Extracted text (via ocr_local)
36772 characters
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHANDLER, ARIZONA June 16, 2021, held in the City Council Chambers, 88 E. Chicago Street. 1. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL CHAIRMAN HEUMANN called the study session to order at 5:31 p.m. | The following Commissioners answered Roll Call: | Chairman Rick Heumann Vice Chairman David Rose Commissioner George Kimble Commissioner Matt Eberle Commissioner Gregg Pekau Commissioner Michael Flanders Absent: Also, present: Ms. Debra Stapleton, Assistant City Manager Mr. David de la Torre, Planning Manager Ms. Kristine Gay, Senior City Planner Mr. Ben Cereceres, City Planner Mr. Thomas Allen, Assistant City Attorney Ms. Julie San Miguel, Clerk 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Pledge of Allegiance led by COMMISSIONER PEKAU. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Study Session Minutes of The Planning and Zoning Commission held on Wednesday, June 2, 2021. Approved b. Regular Meeting Minutes of The Planning and Zoning Commission held on Wednesday, June 2, 2021. Approved MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KIMBALL, second by COMMISSIONER FLANDERS to approve Study Session and Regular Meeting Minutes of The Planning and Zoning Commission of the. City of Chandler held on Wednesday, June 2, 2021. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. Chairman Rick Heumann - In Favor Commissioner George Kimble - In Favor | Vice Chair David Rose - In Favor Commissioner Gregg Pekau - In Favor Commissioner Matt Eberle- In Favor Commissioner Michael Flanders- In Favor Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 4. 2021 - Page 2 AGENDA ITEMS: CHAIRMAN HEUMANN informed the audience before the regular meeting Commission and Staff met in open study session to discuss items on the agenda. He advised there will be a full presentation on action item a. He further advised items b, c, and d are on consent. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS *b, PLH21-0009 PHOENICIAN MEDICAL CENTER AT 1345 Continued to the July 21, 2021, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Request Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) approval for site layout and building architecture for a one-story medical office building on approximately 0.4 acres. The subject property is located approximately one quarter of a mile north of the northeast corner of Ray and Alma School roads. (STAFF REQUESTS CONTINUANCE TO THE JULY 21, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.) The applicant requests a continuance to allow additional time for adjustments to be made to the site layout. As such, Planning staff recommends a continuance to the July 21, 2021, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. *c, PLH20-0057 THE OASIS/EL OASIS Approved Request Use Permit approval for a one-story community center and community gardens on approximately 1.9 acres on a property zoned Multiple-Family Residential District (MF-2). The subject property is located at 482 E. Erie Street, approximately one quarter of a mile north of the northwest corner of Chandler Boulevard and Hamilton Street. Background e Approximately 1.9 acres e Subject site zoned MF-2 (Multi-Family Residential District) e Use is permitted with Use Permit if compatible and in the best interest of the community Surrounding Land Use Data North | Existing Single-Family residential | South | Across E. Erie Street: Existing mobile zoned SF-8.5 (Single-Family home park, single family and multi- District) family developments zoned MF-1 (Medium-Density Residential District) East Existing Single-Family residential | West Existing mobile home park zoned zoned SF-8.5 (Single-Family MF-1 (Medium-Density Residential District) District) Proposed Development Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 3 Building Square Footage 5,000 Square-feet Building Height 20 feet (Maximum 35 feet permitted) Parking Spaces Required 25 spaces Parking Spaces Provided 25 spaces ee (2 of the spaces are within the garage) Days of Operation Community Garden/Grass Field: Monday - Sunday Community Education Center: Monday Thru Friday Evening Activities: Monday - Saturday Weddings/Quinceaneras: Thursday - Saturday Hours of Operation Community Garden/Grass Field: Dusk to Dawn Community Center Community Education Center: 8 AM -5 PM Evening Activities: 5 PM - 10 PM Weddings/Quinceaneras: 4 PM - 10 PM Review and Recommendation The MF-2 District permits compatible land uses that are in the best interest of the community to be developed with Council approval of a Use Permit. The proposed community center and community garden will result in a land use that is compatible with the surrounding land uses, much like a church is compatible with surrounding residential properties in any given neighborhood. Planning staff has reviewed the request finding consistency with the General Plan. The building includes a large community room than can be broken down into smaller co-working/tutoring/training spaces or a single meeting space serving up to 90 people. It will also include an open workroom, public restrooms a generous teaching kitchen and gardens. In an effort to prevent parking and noise from negatively impacting adjacent neighborhoods when events are held (i.e., wedding, quinceanera), the applicant has agreed to stipulations number 8 -10 restricting parking to on-site only, restricting noise levels and requiring a contact phone number be provided to neighbors to resolve complaints quickly and directly. Staff finds the proposal to be consistent with the goals of the General Plan, thus recommending Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval. Public/Neighborhood Outreach e This request was noticed in accordance with the requirements of the Chandler Zoning Code. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 4 e A neighborhood meeting was held on June 1, 2021; 20 neighbors were in attendance, they had general questions and were in support of the proposal. e As of the writing of this memo, planning staff is not aware of any concerns or opposition to the request. Recommended Action Planning staff recommends Planning and Zoning Commission move to recommend approval of the Use Permit, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall be in substantial conformance with the Development Booklet, entitled “The Oasis/El Oasis” and kept on file in the City of Chandler Planning Division, in File No. PLH20-0057 modified by such conditions included at the time the Booklet was approved by the Chandler City Council and/or as thereafter amended, modified, or supplemented by the Chandler City Council. 1. The landscaping shall be maintained at a level consistent with or better than at the time of planting. 2. Use Permit approval does not constitute Final Development Plan approval; compliance with the details required by all applicable codes and conditions of the City of Chandler and this Use Permit shall apply 3. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 4. All mechanical equipment, including HVAC, utility meters, etc. shall be screened from view by material(s) that are architecturally integrated and consistent with the proposed buildings 5. Sign packages, including free-standing signs as well as wall-mounted signs, shall be designed in coordination with landscape plans, planting materials, storm water retention requirements, and utility pedestals, so as not to create problems with sign visibility or prompt the removal of required landscape materials. 6. The Use Permit is non-transferable to other locations. 7. Parking for any event held on the subject property shall be limited to on-site parking only. 8. Music shall be controlled so as to not unreasonably disturb area residents and shall not exceed the ambient noise level as measured from the subject site’s property line. 9. The organization/operator shall provide a contact phone number of a Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 5 responsible person to interested neighbors to resolve parking and/or noise complaints quickly and directly. 10. The Use Permit shall remain in effect for two (2) years from the date of City of Chandler Council approval. Continuation of the Use Permit beyond the expiration date shall require re-application to and approval by the City of Chandler. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised he believes that this is a great project for the neighborhood, but there are concerns due to the size of the project and the amount of parking spaces. He further advised that this is a two year use permit and wants the Applicant to understand that this will have to come back to be approved in two years. Proposed Motion Move Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of Use Permit PLH20- 0057 The Oasis/El Oasis for a one-story community center and community gardens, subject to the conditions as recommended by Planning staff. *d. CANCELLATION OF THE JULY 7, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Approved CHAIRMAN HEUMANN opened the floor to discuss the consent items and informs the audience a speaker card was received for item c, PLH20-0057, The Oasis/El Oasis. He advised the card notated support of item c and that they do not wish to speak unless necessary. PAUL BLUE, 16227 SOUTH FIRST AVENUE is in favor of item c, PLH20-0057, The Oasis/El Oasis, and confirmed he does not wish to speak before the board regarding this item. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PEKAU seconded by COMMISSIONER FLANDERS to approve the consent agenda as to items b, c, and d. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. Chairman Rick Heumann - In Favor Commissioner George Kimble - In Favor Vice Chair David Rose - In Favor Commissioner Gregg Pekau - In Favor Commissioner Matt Eberle- In Favor Commissioner Michael Flanders- In Favor Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 6 ACTION AGENDA ITEM a. PLH20-0030, PLT20-0020 SCHRADER FARMS BUSINESS PARK Approved with Added Stipulations Request Rezoning from Agricultural District (AG-1) to Planned Area Development (PAD) with a Mid-Rise Overlay, Preliminary Development Plan for site layout and building architecture and preliminary plat approval for a light industrial and office business park, and a commercial corner on approximately 71.1 net acres located at the northwest corner of McQueen and Queen Creek roads. Background e Site is currently zoned and used for agricultural land uses. e 71.1 net-acre site Surrounding Land Use Data North Agriculture South Queen Creek Road then City of ____|___ Chandler Solid Waste Services East McQueen Road then dairy farm | West | Faith Family Church and agriculture General Plan and Area Plan Designations Plan Recommended Land Use Proposed Amendment Growth Area 3: IPI General Plan Chandler Airpark - Employment No Change Chandler Airpark Light Industrial and Neighborhood Area Plan Commercial No Change Proposal Industrial Business Park Size e 67.65 net-acres in area Land Use e Light industrial and business park land uses Buildings e Six single-story buildings e 91,900 sq. ft. - 277,700 sq.ft. in size e 46 feet in height to the top of parapet (50 ft max. building height allowed with proposed with Mid- Rise) Site Design e Truck loading courts located on the interior of the site e Berming and screen walls used along perimeter e Angled parking and landscaping to support campus aesthetic along street frontages Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 7 Stained concrete thematic entrances Architecturally coordinated monument signage Phasing Two phases are proposed Phase 1 consists of: e 3 eastern business park buildings e Street improvements along perimeter of entire site e Street frontage landscaping along perimeter of Phase 1 and commercial lot Phase 2 consists of: e Three western business park buildings and remaining street frontage landscaping. Commercial Corner Size 3.46 net-acres Land Use C-2 Commercial land uses per the City of Chandler Land Use Code. Auto-related uses, (fuel stations, oil change services, etc.) will not be permitted Up to one drive through establishment may be developed on-site Building & Site Design and Future PDP No specific building design or site layout is proposed at this time. A future PDP will be reviewed by Council prior to development of the corner The design of the buildings and site layout of the commercial corner will coordinate with the business park site. Phasing The corner parcel will be developed at a separate time and is not included in Phase 1or 2 of the business park. | Review and Recommendation Staff finds the proposed rezoning, mid-rise overlay, preliminary development plan, and preliminary plat to align with the goals of the 2016 General Plan and Chandler Airpark Area Plan. The 2016 General Plan identifies the site as being located within Growth Area 3, Chandler Airpark, where the future land use of “Employment” is guided for. The Chandler Airpark Area Plan more specifically calls for light industrial land uses and neighborhood commercial land uses at the corner. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 8 To align with both the Chandler Airpark Area Plan and the Employment guidance of the 2016 Chandler General Plan, the applicant revised the site plan to avoid proposing buildings that appeared to support distribution as a primary land use. Staff believes the resulting building footprints will better accommodate land uses that will generate employment opportunities and therefor align with the goals of the General Plan. To ensure the proposed corner site is sized and dimensioned appropriately, the applicant has shown staff how the corner could successfully accommodate vehicular access, retention, landscaping, and commercial land uses that are coordinated with the adjacent business park. Since the applicant will not be the developer of the commercial corner site, it is left empty in the proposed site exhibits. A future preliminary development plan will need to be approved by Council prior to it being developed. Public/Neighborhood Outreach e This request was noticed in accordance with the requirements of the Chandler Land Use and Zoning Code. e To comply with CDC social distancing guidelines, the applicant hosted digital neighborhood meetings via Zoom on February 18", and April 12", 2021. The applicant also created a website to share further information with residents. e Residents had concerns regarding the building height, the land uses and associated traffic concerns. The applicant explained the how the site has been planned for employment and commercial land uses by the Chandler Airpark Area Plan and 2016 General Plan. At the time of the meetings, the traffic study had not been reviewed by The City’s Traffic Engineer. The applicant explained that a traffic impact analysis would need to be approved prior to moving forward. After sharing perspectives of the buildings, no further concerns for building design were received. e As of writing this memo, Planning staff has not received further opposition from residents regarding the proposal. Airport Commission Conflict Evaluation Airport Commission meeting April 14, 2021 Motion to find no conflict with existing or planned airport operations. In Favor: 7 Opposed: 0 Absent: 0 Recommended Actions Rezoning Planning staff recommends Planning and Zoning Commission move to recommend approval of the rezoning from Agricultural District (AG-1) to Planned Area Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 9 Development (PAD) for a light industrial and office business park with a Mid-Rise Overlay, and a commercial corner subject to the following conditions: 1. For the parcel legally described in Exhibit “A,” permitted land uses shall be limited to office uses and land uses permitted by-right in the I-1 Planned Industrial District per the Land Use and Zoning Code of the City of Chandler. Showrooms shall also be permitted where they are provided as an ancillary component of a primary use. 2. For the parcel legally described in Exhibit “B,” permitted land uses shall be limited to land uses permitted by-right in the C-2 Community Commercial District per the Land Use and Zoning Code of the City of Chandler. Auto-related uses including but not limited to the sale, rental, repair, fueling or washing of automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, boats, or related accessories shall not be permitted. 3. Development of the overall site shall be in substantial conformance with the Development Booklet, entitled, “Schrader Farms Business Park” and kept on file in the City of Chandler Planning Division, in File No. PLH20-0030, modified by such conditions included at the time the Booklet was approved by the Chandler City Council and/or as thereafter amended, modified, or supplemented by Chandler City Council. 4. Prior to development of the corner parcel, as described in Exhibit “B,” a preliminary development plan for site layout and building design shall be approved by City Council. The architectural design, landscaping, and pedestrian and vehicular access shall be coordinated with the business park to create an integrated campus appearance, 5. Building heights shall not exceed 50 (fifty) feet in height as measured to the top of parapet. 6. Completion of the construction of all required off-site street improvements including but not limited to paving, landscaping, curb, gutter and sidewalks, median improvements and street lighting, as shown in the Phasing Exhibit to achieve conformance with City codes, standard details, and design manuals. 7. Right-of-way dedications to achieve full half-widths, including turn lanes and deceleration lanes, per the standards of the Chandler Transportation Plan. 8. When office is proposed to occupy more than ten percent of a tenant space, a parking analysis shall be submitted for review by the Zoning Administrator. Said analysis shall clearly show the amount of area occupied by all existing and proposed Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 10 land uses and the amount of parking spaces required by the City of Chandler Zoning Code, and the amount of parking spaces provided. Preliminary Development Plan Planning staff recommends Planning and Zoning Commission move to recommend approval of the Preliminary Development Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development shall be in substantial conformance with the Development Booklet, entitled “Schrader Farms Business Park” and kept on file in the City of Chandler Planning Division, in File No. PLH20-0030, modified by such conditions included at the time the Booklet was approved by the Chandler City Council and/or as thereafter amended, modified or supplemented by the Chandler City Council. 2. The enhanced pavement design shown at the main Queen Creek Road entrance shall be duplicated at the main entrances proposed on McQueen Road and Canary Way. 3. The site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 4. The landscaping and all other improvements in all open-spaces shall be maintained by the property owner or property owners’ association and shall be maintained at a level consistent with or better than at the time of planting. 5. The landscaping in all rights-of-way shall be maintained by the adjacent property owner or property owners’ association. 6. Landscaping plans (including for open spaces, rights-of-way, and street medians) and perimeter walls shall be approved by the Planning Administrator. 7. Signage shall be designed in coordination with landscape plans, planting materials, storm water basins, site contours, utility pedestals, and other site appurtenances or features so as not to create problems with sign visibility or prompt the removal of required or proposed landscaping. Building signage shall be architecturally coordinated with the respective facade. 8. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened on all sides. Said screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building. 9. Preliminary Development Plan approval does not constitute Final Development Plan approval; compliance with the details required by all applicable codes and conditions of the City of Chandler and this Preliminary Development Plan shall apply. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 11 10. Fifty percent of the trees planted along the arterial streets shall be a minimum of 36-inch box and 12-feet in height at the time of planting. Note: Stipulations #11 and #12 of the Preliminary Development Plan were added in the addendum memo presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission this date. 11. The applicant shall work with staff to provide an accent material under the metal Awnings. 12. The applicant shall work with staff to create a different paint color scheme for phase two. Preliminary Plat Upon finding consistency with the General Plan and the proposed rezoning and preliminary development plan, Planning staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the following condition: 1. Approval by the City Engineer and Planning Administrator with regard to the details of all submittals required by code or condition. BRENNAN RAY, 1850 NORTH CENTRAL advised he is there on behalf of the Applicant and they have been working on the project for two years. He further advised they had a mindful approach and worked with staff in developing the business park with concerns relative to prior zoning cases and approvals down the road. He stated the area has been designated for employment in the Airpark Area Plan, which has been around since 1998, and it identifies the site for I-2. He pointed out this is one of the few times he has proposed a development that is consistent with every guiding document the City has. He responded to questions brought up in the Study Session regarding landscaping; he advised with regards to landscaping and planting of acacia trees there are no problems and have added stipulation #10 that covers size, height, and quantity of trees. He went on to say they were happy to add the stipulation as they have worked closely with staff regarding the architectural design of this development and also took into account the location at the end of the runway and adjacent to the City's solid waste facility. He responded to questions brought up in the Study Session regarding land use; He stated if they wanted a distribution warehouse they would of gone to the west side where it would have been quicker and distribution here was never the intention. He further stated he understood the perception of the cross docks and the concerns of distribution. He mentioned at the first neighborhood meeting there were twenty-four neighbors and two seated city council members present. He stated they heard concerns of distribution and spoke to staff and changed the design. He pointed out this is not an industrial development where you have a single row of parking, large buildings, and Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 12 truck docks. He further stated there is a substantial amount of parking and the proposed is double the requirement for warehousing and industrial use. He advised they are targeting manufactures and high types of business park users. He mentioned with Intel’s announcement of expansion there will be a need and opportunity for businesses who support intel to co-locate here. He stated there are other types of high manufacturing types of developments in there and from an economic perspective, there is not a demand for distribution, but there is a demand for high tech manufacture with higher employee count. He stated that is why they have provided increased parking. He advised the intention of greater square footage rent, considerably higher than what a distribution user would want. He explained what has been oriented that does not speak towards distribution. He does not believe it is fair to characterize dock doors, as a defining something as distribution and further explained from a use perspective there will be a number of manufactures that will have a distribution type of component. He mentioned as staff advised during study session that they did not want to impose a limit because there is some form of distribution that is going to take place. He advised he understood the concerns regarding an Amazon type of distributor and he does not believe the proposed design and the economics work for that type of user. He presented a slide to the commissioners and explained this slide has been shown to the neighbors and they reached out to the twenty-four that came to the first meeting and let them know the target market and the redesign. He responded to the questions regarding economic impact and presented the corresponding slide to the commission. He advise a consulting group will be finalizing the presented information in a report that can be shared with economic development or anyone who would like to read it in great detail. He further advised of the estimated employment for the project is one thousand five hundred people. He presented a slide with the focus on the direct and indirect jobs and mentions with Intel's announcement there will be need for additional development and investments. He advised the consulting firm is sure about on the numbers presented and he is confident in the numbers in terms of output. He stated he has been coming before this board for sixteen years and would not want to show inaccurate numbers. He further advised he appreciates staff and the work they have put in to ensure the proposed minimized the Commission's concerns and met the high quality that has been requested and required. He would like to believe that the neighbors are pleased with the project, as they went from twenty-four to two. He requested recommendation for approval in accordance with staff. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN asked how the ninety-three million direct labor income comes to eight hundred fifty-two million per year. BRENNAN RAY presented the corresponding slide and responded the eight hundred fifty-two million indicates the total economic activity gain in the region. The Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 13 eight hundred fifty-two million speaks for the indirect costs and indirect benefits where the ninety-three million is the direct labor summary. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN presented statements regarding the amount of jobs and asked how many parking spaces are proposed. BRENNAN RAY advised in terms of total number of parking spaces, the code requires nine hundred forty-six and approximately one thousand six hundred spaces are provided. COMMISSION PEKAU advised if manufacturing is involved, not all of the one thousand five hundred workers would be on site at the same time. COMMISSIONER EBERLY asked if the eight hundred fifty-two million per year is a site gross domestic product (GDP) number. ‘ BRENNAN RAY confirmed with his client that the eight hundred fifty-two million per year is believed to be a GPD number and he will follow up with the creator of the report, who is not here tonight, to ensure this correct. VICE CHAIRMAN ROSE commend the Applicant as they have created what appears to be a great product. He thanked the Applicant for working with staff and making changes. He stated the landscaping looks good and further stated this is an exciting project that will have a positive impact and support the City’s high tech jobs. COMMISSIONER KIMBALL thanked Mr. Ray for the presentation. He asked to explain traffic concerns brought up by citizens. He also asked if the main entrance is on Queen Creek are the trucks are going to come out to Arizona Avenue or to McQueen Road. BRENNAN RAY presented the corresponding slide created by a traffic consultant to show the regional truck traffic estimate. He pointed out the flow of where truck traffic will go and stated trucks usually will not take a left turn, as they prefer turning right. He further stated this report was submitted to the City and they have approved and this is a component. COMMISSIONER EBERLY asked directionally what the Commission and Staff have in mind regarding jobs as server farms are viewed as inadequate because they provided few jobs and before us is a project that will potentially bring in eight hundred fifty-two million dollars annually to the area. He pointed out the location is a great corridor where traffic can hold. He mentioned the Applicant met with the neighbors and started with twenty-four and turned it to a minimal number who are against it. He stated he likes the project. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 14 CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised the challenge as a City is to ensure land use is compatible and drives the greatest economic development. He mentioned warehouse distribution along the I-10 corridor and stressed the importance of the last remaining land in Chandler be utilized at its optimum. He further advised Mr. Ray is correct with the new Intel agreement we want to make sure the building is appropriate. He stated discussions were held with Mr. Ray where he advised they are pursuing higher rent. He asked what drives this to be higher rent. BRENNAN RAY advised Bill Honsaker with JLL National Firm is present and can explain in detail the specifics, but there are a number of factors; square footage, land costs, construction costs, site development costs, design of the building. He explained when we started this process a few years ago what we envisioned for the building is different from what has been presented. He advised there have been several discussions with staff with concerns from beginning regarding distribution, scarcity of land, and building appearance. He presented statements regarding the type of users they are pursuing in terms of payment per square foot and stated the Economic Development Department advised they have someone interested in building C. He further stated when we look at square footage and costs, there a multiple factors that go into higher rent. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN mentioned there are projects around town that need significant extra power and require an access building. He asked where the access building will be built. BRENNAN RAY responded unlike what you would see for a data center, we do not believe the power requirements would require a separate building. It is believed the existing infrastructure has the capacity to provide power. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised Chandler Corporate Center has two buildings that require an accessory building to address their power needs. He further advised one is a manufacturer and there other is not. He presented statements regarding the recessed doors and asked if they are building for a user or for spec. BRENNAN RAY responded phase one is planned to be spec and if we get tenants along the way we would build for that. He explained we are trying to anticipate market needs and the needs of the people who want it. He further explained each tenant will come in with their various requirements, some may require dock bays on the back and some might require less. They are creating a building without knowing but giving enough flexibility for tenants to have it when they come in. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN pointed out when you look at the booklet there are many doors, but they are four feet for cargo vans. He asked staff if the Applicant would be required to come back in the event they found a user that needed major recessed Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 15 wells and heavy duty distribution as a part of the component, for example if they needed twenty full recessed grocery type distribution docks. DAVID DE LA TORRE, PLANNING MANAGER responded as currently proposed there is enough flexibility for staff to approve such request administratively. He mentioned staff could review minor changes while in substantial conformance with the intent of the development. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN pointed out four-foot doors are for cargo vans and incidental distribution, like a company picking up product. He asked if staff could approve a change to a heavy-duty user who needed high eight-foot docks with semi- trucks going through it. DAVID DE LA TORRE, PLANNING MANAGER responded that is something staff can approved administratively. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised that this is one of his concerns. He further advised that he would like to hear from Mr. Bill Honsaker regarding tenants. COMMISSION PEKAU stated there cannot be manufacturing without distribution. He advised you cannot make product without having components shipped in and you cannot produce something to be sold if it does not leave the door. He further advised there has to be some degree of distribution and he does not see a mass distribution center being proposed. He advised the questions are great but he is concerned the Applicant is being put through the ringer. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN stated in his years of experience there are times where economic development is considered on a project. He advised his intent on asking questions is for clarification purposes for council regarding distribution due to the design and cross-docks. He further stated if the questions are answered now they will not have to worry about them down the road. He advised he is hoping that the result is high quality manufacturing with product coming in and out, but that is different from heavy-duty warehouse distribution. COMMISSION PEKAU presented further concerns regarding economic development questioning. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised that the Commission considers best use, architecture, and land use in reference to a project and that economic development goes into it a little bit. He further advises that he believes is a good project, but he is asking the questions now, so it is clarified for five or six years down the road. COMMISSION PEKAU advised that no one can tell what the economy will be like in five or six years. Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 16 CHAIRMAN HEUMANN asked if they are planning to do one big acacia tree and their thoughts on the trees being twelve feet in height on planting. BRENNAN RAY advised the acacia tree was chosen because it is a fast growing tree. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN advised he would like to hear from Bill Honsaker of JLL. BILL HONSAKER, 3131 EAST CAMEL BACK ROAD advised he has been working on this project with the team and understands the concerns raised. He pointed out several buildings that have been referenced during the meeting; FedEx, Amazon, UPS, but their buildings look nothing like what is proposed. He further advised UPS has a massive building with dock doors on both sides and Amazon is a box with parking for vans, dock doors on both side, and a unique design. He stated they were very deliberate on how the design was laid out as they heard the commission and neighborhood and changed the design. He pointed out single side loading is on the interior, so the exterior is aesthetically pleasing and how parking is increased. He further stated because of ASU and Intel, they are cognitive in an economic development perspective, community perspective, and citizen perspective. He emphasized the buildings the Commission is concerned about is not what we are trying to do here. He mentioned Mr. Ray presented a slide with a number of types of users that are out there. Mr. Honsaker advised he is working with a cooperation that is looking to land in Chandler, a manufacturer looking for a building similar to what we are proposing. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN thanked the presenter for the clarification. CHAIRMAN HEUMANN opened the floor to discuss action item a. He advised that that it is a long process, but it is important and the best thing for the City that questions are asked when a project like this comes forward. MOVED BY VICE CHAIR ROSE seconded by COMMISSIONER KIMBALL to approve action item a with added stipulations. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. Chairman Rick Heumann - In Favor Commissioner George Kimble - In Favor Vice Chair David Rose - In Favor Commissioner Gregg Pekau - In Favor Commissioner Matt Eberle- In Favor Commissioner Michael Flanders- In Favor 5. BRIEFING ITEMS: None 6. MEMBERS COMMENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 16, 2021 - Page 17 7. CALENDAR The next regular meeting will be held on Wednesday, July 21, 2021, in the Chandler City Council Chambers, 88 E. Chicago Street. 6. ADJOURNMENT The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:19 p.m. Me Rick Heumann, Chairman a. Kevin\Mayo, Secretary