(These minutes are subject to correction and or approval on June 21, 2005

Donna Stanley

Informations

• Publié par: Orgie
• Nombre de lectures: 40
• Langue: English

Extrait

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PINETOP-LAKESIDE, ARIZONA HELD
THTUESDAY, OCTOBER 4 , 2005, AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.

ITEM NO. 1, CALL TO ORDER AND ASCERTAIN QUORUM:

Chairman Irwin called the Regular Meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Roll call was taken and a
quorum established.

ROLL CALL: Present Absent
Chairman Stephanie Irwin X

Vice Chairman Tim Williams X
Gretchen Forbeck X Brian Gilbert X
Georgia Dysterheft X
Richard Smith X


STAFF PRESENT:

Paul Esparza, Community Development Director; Jessica Covey, Staff Assistant.

ITEM NO. 2, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

Chairman Irwin led the Pledge of Allegiance.

ITEM NO. 3, CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE WORK
SESSION AND MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 20th, 2005:

COMMISSIONER FORBECK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE
WORK SESSION AND THE REGULAR MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 20th, 2005
THWITH THE MINOR CORRECTIONS NOTED IN THE OCTOBER 4 , 2005
WORK SESSION. COMMISSIONER DYSTERHEFT SECONDED THE MOTION
AND IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NO. 4, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

Action taken as a result of public comment is limited to directing Staff to study the matter
and reschedule for further consideration at a later date. Commission may provide limited
response to items that are not on the agenda. Presentations are limited to three (3) minutes.

Mr. Lon Dorsay said he wanted to discuss an item that has come up repeatedly over the past
meetings. He said the citizens have been asking why Pinetop-Lakeside cannot restrict
certain types of businesses. He cited the last Minutes that said two Commissioners said the
Commission could not restrict free trade and developer rights. He said there are many
municipalities that have passed ordinances that restrict chain restaurants and other
businesses from entering their communities. Mr. Dorsay asked the Commission to direct
1Staff to put an initiative on the ballot that restricts certain chain stores, like the Dollar
General. He said it is not illegal or unethical to do this. Mr. Dorsay said small
communities are given a lot of latitude in planning and he wants the Commission to address
this on an agenda item in the future. He also said the Commissioners should issue a
correction to their response that they cannot restrict free trade. Chairman Irwin said she
believed those comments were made in the context of the current law in effect.
Commissioner Forbeck said the attorney, not the Commission, would have to give advice on
ballots.

Rob Ingels approached the Commission and expressed his appreciation for their hard work
and volunteer hours. He asked the Commission to take the initiative for more public
awareness. He said additional posting places would be a good start. He also mentioned that
more of the zoning criteria could be on the walls so people could review it; he referred to the
design criteria review board hanging in the Council Chambers. He said that City 4 TV
would be a great avenue for public awareness. He said it would be nice if there were a push
from the Commission to increase public awareness. Mr. Ingels also suggested the
Commission hold a Town Hall to tell the citizens how they apply zoning laws to
developments in making their decisions, or a forum on how small government operates.
Commissioner Forbeck said she liked the idea of a sealed community bulletin board at the
post office.

Toni Russell said she was concerned with the Subdivision Regulations. Ms. Russell said she
was a member of the committee for Subdivision Regulations and she voiced her concern
about the limited Town water supply. She said she asked developers to be required to
guarantee a one hundred year water supply and the consultant agreed with her. She said the
Town Engineer, Jim Matteson said we have plenty of water. Ms. Russell said the aquifer is
flowing and it does not stay constant. She said she is very concerned about allowing all this
growth without consideration for water. She said she is also a member of the Committee on
Impact Fee studies and there is discussion that commercial properties may not be charged
impact fees. Ms. Russell said she believes both commercial and residential need to be
charged impact fees and it will not deter businesses from coming to the area.
Commissioner Dysterheft asked if Ms. Russell had seen or researched surveys that say there
is a water concern in our area. Ms. Russell said she did research on the internet and that
many counties are struggling to maintain water supplies. Commissioner Forbeck asked if
Ms. Russell had read the water supply element in the General Plan. Commissioner Forbeck
said the state is looking at making this area a managed water area. Mr. Esparza said he
believes impact fees are predominately charged on residential permits. Ms. Russell said she
disagreed and there are many places that charge impact fees on commercial also. Mr.
Esparza clarified that most the permits issued are residential.

ITEM NO. 5, DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND ACTION RE: PINETOP
MEADOW MASTER SITE PLAN. A PROPOSED MASTER PLAN SITE FOR THE 48-
ACRE PUD ZONED PINETOP MEADOW AREA. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED
SOUTH OF WHITE MOUNTAIN BLVD AND EAST OF PENROD LANE. APN(S) 211-
44-066C, 006F, 006G AND 008D. THE APPLICANT IS PINETOP MEADOWS, LLC.

Mr. Esparza gave a Staff review of the project (see Pinetop Meadow Memorandum and
Minutes from September 18, 2005). Mr. Esparza said the applicant would like to have this
Master Plan confirmed by the Commission because there were some changes. Staff would
2like to have approval so that all future submittals will be tied to this Master Plan. Mr.
Esparza said if this were approved, then any future changes would need to come back for
approval. Mr. Esparza said the commercial portion has changed and needs to remain
flexible because the applicant is participating in the Buxton Study, which will help
determine the ideal commercial tenants for the area. He said the Town Council made it
clear that a portion of the project must be commercial, retail or office and that is proposed
on this Master Plan. The project planner, Terry Galloway introduced himself and said he is
from the Galloway group in Irvine, California. He said the change in plan was initiated
because he was charged with bringing the project in compliance with the relevant Town
zoning codes. Mr. Galloway said he walked the property, applied the codes and talked to
the neighbors before coming up with this Master Plan. He said the most significant change
was the Town standard requiring sixty-foot roads. He said that requirement forced changes
in the layout of the project. In speaking with the neighbors, he learned street parking was a
concern. He understood that many seasonal owners would bring recreational vehicles so he
created paving on both sides of the streets to allow for more parking. He said the project is
aisle (alley) loaded with two-car covered parking to help keep residents cars off the street.
Mr. Galloway said his meetings with the nearby church resulted in an overflow parking lot
for their use. Mr. Galloway said he added Highway 260 access to try to eliminate traffic on
Penrod. Mr. Galloway said he believes the commercial portion is also limited by
topography and water concerns. He said the commercial shown now would not interfere
with jurisdictional water flow and would not disturb the riparian water area. He said the
town homes are an attached unit concept and the residential density is about 9.9 dwelling
units per acre. Mr. Galloway said in his experience, hydrology reports and environmental
studies often reduce the dwelling units per acre. Mr. Galloway said the project would be
built in phases. Phase I will include the entrance from Penrod to the private street section of
the thirteen estate lots. Mr. Galloway said he was notified that Mr. and Mrs. Ingels would
like to see an estate lot rather than open space in the area that borders their property. Mr.
Galloway said he would have trouble putting that lot behind the gated private estate lot area,
but he would redesign the corner in some fashion to include the estate lot they are
requesting. Mr. Galloway asked the Commission to consider this plan with the modification
of the open space to an estate lot, which would increase the overall dwelling units to 214.
Commissioner Forbeck asked if the applicant would sign a development agreement
guaranteeing the development of the commercial area within a specified amount of time.
She said the Town relies on sales tax dollars and the commercial is very important. Mr.
Galloway said he did not have the authority to commit to that, but he thought the applicant
would entertain discussion about an agreement if it were mutually beneficial. He
emphasized that the applicant has made a contribution to the Buxton study and the applicant
is primarily a commercial developer. He said he believes the developer is seriously
committed to the commercial development, but he cannot yet say what type or when
commercial will be needed. Commissioner Williams asked how part of t