August 21, 2024 Study Session Minutes

Meeting Minutes
Planning and Zoning Commission
Study Session

August 21, 2024 | 4:00 p.m. ann
Chandler City Council Chambers Fooe., CHANDLER
88 E. Chicago Street, Chandler, AZ (| Community of Innovation
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Heumann at 4:08 p.m.
Roll Call
Commission Attendance Staff Attendance
Chair Rick Heumann Matthew Dunbar, Budget and Policy Director
Commissioner Michael Quinn Kevin Mayo, Planning Administrator
Commissioner Rene Lopez Lauren Schumann, Principal Planner
Commissioner Charlotte Golla Alisa Petterson, Senior Planner
Commissioner Ryan Schwarzer Mika Liburd, Associate Planner

Darsy Omer, Associate Planner
Absent Taylor Manemann, Associate Planner
Vice Chair Sherri Koshiol - Excused Thomas Allen, Assistant City Attorney
Commissioner Kyle Barichello - Excused Julie San Miguel, Clerk

Scheduled/Unscheduled Public Appearances

Members of the audience may address any item not on the agenda. State Statute prohibits the
Board or Commission from discussing an item that is not on the agenda, but the Board or
Commission does listen to your concerns and has staff follow up on any questions you raise.

Briefing
A. City Capital Project Funding/Bond Election discussion.
Budget documents were presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission as visual aids to the

presentation.

CHAIR HEUMANN announced the Study Session will start with a Briefing on the City’s Capital
Project Funding/Bond Election.

MATTHEW DUNBAR, BUDGET AND POLICY DIRECTOR introduced himself and stated he was
present to provide an update on the capital project funding issues the city was encountering
along with the potential for a bond election. He provided an outline of the topics he planned to
cover and presented a video that explained the purpose of bonds and bond elections. He
emphasized that bonds are essential to Chandler's current capital plan for the next ten years,
which relies heavily on bond funding for 2.5 billion dollars’ worth of capital projects. He
explained that 68% of the plan is funded by general obligation or geo bonds and excise tax
revenue obligations, with the rest coming from current revenues (22%), grants (7%), and system
development fees or impact fees (2%). He further explained the reason the city needed
additional geo bond authorization is due to inflationary impacts on steel, concrete, asphalt, and
copper. He stated the previous bond authorization in was expected to last seven or eight years,
but due to inflation, the authorization will only last four years. He presented a timeline and
pointed out where the city could run into issues with the existing bond authorization. He
explained that typically the city sells bonds every two years and pointed out the documents
presented on the dais lists all categories with amounts needed over the years. He further stated
which categories would be short on authorization and require additional authorization from
voters by 2027. He advised of the possibility of a bond election in 2025 or 2026, noting that 2026
is the latest that this could go before the voters if the city continues to use secondary property
taxes as a funding mechanism. He further stated the fall of 2026 would be a busy election year
with the Mayor's seat, Council Member seats, charter amendments, and home rule on the ballot,
which could lead to voter fatigue and having too much on one ballot. He stated it is the city’s
preference to go forward with a bond election in 2025 that could last seven to eight years,
depending on what is determined through a subcommittee process. He reviewed Chandler's
bond election history, noting that historically, the city went to voters every three or four years for
additional authorization except in 2008 where due to the great recession many projects were
put on hold and the authorization lasted fourteen years. The last bond election in 2021 provided
$272 million in authorization and while it was anticipated to last 7-8 years, it will only last 4-5
years. He emphasized the city’s success in past bond elections and the importance of the Bond
Exploratory Committee in helping to educate voters. He explained the Bond Exploratory
Committee was put together by mayor and council and was made up of 49 members of the
community, who would listen project details, visit sites, and spread the information to neighbors
and other community members. He mentioned mayor and council have asked to do something
similar as what was done in the last authorization and outlined the timeline for a potential bond
election in 2025. He mentioned other cities in Arizona who were facing similar challenges with
capital project funding and were considering bond elections or other funding mechanisms. He
concluded by explaining that he is visiting Boards and Commissions to find out if there is any
direct feedback or if anyone had interest in volunteering. He stated that he is available for any
questions and thanked the Commission.

Page 2 of 9

COMMISSIONER GOLLA asked what is the cost difference between holding an election in a non-
election year versus an election year and if the city went forward in 2025 if they could share
costs with Chandler Unified School District (CUSD) if they were to hold a bond election at the
same time.

MATTHEW DUNBAR, BUDGET AND POLICY DIRECTOR pointed out there would be a cost
difference and stated an election in 2026 would coincide with the county and general elections,
which would lower costs for the city. He stated that an unsplit election in 2025 would cost
around $200,000, but the city could split costs with other entities like CUSD or other school
districts. He further stated that the costs would not be a 50/50 split as some of the costs go to a
pamphlet that we have to produce, but some of the actual election costs themselves could be

split.
CHAIR HEUMANN asked if the city was still refinancing bonds, given the current interest rates.

MATTHEW DUNBAR, BUDGET AND POLICY DIRECTOR confirmed the city was still looking into
refinancing bonds where possible, though many of their bonds were issued during times of very
low interest rates, making it harder to find opportunities to save money. He mentioned that
Chandler's AAA bond rating allowed them to secure very favorable rates.

CHAIR HEUMANN confirmed there were no further questions or comments from the
Commission Members and thanked the Budget and Policy Director for his presentation.

B. Presentation of the Chandler Downtown Region Area Plan Update.
CHAIR HEUMANN announced the next Briefing will be on the Chandler Downtown Region Area

Plan Update.

ALISA PETERSON, SENIOR PLANNER introduced herself and outlined her presentation. She
explained the different between the general plan, which provides city-wide guidance on future
development, and area plans, which are more specific and implement general plan goals
through defined objectives and policies. She emphasized that the area plan would be based on
community input, reflecting what citizens want for the future development of the downtown
region. She presented the existing related plans, such as the 2016 Chandler General Plan and
the 1995 Chandler Redevelopment Element and mentioned newer plans, like the 2006 South
Arizona Avenue Entry Corridor Plan and the 2010 South Arizona Avenue Design Guidelines,
along with others related to transportation, water infrastructure, and economic development.
She displayed maps showing the Chandler Redevelopment Area and the South Arizona Avenue
Corridor Area Plan, stating that the current proposed area plan map encompassed the region
from Ray Road in the north to the 202 Freeway in the south, and from Alma School Road to
McQueen Road. She explained that certain areas were excluded from this effort and pointed out
the area for reconsideration are divided into five districts: Northern, San Marcos, the Historic

Page 3 of 9

Downtown, Eastern, and Southern districts. She detailed the goals of the plan, including
identifying unique characteristics, aligning with existing community goals, and creating flexibility
for redevelopment while incorporating adaptive reuse. She assured the commissioners that the
historic downtown would not undergo any zoning changes or boundary shifts. She presented
the timeline for the project, which began in February of 2024 and is expected to conclude with
final approval from the council in January 2025. She pointed out staff is currently gathering
feedback from the community, and this will be ongoing through surveys and continuous
community outreach. She stated that events will be held to engage the community with
upcoming workshops scheduled for September at the Downtown Library and November at the
ASU Innovation Center. She stated the latter event will featuring an augmented reality (AR)
immersion event to provide attendees with a 3D experience of the proposed environments. She
concluded the presentation by describing the AR immersion event, which would allow attendees
to experience 3D renderings of the downtown area and provide feedback on elements such as
density and setbacks. She stated the event is designed to ensure that the city is aligned with
what the community desires for the downtown region’s future.

CHAIR HEUMANN thanked Alisa for the presentation and asked if the plan would come back to
the Planning and Zoning Commission or go directly to the City Council.

ALISA PETERSON, SENIOR PLANNER deferred the question to the Planning Administrator.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR confirmed that the plan update would come back
before the Planning Commission for a formal briefing and deliberation on what had been
gathered from the community. He explained that the Briefing this date is to make the
Commission aware of the update and the process. He emphasized that the Downtown Region
Area Plan Update will ultimately the community's plan as it will be shaped by their input.

CHAIR HEUMANN expressed his appreciation for the efforts of staff and commented on the
ongoing conversations about expanding the downtown area in various directions. He asked if
eminent domain would be discussed as part of the plan.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR stated while eminent domain was occasionally
necessary it is not favored by the city. He stressed the area plan update is a guiding document
focused on planning policy, and eminent domain was not a significant aspect of this effort.

CHAIR HEUMANN presented statements regarding eminent domain not being an option unless
absolutely necessary.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR mentioned the timing of the plan update was perfect
due to the changes in the market and pointed out the differences between the 1995 and 2006
plans. He stated the original plan anticipated large-scale redevelopment, but what had emerged

Page 4 of 9

was smaller, adaptive reuse projects. He identified the different districts and explained that the
updated plan would address these market shifts and define the character of each district.

CHAIR HEUMANN presented concerns of Chandler becoming like downtown Tempe, filled with
high-rises. He asked if there would be limits on building heights in the plans for each district

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR replied that is an option and while the current plan
does not specify height limits, it did include goals to ensure compatibility between new
developments and existing neighborhoods. He envisioned that the updated plan would continue
to emphasize compatibility and proper transitioning between buildings of different heights
instead of the use of specific height limits.

CHAIR HEUMANN mentioned that earlier plans for the south area used staggered building
heights and stressed the importance of avoiding abrupt height transitions.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR pointed out that the plan used words and graphics to
clearly communicate the intent behind guidelines.

COMMISSIONER LOPEZ asked if the plan would change any allowances for adaptive reuse or
expand those allowances as it is his understanding that it is restrictive in the downtown area.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR explained the adaptive reuse overlay policy was
adopted by ordinance and the area plan update, which is adopted by resolution is not strong
enough to overwrite it. He mentioned staff anticipates elements of the adaptive reuse policy
being included in the new plan.

COMMISSIONER LOPEZ questioned why Ray Road was chosen as the northern boundary for the
area plan update and whether adaptive reuse could be extended north into other parts of
Chandler, therefore houses on the main street can be used as businesses.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR responded that Ray Road was chosen due to
feedback from businesses and property owners who felt that area needed identity like Uptown.
He stated this area is closer to downtown than to Uptown Chandler, which led to the decision to
include it in the plan.

COMMISSIONER LOPEZ asked if the plan would take advantage of federal dollars for the
economic redevelopment region or adaptive reuse for troubled properties.

KEVIN MAYO, PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR responded that staff has yet to looked at the overlap
between the federal economic redevelopment map and the area plan, but it was something staff
can consider and look at.

Page 5 of 9

CHAIR HEUMANN confirmed there were no further questions or comments from the
Commission Members and thanked staff for the briefing.

Consent Agenda and Discussion

1. June 5, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes

Move Planning and Zoning Commission approve Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
minutes of the Study Session of June 5, 2024, and Regular Meeting of June 5, 2024.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no questions or comments from the Commission
Members.

2. July 23, 2024 Design Review Committee Regular Meeting Minutes
Move Planning and Zoning Commission approve Design Review Committee meeting minutes of
the Regular Meeting of July 23, 2024.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no questions or comments from the Commission
Members.

3. PLH22-0056 TIPSY EGG & THE UNCOMMON

MIKA LIBURD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Entertainment
Use Permit time extension to continue to allow live indoor and outdoor entertainment, at 1 E
Boston Street, generally located % mile south of the southeast corner of Arizona Avenue and
Chandler Boulevard.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no questions or comments from the Commission
Members and pointed out there are several similar items on the agenda this evening and
emphasized the importance of being sensitive to the neighborhood and ensuring stipulations,
such as having a contact phone number, were in place. He stated given the distance of the
property from homes; he did not foresee any issues on this case.

4. PLH23-0065 MAGNOLIA

DARSY OMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Preliminary
Development Plan approval for single-family housing product to be constructed in a new
subdivision that is generally located % mile east of the northeast corner of Cooper Road and
Riggs Road.

An Addendum Memorandum was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission with a
revised stipulation per the Applicant's request.

Page 6 of 9

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN recalled discussions during the Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting
about optional features, such as garage doors. He asked if the garage doors shown were
optional or standard.

DASRY OMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER deferred the question to the Applicant.
CHAIRMAN HEUMANN requested the Applicant come forward to answer the question.

BRENNAN RAY, APPLICANT confirmed what is marked as optional in the exhibits is indeed
optional and what is marked standard is standard. He assured the Commission that it is not the
Applicants intention to present materials or something for garage doors and then build
something different. He clarified that it is the Applicant's intention to build something that is
consistent with discussions held in Design Review Committee (DRC).

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN suggested the Applicant review and provide details before the Regular
Session instead of a full presentation.

BRENNAN RAY, APPLICANT agreed and thanked the Commission.

5. PLH24-0006 PONDEROSA DISPENSARY

DASRY OMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Use Permit time
extension to continue to allow for the colocation of an ancillary Medical Marijuana Facility in
conjunction with its affiliated onsite Medical Marijuana Cultivation Site and Medical Marijuana

Infusion Food Establishment located at 318 S. Bracken Lane.

COMMISSIONER LOPEZ stated the first time this came through there were parking concerns and
asked if there were any issues with parking.

DASRY OMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER confirmed there were no issues with parking.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN noted the one-year time limitation was a legal requirement and there
was no option to extend it beyond that.

DASRY OMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER confirmed the one-year term was set by code.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no further questions or comments from the
Commission Members.

Page 7 of 9

6. PLH24-0007 SAWTOOTH BAR AND GRILL

MIKA LIBURD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Entertainment
Use Permit time extension to continue to allow for live indoor entertainment, speakers and tv
screens, at 4929 W Ray Road, generally located at the southeast corner Ray and Rural roads.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no questions or comments from the Commission
Members.

7. PLH24-0008 FUN FUSION LEARNING CENTER

Move Planning and Zoning Commission withdraw PLH24-0008 Fun Fusion Learning Center, Use
Permit to allow residential childcare for up to 10 children in an existing single-family home as
requested by the applicant. (APPLICANT REQUESTS WITHDRAWAL)

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no questions or comments from the Commission
Members and mentioned the request for Use Permit has been withdrawn.

8. PLH24-0013 LEGENDS SHOWCASE BAR & GRILL

MIKA LIBURD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Entertainment
Use Permit approval to allow for indoor live entertainment, speakers and tv screens at 2386 N
Alma School Road, generally located north of the northwest corner of Alma School and Warner
roads.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were further questions or comments from the
Commission Members.

9. PLH24-0014 CELONI HOSPITALITY, LLC DBA RECREO CANTINA

MIKA LIBURD, ASSOCIATE PLANNER presented details regarding the request for Entertainment
Use Permit time extension to continue to allow live indoor and outdoor entertainment, at 28 S
San Marcos Place, generally located % mile south of the southwest corner of Arizona Avenue and
Chandler Boulevard.

CHAIRMAN HEUMANN confirmed there were no further questions or comments from the
Commission Members.

10. Notice of Cancellation of the September 4, 2024, Planning and Zoning Commission
Hearing

Move Planning and Zoning Commission cancel the September 4, 2024 Planning and Zoning
Commission Hearing.

Page 8 of 9

Action Agenda Item 11 and Discussion

11. PLH24-0009 Chandler and Cooper Retail/ Shops A
Request Preliminary Development Plan approval for a new drive-through building located at the
northwest corner of Cooper Road and Chandler Boulevard.

Move Planning and Zoning Commission recommend denial of Preliminary Development Plan,
PLH24-0009 Chandler and Cooper Retail - Shops A for a new drive-through building.

Alternative Motion:

Move Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Development Plan,
PLH24-0009 Chandler and Cooper Retail - Shops A for a new drive-through building, subject to
the conditions as recommended by Planning staff.

Calendar
The next Study Session will be held before the Regular Meeting on Wednesday, September 18,
2024, in the Chandler City Council Chambers, 88 E. Chicago Street, Chandler, Arizona.

Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

awe Me

Kevin \Vlayo, Secretary Rick Heumann, Chairman

Page 9 of 9