discovered the Torgeson's used their own signs from their sign business to mimic actual county signs to get us
there. We signed in and took turns sharing our concerns but again were met with pettiness and name calling
from both the husband and wife. We have a voice recording of the whole conversation if you're interested in
hearing it.
I'm sure you're aware at the lack of parking on the property but if not, I encourage you to drive by and scout it
out yourself. It's a quiet street which already had excess traffic with the school, the new church and now a 2nd
reception center trying to open on the opposite end of the street. We built this house in the 70's and aren't
opposed to change but we are opposed to lack of common sense. There is no realistic parking to
accommodate attendees, no way to control the speed of attendees, no way to control the alcohol consumption,
no palatable security plan in place and no solid plan to make it work.
This outlines why I am opposed to a reception center on our residential street. The increase in traffic by
strangers who are unfamiliar with the quiet street poses a danger to my family and all the residents on our
street.
Thanks for your time, Adam!
Best, Kelli Mullins
5
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Linda Payne <slpayne8@outlook.com>
Sent:
Monday, January 30, 2023 1:05 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Z2021169
Hello Adam,
I just found out that the county has approved a wedding venue here in our neighborhood. We had contacted
your office several times to let them know we are totally against it, in fact the whole neighborhood except
maybe 2 or 3 families are against it as it is right on the corner and several people have already been almost hit
or have almost hit people that are coming to that venue. They have had a sign up for 3 months about a
planning meeting and no date has ever been put on it. The property is in a trust name but the lady that lives
there is older and it is her daughter and son‐in‐law that wants to put it there. There is not enough parking and
they claim that they are having them park down the street in a CVS parking lot but that is ¼ mile away and
people are not going to want to go there.
We have been trying to have a meeting with the county and them. They set up one meeting but the county
was not there and when the county was called they said that they were not aware of it even though the
people who are wanting this said that they had set it up with the county. We are a neighborhood that has
been here for 40 years and all families. These people do not even live here and are convincing their Mom who
is probably 75 that it is a good idea. When they get it passed there are two or three other people who are
trying to get their venues into wedding parties also. It brings drinking, drugs, and people who do not respect
our neighborhood. Like I said we have already had several near accidents due to their people crossing the
street right at that corner. We have not streetlights and it is dark at night. Please do not allow them to get
their permit and allow us as neighbors to come and discuss it with you. Thank you.
Linda Payne
480‐258‐2029
16308 E. Fairview St.
Gilbert, AZ 85295
6
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
stacy finter <azstacyeh@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Friday, January 27, 2023 3:40 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Z2021169
Hi Adam. Our neighborhood has had a very hard time with this house and their parties/ wedding event that have been
happening for 2‐3 years now. These people have been beyond difficult and break every law and ordinance. Kids have
almost been hit by their patrons, the owner assaulted a neighbor, violence from others, drunks fighting in our street,
speeding cars nonstop all day long, broken beer bottles on our street and the sidewalk on Higley, cars blocking the street
and parked all up and down in other neighbors yards and easements, etc. Police have been called and reports made. The
venue owners don't even own this home. This has been terrible. The whole neighborhood opposes this venue. THE
WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD!
The owners placed this sign months ago with a TBD. No date has ever been added to this sign. It is not customary for
these signs to be posted for 3+ months. The signs are causing more upset and they seem “taunting.” When a date does
get added, no one will notice and I’m sure that is the owner’s plan as we’ve all fought this from day 1.
They have no permits for the extra structure on their property, the septic is not for 100 people events, there is only
parking for possibly 6 cars at the home. This home is on a blind corner. This home is a HOME! Businesses are not allowed
to be ran from the home and we all oppose the change. Please let me know why this continues. Please help us make the
owners remove the 2 signs posted. Please stop them from ruining our neighborhood.
Thank you,
Stacy Finter
From:
Charles Hart (PND)
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
FW: 16732 E Fairview St *HELP*
Date:
Wednesday, November 30, 2022 9:02:00 AM
Charles Hart, AICP
Principal Planner
Code Compliance Supervisor
Maricopa County Planning & Development Dept.
(602) 506-7159 Ph. (602) 723-1237 cell (602) 506-3711 FAX
301 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.
-----Original Message-----
From: stacy finter <azstacyeh@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 1:09 PM
To: Jack Sellers (BOS) <Jack.Sellers@Maricopa.Gov>
Cc: Michael Ordahl (PND) <Michael.Ordahl@Maricopa.Gov>; Charles Hart (PND)
<Charles.Hart@Maricopa.Gov>; Richard Bohan (BOS) <Richard.Bohan@Maricopa.Gov>; Diane Hilow (BOS)
<Diane.Hilow@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: 16732 E Fairview St *HELP*
Hi Mr. Sellers. I am writing to you with deep concern for my neighborhood. After living just 2 streets away for 10
years, my husband and I decided that Fairview St was the perfect place to raise our 4 children. We dreamed of room
to play, the kids raising chickens, a relaxed life and a quiet street with kind people. After moving in 7 1/2 years ago,
we learned that our street had speeding issues that the county not helped with. I’ve called, emailed, and spoken with
multiple people in your office who have not been willing to help us. I’ve had a drunk driver run off of the road and
into my yard and ditch causing property damage. The traffic just keeps getting worse with no signs of Maricopa
helping. I’ve pleaded for help and was denied multiple times. MCSO has not responded to calls in a timely manor
and never patrols our street. Our 25mph road has had speeders going almost 100mph! We’ve clocked them with
radar guns. Neighbors have gotten in altercations with them too.
NOW we have 16732 E Fairview st turning into a wedding/party venue. The house has held 15+ large events all
without permits. Their guests park all over the street, speed (almost killing a child of a scottsdale police lieutenant
and that has a police report on it), fights in the middle of the street (police were called), drinking and driving,
reckless driving, littering of alcohol bottles and other things, and the dangers of residents trying to access our road
with a blind corner and cars and people in the road.
The owner’s children have applied for permits for a venue after our complaints to the county. They’ve been holding
events for 2 years now. They’ve tried to cut corners and not pay for permits. They let people “tip” them so that they
don’t charge for their venue and can get away without permits. They are mean and reckless. The son in law has even
assaulted the attorney neighbor when the neighbor asked for cars to be moved that were blocking his driveway. The
actual owner of the property hides and is letting her adult children make enemies. They are taking advantage of this
elderly lady. The home is also not permitted for the increased septic usage nor is the “guest house” permitted that
they use for the venue.
The owner has placed a sign in front of their home with the special use permit hearing information. The issue is that
they have indicated all information EXCEPT the date of the hearing. It’s currently TBD and has said that for almost
2 months now. They don’t follow the rules and never have. They continue to play games.
I ask of you, PLEASE HELP US! Help us stop the abuse to our neighborhood. Our street is not zoned for this. This
is a single family residential neighborhood. Allowing a special use permit will not only hurt our property values but
it will bring crime and more safety issues.
Neighbors have police reports, videos, pictures, etc of the events and also the neighborhood “meeting” in which
100% of the neighborhood disagreed with the venue and were called horrible names and talked to so nastily by the
son in law.
Please let me know what can be done to stop this before it gets any more out of hand. Our residents do NOT want
any venues to operate in our neighborhood.
Thank you,
Stacy Finter
16506 E Fairview St
Gilbert, AZ 85295
480-734-7327
DATE:
January 22, 2025
TO:
Planning & Zoning Commission
From:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
Z2021169 – The Fairview
Agenda Item: #3
Since the publishing of the staff report, staff received one (1) additional opposition letter. The
opposition letter is concerned with the character of the neighborhood and parking and noise
associated with the event venue. With the additional letter, the total number opposing the case
is eight (8) individuals. Seven (7) individuals support the case. The level of opposition does not
trigger the requirement for a supermajority (four affirmative) vote of the Board for approval of
Z2021169. All property owners which directly surround the site support the venue.
Attachments:
Opposition Correspondence (2 pages)
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the
county.
From:
Rachel Applegate (PND)
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
FW: Online Form Submittal: Objection of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Date:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 6:39:23 AM
From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 10:46 PM
To: PND PZAppeal <PNDPZAppeal@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Objection of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Objection of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation Objection Form If the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of a particular case it will be placed on a consent agenda for the Board of Supervisors hearing. However, if
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Objection of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Objection Form
If the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of a particular case it
will be placed on a consent agenda for the Board of Supervisors hearing. However, if
this objection form is received within 15 calendar days following Commission
hearing, then the agenda item will be placed on the regular agenda for the Board of
Supervisors hearing.
Name
Amanda Gallagher
Email Address
amandalynnegallagher@gmail.com
Address
Field not completed.
City
Field not completed.
State
Field not completed.
Zip Code
Field not completed.
Phone Number
480.332.1050
Fax Number
Field not completed.
Case Number / Project
Name
Z2021169
01/23/2025
Planning & Zoning
Commission Hearing
Date
Reason for the
Objection of the
Subject Case
This proposed venue is located on the corner of Higley Road
(very busy road) and Fairview Road which leads into a small
county island of residential farm houses on acres ranging from
one to five acres. There is no where to safely park in order to
attend any event. The music played is extremely loud and can be
heard throughout the area. This homeowner has already been
doing events over the past year without approval to do so. Many
of the neighbors located in the county island are against this
being allowed. We want to keep our small family friendly part of
heaven the way it is and not let commercialized places like this to
ruin it. Thank you!
Electronic Signature
Agreement
I agree.
Electronic Signature
Amanda Gallagher
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Sign King
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); lauritorgeson@yahoo.com; Jlindblom@willmeng.com
Subject:
For the file
Date:
Tuesday, January 28, 2025 9:38:14 AM
Adam;
This note is something I would like to include in the public record with The Fairview
submission.
Inferences in recent emails made by a few island residents have put me in the unenviable
position of defending my name, my wife's name, and Leni's name. It's very unfortunate.
My mother in law is 100% her own woman and fully capable or handling her own business
affairs. She put 16732 Fairview into trust many years ago to protect it from anything that may
come her way. She has also made it plainly clear that I am to represent that trust and property
for her.
If you feel any need to contact her, please do as she is fully capable. The inferences that have
been made trouble her deeply and she will be handling that issue at her own discretion.
I know the county is stuck in the middle and not party to such character assassination.
I will always cooperate to the best of my ability with anything the county may need and that
extends to the meeting Mr. Lindblom wants to arrange. That meeting will have a police
officer (paid for by me) to be present in case of any more acts of intimidation or physicality by
members of the group. Please recall the last meeting left the officer gobsmacked by their
behavior.
I do want to point out that the baby shower for Dream Padilla (daughter's best friend) was a
private affair and had not one delivery; zero. Claims that delivery trucks are racing up and
down Fairview constantly seems very odd and purposely inflammatory. In fact, almost every
food delivery is by SUV.
Again, thank you for all you do.
Jim Torgeson
January 28th, 2025
Dear Adam Cannon, Maricopa County Planning and Zoning
I’m writing to you today to express my extreme objection to an accusation made by
members of The Fairview opposition. After reading the opposition’s letters, it appears that
some have implied that I am being taken advantage of by the applicant (my daughter)
because of my age and suggested that I am not in control or have any say as to what is
planned for my property. Words cannot describe my offense to this notion. The opposition
has made it part of their game plan to make my daughter some kind of villain and besmirch
her and her husband’s character with accusations that could not be farther from the truth.
Here are the facts:
1.
I insisted on putting this property in Trust a very long time ago. My daughter
never asked for or demanded it.
2.
My daughter and son-in-law are the beneficiaries of the Trust and have been
given full rights to represent the best interests of the property.
3.
I am in FULL support of the applicant’s use of the property to operate a small
business. It brings me tremendous satisfaction to know I’ll be leaving this property
to my family and along with it a business they can build.
4.
I am fully informed on any property usage, changes, and future plans.
5.
My personal boundaries are a top priority of the applicants and are thoroughly
respected.
6.
Lastly, and most importantly, let it be known that the MOST stressful and
abusive part of this entire permit process has been the behavior of the opposition.
Their aggressive, disrespectful, threatening, and dangerous behavior directed at my
family, neighbors, and property is inexcusable.
In spite of the irrational behavior displayed on and around my property by the opposition, I
have gracefully been able to remain on the sidelines of this process. However, after being
disrespectfully described as a victim of some type of elder abuse, I simply had to engage to
set the record straight.
Best Regards,
LENI M. CAZDEN
16732 E Fairview St.
Gilbert, AZ 85295
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
PND Code Complaints
Sent:
Thursday, January 23, 2025 11:59 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Fairview opposition
From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2025 5:07 PM
To: PND Code Complaints <PNDCodeComplaints@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Report a Code Violation
Report a Code Violation Violator Information Violation Address or Parcel Number 16732 East Fairview st Gilbert Az 85295 Violation Description Subject: Urgent Request to Shut Down Unauthorized Reception Center at 16732 E. Fairview Street, Gilbert,
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBanner End
Report a Code Violation
Violator Information
Violation Address or
Parcel Number
16732 East Fairview st Gilbert Az 85295
Violation Description
Subject: Urgent Request to Shut Down Unauthorized
Reception Center at 16732 E. Fairview Street, Gilbert, AZ,
85295, Case Z2021169
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally oppose the ongoing operation of a
reception center at 16732 E. Fairview Street, Gilbert, AZ,
85295. Despite the county’s previous attempts to halt this
activity, the owners continue to host large parties that pose
serious risks to our private residential street.
Even this past weekend their was a party, baby shower at this
location. My family was out for a bike ride and since there are
NO sidewalks the cars parked all around the street make it
more dagerous when we are turning the blind corner and we
cant be seen. The increase in traffic and lack of street lighting
make it very dangerous for my children to play outside in our
neighborhood or walk to a friend's house diwn the street at
night.
This is a private neighborhood, and these events are
endangering the safety and peace of our community. The
parties attract large crowds, create dangerous traffic
2
conditions, and even involve alcohol vendors serving guests.
The street is narrow, has no parking, and is a blind corner,
which makes it incredibly hazardous, especially for children
who play in the area. In the past, there have been incidents
where intoxicated guests required hospitalization after falling
and injuring themselves.
Additionally, party vans and other vehicles constantly drive
through our residential street, adding significant traffic and
disrupting the tranquility of our neighborhood. While we've
attempted to address these concerns in private neighborhood
meetings, the property owners have shown no regard for our
safety or concerns.
It’s also important to note that the individuals behind this event
center—Jim and Lauri Torgeson—do not even live in the
neighborhood. They’ve taken Mrs. Torgeson’s elderly mother’s
home, placed it in an LLC, and are now using it for commercial
purposes, with no regard for the neighbors’ quality of life. Their
personal lives will not be negatively impacted by the
disturbances they are causing. Furthermore, Jim Torgeson, a
member of the Town of Gilbert, ran on a platform to “keep
Gilbert small” but now hypocritically supports the establishment
of a commercial reception center in the surrounding county
island. His actions are not only unethical but also
untrustworthy. To make matters worse, he has previously
assaulted a neighbor who simply asked to have a guest
unblock his driveway. Jim became agitated and physically
pushed the neighbor, which reflects a complete disregard for
the well-being of those living in the community.
We implore the county to take immediate action to stop this
unauthorized use of a private home as an event center. There
are many commercial locations in Gilbert where such events
can take place safely, but a private residence in a residential
neighborhood is not an appropriate venue.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. We trust the
county will take the necessary steps to protect our community.
Sincerely,
Jessica Allen
16517 East Fairview st
Gilbert az 85295
480-415-4277
[Your Contact Information]
Your Information
Your Name
Jessica Allen
Your Telephone Number
4804154277
3
Your Email Address
Thursochick@yahoo.com
Attach Pictures
Field not completed.
The following information is optional but will expedite the process.
Legal Property
Description
16732 East Fairview st Gilbert az 85295
Owner Name
LMC Trust
Assessor Parcel
Number
304-47-052N
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
4
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Sarah Sturgeon <sarahsturgeon5@gmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 11:33 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Urgent request to shut down unauthorized reception center at 16732 E. Fairview St,
Gilbert, AZ 85295, Case Z2021169
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing a formal request to oppose the opening of a reception center at 16732 E. Fairview St, Gilbert,
AZ 85295, Case Z2021169.
I have lived and raised my family of seven on Fairview Street for ten years. Our family loves this county
island neighborhood for its quiet country feel. I do not wish to have a busy reception center on my very
own street. For that reason, I do not live in a commercially zoned area.
The individuals trying to open this reception center- Jim and Lauri Torgeson- do not even live in our
neighborhood. They have taken Mrs. Torgeson's elderly mother's home, put it in an LLC, and are now
trying to operate a business on her property, in our quiet county island neighborhood. Their own
personal lives will not be impacted whatsoever, because they do not even live on this street. But we
do! We live here and we will feel the impact! I do not know the ins and outs of whether our neighborhood
allows a business like a reception center to operate here, but I, and many of my neighbors have
concerns. The large parties that have already been hosted at the location have brought about traffic,
noise and chaos to our neighborhood, especially late at night. The street on which we live is narrow, has
no parking, the home is on a blind corner and there are alcohol vendors serving guests late into the
evening. There are lots of kids and teenagers that live on our street. Higley Road is already so busy, more
traffic at our intersection is a danger to them.
If neighbors really do have a say in whether they feel comfortable having a business in their
neighborhood, I ask you to please consider my request and that of so many of my neighbors. There
should exist a certain amount of respect for people when one tries go about making a big change like this
to a neighborhood. The unfriendly manner and interactions I have had and seen from Mr Torgeson has
not had a good impression on me. I would ask him to consider a different location where he will be more
accepted and better able to operate his business on a broader scale with less pressure to please the
neighbors.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sarah Sturgeon
16547 E Fairview St. Gilbert, AZ 85295
(801) 448-4049
5
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
ELIZABETH ALLEN <truckingrl@hotmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 8:07 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Urgent Request to Shut Down Unauthorized Reception Center at 16732 E. Fairview
Street, Gilbert, AZ, 85295, Case Z2021169
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Parcel Number: 304-47-052N
Owner Name:
LMC TRUST I
Property Address:
16732 E FAIRVIEW ST GILBERT 85295
Mailing Address:
16732 E FAIRVIEW LN GILBERT AZ USA 85297
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally oppose the ongoing operation of a reception center at 16732 E. Fairview Street,
Gilbert, AZ, 85295. Despite the county’s previous attempts to halt this activity, the owners continue to host
large parties that pose serious risks to our private residential street.
This is a private neighborhood, and these events are endangering the safety and peace of our community. The
parties attract large crowds, create dangerous traffic conditions, and even involve alcohol vendors serving
guests. The street is narrow, has no parking, and is a blind corner, which makes it incredibly hazardous,
especially for children who play in the area. In the past, there have been incidents where intoxicated guests
required hospitalization after falling and injuring themselves.
Additionally, party vans and other vehicles constantly drive through our residential street, adding significant
traffic and disrupting the tranquility of our neighborhood. While we've attempted to address these concerns in
private neighborhood meetings, the property owners have shown no regard for our safety or concerns.
It’s also important to note that the individuals behind this event center—Jim and Lauri Torgeson—do not even
live in the neighborhood. They’ve taken Mrs. Torgeson’s elderly mother’s home, placed it in an LLC, and are
now using it for commercial purposes, with no regard for the neighbors’ quality of life. Their personal lives will
not be negatively impacted by the disturbances they are causing. Furthermore, Jim Torgeson, a member of the
Town of Gilbert, ran on a platform to “keep Gilbert small” but now hypocritically supports the establishment of
a commercial reception center in the surrounding county island. His actions are not only unethical but also
untrustworthy. To make matters worse, he has previously assaulted a neighbor who simply asked to have a
guest unblock his driveway. Jim became agitated and physically pushed the neighbor, which reflects a complete
disregard for the well-being of those living in the community.
6
We implore the county to take immediate action to stop this unauthorized use of a private home as an event
center. There are many commercial locations in Gilbert where such events can take place safely, but a private
residence in a residential neighborhood is not an appropriate venue.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. We trust the county will take the necessary steps to protect
our community.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Allen a Fairview street home owner.
7
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Melissa Jorgensen <misjinaz@gmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 5:48 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Urgent request to shut down unauthorized reception centers at 16732 E. Fairview St. ,
Gilbert, AZ 85295, Case Z2021169
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally oppose the ongoing operation of a reception center at 16732 E. Fairview Street,
Gilbert, AZ, 85295. Despite the county’s previous attempts to halt this activity, the owners continue to host
large parties that pose serious risks to our private residential street.
This is a private neighborhood, and these events are endangering the safety and peace of our community. The
parties attract large crowds, create dangerous traffic conditions, and even involve alcohol vendors serving
guests. The street is narrow, has no parking, and is a blind corner, which makes it incredibly hazardous,
especially for children who play in the area. In the past, there have been incidents where intoxicated guests
required hospitalization after falling and injuring themselves.
Additionally, party vans and other vehicles constantly drive through our residential street, adding significant
traffic and disrupting the tranquility of our neighborhood. While we've attempted to address these concerns in
private neighborhood meetings, the property owners have shown no regard for our safety or concerns.
It’s also important to note that the individuals behind this event center—Jim and Lauri Torgeson—do not even
live in the neighborhood. They’ve taken Mrs. Torgeson’s elderly mother’s home, placed it in an LLC, and are
now using it for commercial purposes, with no regard for the neighbors’ quality of life. Their personal lives will
not be negatively impacted by the disturbances they are causing. Furthermore, Jim Torgeson, a member of the
Town of Gilbert, ran on a platform to “keep Gilbert small” but now hypocritically supports the establishment of
a commercial reception center in the surrounding county island. His actions are not only unethical but also
untrustworthy. To make matters worse, he has previously assaulted a neighbor who simply asked to have a
guest unblock his driveway. Jim became agitated and physically pushed the neighbor, which reflects a complete
disregard for the well-being of those living in the community.
We implore the county to take immediate action to stop this unauthorized use of a private home as an event
center. There are many commercial locations in Gilbert where such events can take place safely, but a private
residence in a residential neighborhood is not an appropriate venue.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. We trust the county will take the necessary steps to protect
our community.
8
Sincerely,
Melissa Jorgensen
16555 E. Fairview St.
Gilbert, AZ 85295
480-580-2308
S Roanoke St
S Roanoke St
E Hampton Ln
S Seton
Ave
S
Se
ton
Av
e
E K
e
sler
Ln
S Seton Ave
E B
ridgeport
Pkwy
E Parkview Dr
S
Rock
well S
t
S Colt
Dr
E Elgin St
S
Banning
St
S Cardinal
St
E Geronimo
St
S Sinova St
S Clairborne
Ave
S Seton A
v
e
S Co
lt Dr
E Bridgeport
Pkwy
S
Seton
Ave
E Parkview Dr
S
Qu
i
nn Ave
E Parkview D
r
S Stuart
Ave
S
S
tu
art
A
v
e
E L
o
well Ct
S
Penros
e
D
r
E Canyon
Creek Ct
E M
orelos
C
t
S T
u
cana
C
t
S Racine
Ct
S Balboa
Dr
E Geroni
mo Ct
S Balboa
Dr
E Lowell
Ave
S 164th Wy
E
A
ttl
e
boro
Rd
S Penrose Ct
E Joseph Wy
S 163rd St
S 166th
St
S Constell
a
ti
o
n
Wy
E Fairview St
E Hopkins
Rd
E Low
ell Ave
E Phelps St
E H
ampton Ln
E Kessler
Ln
E Cany
o
n Creek Dr
E Fairview St
E Canyon Creek D
r
S 164th St
E Elgin
St
E Lowell Ave
Higley Rd
Pecos Rd
Frye Rd
Cany
on
Cree
k
Dr
304
47
013E
304
47
013J
304
47
013K
304
47
013L
304
47
023F
304
47
023Q
304
47
023R
304
47
036A
304
47
050
304
47
051
304
47
053
304
47
054
304
47
055
304
47
059
304
47
060
304
47
061
304
47
063
304
47
069
304
47
076
304
47
080
304
47
081
304
47
086
304
47
087
304
47
090
304
47
091
304
47
378
304
47
390
304
47
391
304
47
393
304
47
394
304
47
402
304
47
772
304
47
803
304
47
793
304
47
794
304
47
796A
304
47
798
304
47
799
304
47
800
304
47
801
304
47
963A
304
47
965
304
80
983
304
80
982
304
52
897
304
47
048D
304
52
899
304
80
987
304
80
988
304
52
902
304
47
396B
304
47
802B
304
52
012B
304
52
901F
304
51
963A
304
53
830
304
45
968
304
45
967
304
50
979
304
47
990A
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2021169\Z2021169_Alternate.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/28/2025
Ü
380
0
380
190
Feet
Case Opposition
Z2021169
Legend
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcels
S Seton Ave
S Seton
A
v
e
E Fairview St
E Hopkins Rd
E Bailey Ln
E Phelps St
E Elgin St
E Fairview St
Higley Rd
304
47
013E
304
47
052H
304
47
050
304
47
051
304
47
052G
304
47
052J
304
47
052N
304
47
796A
304
47
797
304
47
963A
304
48
489
304
48
490
304
48
491
304
48
492
304
48
493
304
48
494
304
48
578
304
48
579
304
48
778
304
48
779
304
48
780
304
48
781
304
48
802
304
48
803
304
48
804
304
48
805
304
48
806
304
48
807
304
48
808
304
48
809
304
48
976
304
48
977
304
48
978
304
48
979
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2021169\Z2021169.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/27/2025
Ü
80
0
80
40
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2021169
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcel
Supporting Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels
300' Buffer Interior
300' Buffer Selection
Eligible parcels: 21
Supporting parcels: 5
Opposition parcels: 0
Supporting parcels sq ft: 299,167
Opposition parcels sq ft: 0
Subject parcels sq ft: 50,653
All area inside the 300' buffer sq ft:
448,459
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels sq ft:
397,806
No-response parcels sq ft: 0
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
0%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
0%