AND ZONING COMMISSION
12425 W. BELL ROAD, SUITE D-100
SURPRISE AZ 85374
August 19, 2003
Call to Order:
Senft called the Regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting to
order at 6:00 p.m. at the Surprise City Hall – 12425 West Bell Road, Suite
D-100, Surprise, Arizona 85374, on Tuesday, August 19, 2003. Also in attendance with Chairman Ken
Senft were: Vice Chairman Dan Morris
and Commissioners Jan Blair, Tony Segarra, Randy Nachtigall, and Mike
Woodard. Commissioner Bob Gonzales
Attorney, Jeff Blilie; Community and Economic Development Director, Phil
Testa; Planning Manager, Scott Phillips; Planner, Grant Penland; Planner,
Vice Mayor Don Cox
Approval of Planning
and Zoning Meeting minutes of August 5, 2003
Segarra made a motion to approve the August 5, 2003,
minutes. Blair seconded the
motion. 5 yes votes. 1 abstained (Morris). 1 absent (Gonzales). Motion carried.
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING: n/a
ITEMS REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING: n/a
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration and Action – Site Plan – Olive
Garden Restaurant at Surprise Marketplace
Planner, Jochums, gave the presentation.
General discussion took place regarding the outside patio area being
close to highway; highway higher elevation than patio area; landscaping;
entry monument to PAD; when construction is to start; parking spaces;
crosswalk areas to protect customers; problem with sidewalk dead ending; and
Applicant, Steve Hale, addressed the issue of the patio. He pointed out that the traffic is moving
away from patio area and that, with everything taken into consideration, the
applicant feels it’s best place for patio.
Construction to start in within next month; 30- 60 days to complete;
pilasters and large pots for flowers, etc. seasonal; sign copy for center as
a whole with a lot of landscaping.
Regarding the parking spaces and how pedestrian friendly the site is,
the applicant spoke of the shared field of parking spaces and detailed the
justification behind dead ending the sidewalk to protect the pedestrian by
encouraging them to use the pedestrian spine already built into the
site. Woodard wants designated area
for walkway. If commission wants to
stipulate this, staff would like to consult with engineering to confirm.
made a motion to approve Application SP03-185, subject to stipulations
a – n. Nachtigall seconded the
motion. 5 yes votes. 1 no vote (Woodard – sidewalk issue). 1
absent (Gonzales). Morris then made a
motion to reconsider the original motion in order to add stipulation o, which stated “The applicant shall extend the sidewalk
along the Grand Avenue entrance further into the site to provide safe
pedestrian access across the entrance; subject to the review and approval of
the City Engineer.” Segarra
seconded the motion to reconsider.
Motion approved. Morris made a
motion to approve Application SP03-185, subject to stipulations a – o,
with o added as noted above, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Nachtigall seconded the motion. 6 yes votes. 1 absent (Gonzales).
Consideration and Action – Site Plan – Grand Hotel Plaza Hampton Inn
Planner, Jochums, gave the presentation.
General discussion took
place regarding staff’s desire for additional
window articulation; the amount of setback; problem with the design being too
flat, too institutional, too bland; landscaping issues overall and,
specifically, along Grand Avenue; and necessary improvements to Grand
Applicant, Paul Vanderveen, detailed problems with staff
recommendations because such articulation draws attention away from visual on
wings; agreed to stipulation added regarding necessary improvements to Grand
Marketplace Way. Discussion took
place regarding landscaping required on Grand Avenue. Applicant has concerns over drainage
plans, not timely to do it all at once as pieces are sold off. Cannot predict drainage uses. If prep area, afraid they’ll do the work
only to have area ripped up. Staff
points out that the master developer is responsible for landscaping. Staff and commission agreed on the need to
control the perception from Grand Avenue.
Necessary to get some of the landscaping done initially and fill it
out as the pads are sold off. Pads
will come in for consideration with preliminary landscape plans for approval. The master site developer responsible for
landscaping frontal strip along Grand Avenue. Stipulation added regarding applicant providing a rough grade
made a motion to approve Application SP03-210, subject to stipulations a – q, with “a” amended as such
“Development shall be in accordance with the plan narrative date stamped
August 12, 2003, and the elevations date stamped August 18, 2003”; old
“k” deleted and replaced with “During future submittals for further development of
the subject property, the conditions of the private drive known as Grand
Marketplace Way shall be reviewed by the City and improvements may be
required if determined to be necessary”; and “q” added - “Applicant shall
rough grade the outlying pads and provide a decomposed granite ground cover,”
attached hereto as Exhibit B. Segarra
seconded the motion. 6 yes
votes. 1 absent (Gonzales). Motion carried.
Consideration and Action – Site Plan Amendment – CVS Pharmacy
Planner, Penland, gave the presentation and noted that the agenda was
in error, that staff was recommending disapproval of the CVS Pharmacy site
General discussion took place regarding lack of consistency between
finished product and originally approved plans; why amendment is being
requested after the fact; problem with height elevation; applicant’s
dismissal of the city process; how commission expects the product that was
originally approved; single hump vs. double hump; and if repairing the
existing structure and attempting to match the materials up would make the
Applicant, Jason Morris, developed a history and timeline delineating
communication with staff. During the
construction process, the developer decided the architecture was detracting
from an overall look of structure and site.
A desire to simplify the line so that it did not detract from the
building, initiated the change to flat parapet; more true to Mediterranean
design; southwestern wanting to flatten out parapet. Staff wanted decorative corners as
approved. Staff reviewed. Miscommunication regarding the buildup of
the corners, builder believed that if element was raised staff would approve
of this. Staff reiterated that this
does not meet intent of site plan as approved. CVS corporate wants to work within individual municipalities,
customizing building to specific site.
Questioned how great of an impact granting this amendment would have
on the citizens of Surprise, customers of CVS. The applicant noted that this became a bigger issue than
anticipated. He feels the changes are
not discernible, that the height has not changed. Ultimately the direction from staff was to bring this back
before commission as an amendment.
Minimal nature of the change is not critical for success of site. Feels staff is nitpicking.
Chairperson Senft stated that it was the builders’ responsibility to
wait for approval before initiating action.
Setting a precedent, asking for amendment after the fact. The commission expects the product that
Planning Manager, Phillips, spoke of the Planning and Design
Guidelines and the desire to create the little piece of identity for
Surprise, which involves keeping in mind the overall content. Details such as these add a little extra
flare, little extra style. Which is
what the City of Surprise expects.
Staff stands behind decision to not support – changes the feel of the
Applicant detailed the pedestrian links, landscaping added, etc.;
consider themselves very community conscious. Thought the change was minor and would be administratively
approved – made an assumption and built out.
Made a mistake, seeking a concession, offered to make a charitable
Director, Testa, spoke of this as being an issue of principal. It’s up to the commission to determine how
they want to enforce this principal.
suggested approving with the understanding that because the building is
already constructed and the change made is not a major architectural change,
the changes are not significant enough to warrant denial of this
Segarra made a motion to approve Application
SPA03-234, subject to stipulations a – f. Morris seconded the motion. 2 yes votes. 4 no votes. 1 absent
(Gonzales). Motion did not
carry. Woodard made a motion to deny
Application SPA03-234. Blair seconded
this motion. 4 yes votes. 2 no votes. 1 absent (Gonzales). Motion to deny carried.
ITEMS REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration and Action – Conditional Use Permit – Surprise Village
Planner, Penland, gave the presentation.
General discussion took
place regarding inappropriate use for location, noting retail sales and office uses surrounding
this site; belongs in an industrial area; height of structure; third facility
of its sort in close proximity; ramps; exterior storage; security of site;
lighting; hours of operation; design; canopy; materials used; strategic
placement of mature landscaping; and how the artist’s rendition compares to
the actual product
Planner, Penland, stated applicant decision based on market
research. Staff also felt the
structure is appropriate for the area because it blocks the view of the side
of WalMart building from Litchfield road. The structure would be a positive
attribute to site.
Applicant, James Day, addressed the commissions concerns stating that
there are no ramps on facility. No
loading docks. Handicap ramp,
yes. No roll up doors. Typically users are primarily for
household overflow. Six or seven cars
at a time, average stay 15 minutes.
As far as lighting, their goal is not for signage such as U-Haul. Automatic timer, lights will go off when
body not present. Site lighting is
consistent with shopping center.
Right now windows are clear but applicant wouldn’t object to clouded
glass. Commission suggested adding
stip not to use clear glass and not to use bright lights. Applicant agrees with this. Applicant notes there will not be any
exterior storage and that the hours of operation will be consistent with
shopping center. Applicant then
detailed the entrance design and materials used to create a unique
structure. Applicant notes the front
desk is right inside front door.
Manager will know what’s going on.
Morton Van Horne, the developer representing Americorp, addressed
questions regarding the interior and overall height of the building.
Opened public hearing. Ken
Christopherson feels a self-storage facility is very inappropriate for the
area as is the height of building.
Staff read into record a letter of objection regarding the CUP from
Alan and Ilene McDonald – felt use was inconsistent, an inappropriate use for
Closed public hearing.
In response to commission’s question, staff noted self-storage
facility is a permissible use in C-2; that a zoning text amendment is an
option for the commission.
made a motion to approve Application CUP03-015, subject to stipulations a – m. Morris seconded the motion. 3 yes votes. 3 no votes. 1 absent (Gonzales). Motion to approve did not carry the majority, therefore the request for Application
CUP03-015 was denied.
Consideration and Action – Conditional Use Permit – Sierra Montana
Master Sign Program
Planning Manger, Phillips, gave a brief presentation.
General discussion took place regarding how the plan and the lack of
any dimension, as presented, left the commission with more questions than
answers and an entrance site plan giving more dimension/detail was requested
by the commission.
Applicant, Debbie Oleskow, and Christina Long, with Taylor Woodrow,
agreed to rework the master sign plan and bring it back before commission
with further details on how the builder’s signs could possibly be used as a
permanent structure denoting directions to existing neighborhoods in the
development as suggested by Commissioner Morris.
There were no
Morris made a
motion to continue Application CUP03-199 to the September 2, 2003,
commission meeting. Woodard seconded
the motion. 6 yes votes. 1 absent (Gonzales). Motion carried.
OPEN CALL TO
There were no public comments.
CURRENT EVENTS REPORT:
and Commissioners: Chairperson Senft introduced seven
topics: CPTED, General Plan 2020,
Landscaping, Traffic, Architectural Design, Military Airports, and emergency
services, for consideration by the commission members. He would like to have each commissioner
accept the assignment of identifying which one of these topics that they
would like to become the ‘expert’ in for the commission.
Vice-Chair should be forwarded to staff for consideration at the September 2,
2003, commission meeting.
Community and Economic Development Director:
reiterated the importance of all commissioners to attend the Arizona Department
of Commerce training scheduled to take place on Tuesday, September 23rd. The training will take place in the NW
Regional Library conference room on the Surprise Recreation
Campus at 16089 N. Bullard Ave. and
will run from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM, with a light meal served just prior to the
start of the meeting.
in attending any of the mobile workshops offered at the APA annual conference
in Glendale should contact staff as soon as possible so that arrangements can
be made. Once again, the following
commissioner/council members have been registered to attend the Arizona
Planning Association 2003 Annual Conference taking place October 15 – 17,
2003, at the Glendale Civic Center: Jan Blair, Ken Senft, Randy Nachtigall,
Dan Morris, Don Cox, Mike Woodard.
He also wanted to
clarify that the planning staff does NOT administratively approve major
deviations as suggested by the CVS applicant. What the commission approves is what is built.
There was no further business.
On a motion duly made and seconded, Chairperson Ken Senft declared the
meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M.
Zoning Commission Community
and Economic Development