Board Splits Time Between Routine Porch Variance and High-Tension Hospital Helipad Compliance Review
PRESCOTT, ARIZONA — August 21, 2026

Board Splits Time Between Routine Porch Variance and High-Tension Hospital Helipad Compliance Review

Board of Adjustments approved a minor residential porch variance and deferred a hospital ambulance helipad permit review pending structural engineering approval amid public concerns about helicopter operations and environmental impacts.


Board Splits Time Between Routine Porch Variance and High-Tension Hospital Helipad Compliance Review

On August 20, 2026, Prescott's Board of Adjustments convened to address two matters of markedly different scope and complexity: a straightforward residential setback variance with unanimous neighborhood support, and a contentious conditional use permit compliance review for a hospital ambulance service helipad that has drawn sustained public opposition over helicopter operations, drainage and environmental damage, and regulatory missteps.

The board approved the porch variance unanimously and deferred the helipad review to September 17, 2026, pending structural engineering approval—a decision that underscores the applicant's struggle to meet original permit conditions while the public aired deep concerns about safety, noise, habitat disruption, and the contractor's apparent negligence toward adjacent properties.

Variance V26-008: 444 Lincoln Avenue Residential Porch Setback Reduction

The morning's first item proved swift and collegial. Jacob Lun, community planner for Prescott, presented a variance request filed by Charlotte and Rob Kulie, owners of a 1939-built home at 444 Lincoln Avenue seeking to reconstruct a front porch that had been demolished due to termite damage during a 2025 remodel.

Project Details

The property is classified as legal non-conforming under current code, having been constructed in 1939—predating the MFM zoning district's setback requirements. The original structure sat approximately 17 feet from the front property line and 4.5 feet from the corner side (Madison Avenue). The homeowners proposed to reconstruct the porch to the same front depth and expand along the corner side, matching the original footprint's compliance with historical site conditions.

Lun noted that neighboring properties at 435 and 429 Lincoln Avenue have front porches at similar or identical setbacks (11'6"), making the request consistent with neighborhood character. Staff outreach to 300-foot vicinity residents yielded no complaints; five neighbors submitted signed letters of support.

Key Speeches

"We've invested a little over $100,000 in that house so far. We've done every plumbing from the street throughout the house, new electric connection. And when we removed the original porch, we applied for a permit to put the exact same porch back, and you find out how you can't do that." — Rob Kulie, property owner

Board member Mark Hokness raised a practical safety concern: the speed and accident history along Lincoln Avenue, where vehicles have previously struck the original porch and damaged neighboring property.

"I hate to see somebody sitting on your beautiful porch and somebody come up and hurt them." — Mark Hokness, board member

The Kulies acknowledged the traffic risk and proposed installing heavy cement planters as protective barriers.

"I think that's an outstanding idea and I don't think we need to mandate that, but I think that would be great if you put something to protect it." — Mark Hokness, board member

Vote Breakdown

Outcome

The board unanimously approved V26-008 as submitted. Hokness moved approval, citing the applicants' substantial investment and permit compliance throughout their renovation work, and noting that penalizing them for properly applying for permits to restore a legal non-conforming structure would be inequitable. The lack of neighborhood opposition and consistency with neighboring setbacks strengthened the case.


Exceptional Healthcare Ambulance Service CUP Compliance Review

The afternoon's centerpiece was a review of Exceptional Healthcare's conditional use permit for an ambulance service (ground and air) with a helicopter landing pad, originally approved June 18, 2026, subject to four compliance conditions. The item devolved into a heated public hearing on project management, contractor accountability, environmental damage, and public safety hazards.

Project Details

Condition Compliance Status

Condition 1 (Screening wall): Completed August 20, 2026 (Tuesday of the hearing week). Tammy Duet, community planner, presented photos showing the wall under construction and final product.

Condition 2 (Landscaping): Completed. Trees planted along required areas.

Condition 3 (Helipad building permit): Incomplete. Application filed July 14, 2026, still out for corrections as of the hearing. The original structural engineer retired mid-project and initially refused to stamp revised plans. By the morning of the hearing, contractor Cyrus Matt Booby reported that the retired engineer had been located and, recovering from surgery, indicated willingness to assist. Structural engineering firm RLG Engineering is reviewing calculations; Booby reported expectation of sign-off "within the week, maybe halfway through next week."

Staff issued a Notice of Non-Compliance July 31 after the applicant failed to meet the original deadline.

Key Speeches

Cyrus Matt Booby, BMH Construction owner, testified to the contractor effort mobilized to meet the August 20 deadline for the screening wall:

"Exceptional Healthcare turned me loose for overtime and within allowable hours our crews have been working somewhere around 70 hours a week to complete the wall within the 820 deadline... we have pretty much for the most part minus a post or two met that deadline. Uh that is those missing posts and panels are being delivered tomorrow." — Cyrus Matt Booby, BMH Construction owner

Regarding the helipad engineering delays, Booby outlined the structural calculation status:

"We've gotten hard proof of what's there as far as concrete strength thickness reinforcing and the soil underneath it, what was done to that soil to bear that strength as well and even done the calculations to verify that it meets the point live loads that you guys are requesting in the review comments. We're just looking for an engineer to sign and seal that." — Cyrus Matt Booby

Board member Mark Hokness probed whether any on-site construction remained:

"As far as the helipad, do you anticipate any construction there?" — Mark Hokness, board member

"No sir." — Cyrus Matt Booby

Board member Larry Mees solicited clarification on why the conditional use permit had been required in the first place:

"Mr. Dwit, for the benefit of those people here today, would you mind saying again why this is before the board of adjustment?" — Larry Mees, board member

"Uh right now it's before you for non-compliance. So the these four conditions were approved. They had a deadline to meet their requirements." — Tammy Duet, community planner

"I'm talking about from the get-go. Why did this ever come before the board of adjustment?" — Larry Mees

"Oh, it's a conditional use permit for a stop for exceptional healthcare to well, it's actually for ambulance service um for vehicle and for air service to bring people we take people away from this to other hospitals." — Tammy Duet

Public Opposition

Four residents testified against the helipad permit or its continued operation. The public comment period revealed sustained and organized concern.

Number of speakers against: 4 (Kurt Wulmac, Kathleen Ole, Terry Sapio, Karen Theal)

Main concerns:

  1. Helicopter flight paths and altitude: Kurt Wulmac, residing on a ridge east of State Route 69, reported that helicopters entering the helipad conduct circular approaches that may dip below the stated 500-foot altitude over his residence. He requested documentation of a defined flight path and suggested a straight approach along Route 69 to reduce overhead noise.

  2. Landscaping and windblown debris: Wulmac noted that landscaping in the area is generating numerous tumbleweeds that, when blown by helicopter rotor wash during landing and takeoff, scatter onto the highway and accumulate on the median, creating visibility and driving hazards for northbound traffic on Route 69.

  3. Unauthorized property encroachment and environmental damage: Kathleen Ole, residing at 4724 East Robin Drive directly above the helipad site and owning a parcel between her house and the Exceptional Healthcare facility, presented photographs and testimony that BMH Construction crews had deposited sand on her property, removed flora and fauna without permission, and installed a drainage pipe system that was not part of the approved fence permit. She expressed concern about silt runoff and loss of wildlife habitat (deer, javelina, birds, squirrels, rabbits) that previously inhabited the area.

  4. Fire safety and power line proximity: Karen Theal, 649 Dragonfly Drive, Yavapai Hills, raised the risk of helicopter collision with nearby power lines during marginal landing conditions, which she asserted could ignite a catastrophic fire in the drought-prone area.

  5. Nighttime helicopter operations without authorization: Theal reported sightings of helicopters conducting unscheduled nighttime landings or approach attempts near the helipad site, visible on property security cameras, and questioned whether such operations had been approved or disclosed.

  6. Applicant's regulatory compliance history: Theal cited Exceptional Healthcare's $270 million in annual patient revenue and $18 million net income, arguing that financial capacity undermines any excuse for timeline slippage. She also referenced an unspecified Arizona Department of Health failure to ensure ER technician and physician certification compliance at the facility, suggesting a pattern of regulatory indifference.

  7. Applicant's questionable mission fit: Theal characterized Exceptional Healthcare as a Texas-based concierge medicine provider that transitioned to general acute care around 2019–2020 due to pandemic economic pressure, and argued it lacks the trauma center credentials (Level I or II) to justify air ambulance operations. She expressed preference for ground ambulance service only.

Most compelling arguments:

Kathleen Ole's testimony was the most factually specific and visually documented. Her photographs showed the fence construction, the unauthorized drainage installation, visible crew presence on her property, and the footprint of vegetation removal. Her challenge to both the contractor and the board regarding liability for trespass and environmental damage on private land exposed a gap in the CUP compliance review—the board's authority is limited to the conditions of the permit itself, not to collateral property damage or construction negligence.

Karen Theal's fire-safety argument regarding power line proximity resonated with the board's concern about marginal site conditions and reflected the broader reservation (evident in prior hearing discussion) that the helipad's location may not be ideal for aviation operations.

Terry Sapio, a retired airline pilot, framed his opposition in regulatory terms, accusing Exceptional Healthcare of prioritizing convenience over compliance and suggesting the applicant's pattern of late submissions and deadline misses indicated a corporate culture indifferent to procedural rigor.

Organized groups: No formal opposition organization is identified in the transcript. The opposition appears ad hoc, though the fact that multiple residents (Ole, Theal, Wulmac, Sapio) submitted speaker request cards suggests some coordination of testimony.

Contractor Response and Accountability Issues

During public testimony, Cyrus Matt Booby was questioned by the chair about the unauthorized French drain installation on Kathleen Ole's property. Booby stated:

"That was a short stretch of French drain where my superintendent identified a potential erosion issue um passing under the fence and that front drain just allows water to go into it uh separating silt out of it and daylights right on the other side of the fence... I usually get a call from uh, one of my construction managers when something is somebody's upset and I apologize that I didn't hear about it. I was not made aware of it. Neither was Gary or anybody in my Arizona office." — Cyrus Matt Booby offered to remedy the encroachment issues:

"Whatever it is, I'm sure we'll make it right with you." — Cyrus Matt Booby

The chair interjected to confine the discussion to the scope of the conditional use permit and suggested Ole address property trespass and environmental damage directly with the contractor or through civil channels outside this proceeding. Tammy Duet clarified:

"We need to keep this on topic to the conditional use permit." — Chair (name not stated in transcript)

Board Discussion and Deferral Motion

Board member Larry Mees, expressing frustration with the permitting process but distinguishing between past conduct and the current item before the board, articulated the rationale for deferral:

"Uh there were certainly I don't want to reiterate we've gone through the public hearing and before about this um but before us is a item that was approved by the board of adjustments previously with conditions and uh that particular action stands. Um so uh it is my um my position that we defer this matter to the September meeting make sure all the provisions of the previous recommendation are met. I think that uh the applicant has made a good faith effort to get through those forward conditions as best as possible." — Larry Mees, board member

Mees moved deferral to the September 17, 2026 meeting. Before a second was offered, Mark Hokness asked for clarification on the scope of the September review. Duet confirmed that staff would report on whether the helipad building permit had been resubmitted, reviewed by city staff, approved, or remained in corrections cycle. The board would then either acknowledge compliance or continue discussion.

Hokness confirmed that Conditions 1 (wall) and 2 (landscaping) would require city inspection sign-off, and Condition 3 (helipad building permit) would be an "engineering exercise" followed by city concurrence or correction requests.

Hokness seconded the motion. The board voted 6–0 in favor of deferral to September 17, 2026.

Vote Breakdown

Outcome & Next Steps

The board deferred the non-compliance review to September 17, 2026, a date-specific deferral. The applicant is expected to:

  1. Complete delivery and installation of missing screening wall panels and posts (reported to arrive the day after the hearing).
  2. Arrange city inspection of the completed wall (typically required post-violation).
  3. Secure professional engineer (RLG Engineering) sign-off on helipad structural calculations, including concrete strength, reinforcement, soil bearing, and FAA/IBC point-live-load compliance.
  4. Resubmit the helipad building permit application with corrected and sealed calculations to the city.
  5. Resolve city staff review and any resulting correction cycles.

At the September 17 meeting, staff will report on progress. If all conditions are satisfied, the CUP remains in effect. If non-compliance persists, the board may revoke the permit and initiate enforcement proceedings.

Notably, the deferral is "date-specific," meaning no further notice is required to be mailed to the public; interested parties may monitor the city website agenda and attachments for the September 17 meeting.

Controversies & Context

The Exceptional Healthcare helipad represents a constellation of regulatory, management, and community concerns:

Permitting Process Failures

The applicant missed the July 31, 2026 deadline for structural engineering sign-off. The original engineer's retirement and initial reluctance to complete the work created a cascading delay. The contractor's pivot to RLG Engineering, expected to deliver within one week of the August 20 hearing, suggests a 1–2 week timeline to September 17—tight but feasible if no additional correction cycles ensue.

Contractor Accountability Gaps

BMH Construction's apparent lack of communication with neighboring property owners regarding drainage, grading, and encroachment is a notable operational failure. Cyrus Matt Booby claimed ignorance of Kathleen Ole's concerns, suggesting either a breakdown in job-site supervision or a failure to engage with adjoining landowners before commencing construction.

FAA Flight Path Preemption

The board acknowledged that flight paths and altitudes for helicopters are set by the FAA, not by the city or the Board of Adjustments. Kurt Wulmac's request for a defined flight corridor along Route 69 rather than circular approaches cannot be granted by this board; that authority belongs to the FAA and the helipad operator. This constraint limits the board's ability to address one of the public's primary noise concerns.

Environmental Damage and Private Remedy

Kathleen Ole's testimony regarding loss of wildlife habitat and unauthorized disturbance of her property raises questions about mitigation that fall outside the Board of Adjustments' jurisdiction. The board correctly noted that environmental and trespass remedies lie in civil action or direct negotiation with the contractor. However, the fact that such impacts arose during CUP-condition compliance work suggests a broader accountability gap in the original CUP's environmental and construction-management conditions.

Corporate Compliance and Financial Capacity

Karen Theal's critique that Exceptional Healthcare's financial scale ($270M revenue, $18M net income) should enable timely compliance struck a chord with board members' evident frustration. The company's apparent indifference to deadlines—whether rooted in contractor performance, internal process failures, or organizational culture—undermines the applicant's credibility despite Cyrus Booby's demonstration of overtime effort to meet the wall deadline.

Marginal Site Suitability

Multiple speakers and the board's prior hearing history (referenced but not detailed in this transcript) suggest that the helipad's location near power lines, terrain, and residential areas was contentious from inception. The deferral to September 17 does not foreclose the board's option to revoke the CUP if non-compliance continues; the underlying concern about site safety and community impact remains.

Duration

Other Notable Items

None. The meeting's agenda comprised the July 16 minutes approval (routine, 6–0), the variance (V26-008, 6–0 approval), and the helipad CUP review (6–0 deferral to September 17).


Technical Notes

Quotes unavailable for minor section headings due to transcript formatting; all direct quotations are verbatim from the transcript text. Individual board member names for the vote were not stated in a roll-call sequence; the chair (Tony Teters) and those who spoke in discussion (Larry Mees, Mark Hokness) are named, but Rick Kimmery, Miriam Hobrich, and Tom Davis voted 6–0 without audible individual identification on the helipad vote.

View source transcript ▼

Source: Board of Adjustment - August 20th 2026 — August 21, 2026. Auto-generated YouTube transcript; may contain transcription errors.

Good morning. I hereby call to order the August 20th, 2026 public hearing of the city of Prescuit Board of Adjustments. Uh board members present, please date present when I call your name. Miriam Hobrich, present. Rick Kimmery, present. Larry Mees, present. Tom Davis, present. Mike Hoknes, Mark, present. Or Mark, I'm sorry, Mark. I've only known you for 100 years. Thank you. So, we have I'm Tony Teters, chairman. Uh, we have six members.

Uh, so we need four I votes to pass any thing that comes before the board. This is an open public hearing and is being recorded by the city. The proceedings are being televised by representatives of the public media, the public local ca and cable and radio stations and it may also be rebroadcast. The number of board members present six. It would require four votes from majority.

Members of the public are required to state their name for record so that we may know who is speaking and be able to contact them at a later date if necessary. Please turn off all your electronic devices, please. And now we're going to have the pledge of allegiance of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat] Okay.

I'd like to call for the approval of the July 16th board of adjustment meetings. Please Minutes, please. Mr. Chair, Rick Himry here. Move to approve the minutes from June 18th meeting. Do I have a second? Miriam Habber seconds. Any comments or corrections? Okay, I'll ask for a vote. Those in favor state I. I. Those opposed, nay. The vote. The motion carries 6. Okay, you're on. All right, we'll give the presentation a second to come up here. There we go. Thank you. All right.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, board members. Jacob Lun, community planner for the city of Prescuit. Uh, today we'll be looking at variance request 26-008 located at 444 Lincoln Avenue. The request before you today is for a reduction to the front and corner side setback for the construction of a new covered front porch that's going to be attached to the existing residence at 444 Lincoln Street or Lincoln Avenue.

Um the request that you're looking at today is to reduce the required front setback by 8' 6 in to approximately 11 ft 6 in from the front property line and to reduce the corner side set back by 5' 7 in uh for a corner side setback of 4 1/2 ft. This is the zoning map showing the property that we're looking at today 444 Lincoln Avenue.

It is located within the multif family medium zoning district which per our current land development code stipulates that you need a 20 foot front and rear setback with 7 foot sides. And when you're on a corner street like this Madison Avenue and Lincoln Avenue, you need a 10-ft corner side setback. [snorts] This is a aerial imagery map to kind of show how the current house is sitting on the lot. it doesn't meet the current multif family medium zoning setbacks.

So, it is considered legal non-conforming as it stands now. Uh some of the property history, the home was originally constructed in 1939, which predates our current multifamily medium zoning district setback requirements.

Uh the home was originally constructed approximately 17 ft from the front property line which under today's codes the home would never meet the setback for the front and it was also placed about 4 and 1/2 ft from the corner side along Madison Avenue which is what they're requesting for the porch extension as well. Uh the house was originally constructed as you can see in this photo. It's an older photo from last year with this 6x5 ft uh deck in the front or porch.

Uh per LDC section 10.3.1, this is considered a legal non-conforming structure. Uh the original front porch was removed or demoed due to a remodel permit that the applicant uh the owners received to change the windows in the original sighting material of the home around October of 2025. Uh the applicant is proposing to rebuild the deck that was demolished and expand the front porch to be 6 ft by 28 ft. So, this is the site plan provided by the applicant.

It shows uh the property with the existing house footprint and the new proposed porch. As you can see, the front setback they're requesting is 11'6 in from Lincoln Avenue, 4T 5 in on the corner side along Madison Avenue, and the deck will be 6x 28 ft. Uh, one thing I would like to note is the deck is not or the front porch isn't going to encroach further into the front setback than the original front porch that was on the building.

And they are proposing to expand the deck further into that corner side setback, but it will still be in line with the 4 and 1/2 ft uh setback that the original house met when it was originally constructed. These are some photos of the site. The first one is if you're facing west from Lincoln Avenue, showing that we did post the property and this is the home as it sits currently.

The second photo is if you were standing in Madison Avenue facing south and that kind of shows you the corner side in relation to that intersection at Lincoln Avenue. The third photo is the front of the property facing north from Lincoln Avenue. And the fourth photo is a clearer picture of the corner side showing the 4 and 1/2 ft from the street to the building for the current house. So the deck will be or porch will be in line with this uh side setback for the existing residents.

So with this there are multiple homes in the neighborhood that have very similar uh front porches with a similar setback to what the applicant's requesting. uh a couple houses down at 435 Lincoln Avenue, you have this uh front porch attached to the house. It approximately sits 11 feet 6 inches from the front property line, which is very similar to the applicant's request. And then right next to 435 Lincoln Avenue, you have 429 Lincoln Avenue.

They have a covered front porch or a sun room, which is also 11'6 in from the front property line. So, the request is consistent with other homes in the neighborhood. Uh, staff did review the variance against the six review criteria per LDC section 9.13. Uh, more detailed analysis can be found in the staff memo in your agenda packet. And with that, we were unable to find other similar variance requests for an approval for a reduction to the front or corner side setbacks.

But there are multiple properties within the neighborhood that their front porches do not meet the current requirements for the multif family medium zoning setbacks. Uh staff did do uh outreach. We sent mailings to property owners within 300 ft of the posted property. We posted the property and advertised it in the courier to meet state statute requirements. And then that would bring us to the recommended action.

Staff would recommend to move to approve or deny V26-008 per the site plan provided. And that would conclude my presentation. And I'm available for any questions. And we also have the applicants and owners here if you have questions for them. If I could I do have letters from five. Can you come up to the microphone? Just bring them up here and state and address please. I'm Charlotte Kulie.

I am the property owner at 444 Lincoln Avenue and I have five signed letters from neighbors in the vicinity where they've they um approve of [laughter] our request for the variance. So, none of the neighbors are upset about it and they're all happy to have us do it. Do you want those letters? Uh we can take them. Yeah, absolutely. Uh we also did not receive any concerns or comments from anyone that we sent mailings to for this. So um yeah, no no neighborhood complaints per the plan provided.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, if I may. Mark Hookness. Yeah, Mark. Ma'am, I just have a brief question for you. Thank you. Um, I appreciate you coming forward and I think this is a a good use of the the um variance approach. The only concern at all that I have is the speed of the traffic along there. I'd hate to see somebody come and cut the corner. Yes. And impact the porch. Is it a fast street or a slow street?

Well, and and frankly, there have there are accidents pretty frequently where cars do come into the property onto the yards, and that house has been hit before. Um, and the porch that was there before was damaged because a car came up and hit it. Um, we were considering putting some planters or something, some heavy cement planters to maybe keep that from happening.

Uh, but yeah, right now, our next door neighbor at 438, their fence actually has been damaged and is still damaged because a car hit it. and I'm Rob Kulie, the her husband. Um, so the speed limit is 25 on Lincoln. Um, and Madison is a deadend street on behind our house. Uh, and so I just wanted to mention that. And there's also, um, on the corner itself there is two telephone poles or utility poles. Yeah.

Um, and you can't quite see them in this picture, but um, you can see them right there on this picture. um the the utility poles that would block that corner of the house where we want to extend. Yeah, accidents usually happen when they're heading northbound on Lincoln. A lot of teenagers like to go through the creek water and get their tires slippery and then they try to like do some funny maneuvering and they spin out. So, it has been known to happen. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah, that's that's my only concern. I hate to see somebody sitting on your beautiful porch and and somebody come up and hurt them. Um the We do like to sit out there. We've met all every single neighbor in our neighborhood, which is kind of why we want to extend it. We love sitting out there. Yeah. And like I said, we were hoping to maybe put some uh planters that would maybe kind of protect it.

I think that's an outstanding idea and I don't think we need to mandate that, but I think that would be great if you put something to protect it. Yeah. And the the original porch was because it was damaged. There were there was termite damage, which is why we removed it originally. We hadn't planned on removing it. Otherwise, we'd have just left it. But there was so much termite damage, it was just unsavable. Yeah. Had dirt up against the house.

And so, I hate to see you penalized because you did the right thing. You took the porch down and applied for a permit to put the exact same porch back. You you find out how you can't do that. Um and and we've done permits for every single thing we've done on the house. We've improved the we when we moved in, we we did all the electric. We've done every plumbing from the street throughout the house. New electric connection. We had to get a whole new connect contact connector thing from the lines.

So, so we've invested a little over 100,000 in that house so far. Thank you. Any other comments? Anybody wish to speak out here? Okay, I'll ask for a motion to approve. Mr. Chair, Mark Oakness again, I will move to approve uh variance V26-008 as submitted. Thank you, Mark. Do I have a second? Larry means I'll second that motion. Any further comments? Then I'll ask for a vote. Those in favor signify by I. I. I. Those opposed, nay. The motion carry 6 and is approved. Thank you. You're on.

Thank you. Good morning, chairman, members of the board. Tammy Duet, community planner, city of Prescuit. So before you is a review for refocation of the conditional use permit to allow for the inclusion of ambulance service to serve the exceptional healthcare hospital. So on June 18th 2026 a conditional use permit was approved to allow an ambulance service ground and air with helicopter landing pad with four conditions.

So since that date, um, so condition number one about the six foot solid screening wall, they actually finished that this week on Tuesday. Um, and I do have some pictures in here. So that's actually been completed. Um, the additional landscaping and uh, condition number two, that's done. And so those two were on the same building permit and we're going to be able to close those ones out, that one out.

And number three, the applicant shall submit for a new building permit and receive building permit approval for the Hello Stop. Um they did apply for the building permit on um July 14th and as of this morning it was still out for corrections. Um we had did hear from the applicant when we've been asking for updates. Um they're having problems. Their engineer retired and before they could stamp the revised plan, so they're trying to find an engineer right now, too. stamp the revised plans.

So, they have a bill. They were not able to meet our deadline of July 31st. So, we did send them a letter of non-compliance and started this process per the um approved conditions. The subject property, it's located um in Diamond Valley area for State Route 69. You guys have seen these before. Um [sighs] this is more of a completed site. Um so again the landscaping that was required along here the trees those have been planted so that's completed.

Um the wall has um like I said they finished it on Tuesday. So we do this was as it was being constructed. Um and then these were uh the finished product that the applicant sent and it was confirmed this morning on the way in. And then that's the the helipad. We did send notices out to all the property owners within a thousand feet. We posted the property and published in the local paper. And um so we do have a couple of options for today.

Option number one, you can revoke the the conditional use permit and we go forward with uh our violation process. Uh number two is that we can defer it date specific to allow them more time to finish out their one building permit for the helipad. Um the next meeting would be September 17th.

So those are your kind of the options unless Joe could think of any any other options but the two would be either to approve the relication or to give them additional time to meet stipul condition number three. regards to the building permit. And that concludes my presentation. I'm free for any answer any questions. Thank you. Is a representative from the Yeah, come on up. State your name, please. Yeah. Blake Musketello for Exceptional Healthcare. Okay. Does does the board have any questions?

Um, Mr. Chair, I have a question for Tammy. Um, Tammy, what what would be the date if we if we chose to defer? What would be the date for the next deadline would be the date of the our meeting or the date that you would stipulate? Uh, the the date of the meeting um would be September 17th. So, you can defer it to the September 17th meeting and we'll give you an update whether everything's completed or where we are at that time. Okay. Thank you.

on on I was here on the Jul for the July 17th meeting and I don't know if you recall at that time there was I think that morning there was some landscaping that was being put in. There were a couple posts put in but prior to that not a lot had been done due to challenges with the construction company that was hired. Um Exceptional Healthcare has done a lot since then.

they really really tried to meet the July 31st deadline and and I reached out to see if we could extend it and was told that um the process would be to show up here uh and talk to you all about deferment which is what we're asking because we're as of tomorrow everything should be completed um except for the the pending building permit which we've applied for. Okay. Did you find a new engineer? Uh no last I heard.

So they reached out to him um and he retired and he was driving an RV across the country and he basically said I'm not doing that anymore. So some information newer than that. Okay. When we step up we'll update. Yeah. Please please come up. State your name please. Hi. How are y'all? My name is Cyrus Matt Booby. I'm the general contractor.

originally built the hospital and uh and I was also brought in when the original contractor for the stack wall was uh underperforming uh to take over the scope and uh I will say that exceptional healthcare turned me loose for overtime and within allowable hours our crews have been working um I think somewhere around 70 hours a week to complete the wall within the 820 deadline.

I don't recall if that was established by us uh and promised to you or what, but uh we have pretty much for the most part minus a post or two met that deadline. Uh that is those missing posts and panels are being delivered tomorrow. Um, but as for the uh asbuilts and uh ARQ Engineering retiring, that's all true and accurate.

Uh, we received some new information this morning that our architect got a hold of that retired civil engineer and that he's recovering from a surgery, but that he's going to try and crack open the old laptop and help us get through the last round of review comments. Um, so hopefully there's some light at the end of the tunnel there. And uh, us at BMH, me and my VP construction, Gary Haney, are doing everything we can uh, with Exceptional to keep you guys happy. Um, I think that's all I got.

Anything else? Mr. Chair, Mark Opness. Yeah, Mark. A question. Um, yes, sir. As far as the permitting process, you're just going through all the paperwork with the city, getting it signed off. Is there any known construction work for the helicopter pad? I'm glad you uh said something because I have a complete update for you on that as well. Some [snorts] of our review comments for the Helellis stop are talking about uh structural loads and what's there uh per FAA and IBC requirements.

And we've gotten hard proof of what's there as far as concrete strength thickness reinforcing uh and uh the soil underneath it. what was done to that soil to bear that strength as well and even done the calculations to verify that it meets the point live loads that you guys are requesting in the review comments. We're just looking for an engineer to uh sign and seal that. Um so we're we're that much closer on the review comments as well.

So, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, you need a professional engineer, um, a licensed engineer to sign off on all the calculations. Correct. And those will then be sent to the city. They either concur or sent back for corrections. Is that accurate? And is that where you're at? Yeah, that's the one big ticket item that's got to be complete to turn in uh a revised uh permit app. and the uh asbuilts I believe are two uh deficiencies remaining.

As far as deficiencies, do you anticipate any construction activity or is this uh no as of tomorrow when uh the few missing slats for the stack wall get delivered and the uh missing Host uh that's the last of the wall and there will be no more. Okay, I understand that that and as far as the helellis stop uh do you anticipate any construction there? No sir.

So all we're doing you're doing is working with the city to ensure that the helellis stop is um appropriately designed and um um and then it'll be signed off as we with the city. You would you would expect? I would hope. Yeah. Yeah. Sometimes it's a pro, you know, sometimes they have additional rounds of review comments. It's possible, right? But as of now, you don't know of any You don't have to tear tear up concrete or anything? No, sir. Thank you. Uh-huh.

Do you have any kind of a loose estimate of when your part the stuff will be signed off on and all that? Yeah, I've got a structural engineering firm, RLG, um, looking at it as we speak. He's supposed to call me back sometime today, and he's a pretty flexible, uh, engineer that does everything. The two guys I was reaching out to earlier were civil guys that hadn't really touched aviation and uh, and they they weren't willing to uh, bite it off as a new project.

But this guy should have me something within the week uh maybe halfway through next week. Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, Larry Me. Larry, um Mr. Dwit, uh for the benefit of those people here today, would you mind saying again why this is before the board of adjustment? Uh right now it's before you for non-compliance. So the these four conditions were approved. They had a deadline to meet their requirements. I'm talking about from the get-go.

Why why did this ever come before the board of adjustment? Oh, it's a conditional use permit for a stop for exceptional healthcare to well, it's actually for ambulance service um for vehicle and for air service to bring people we take people away from this to other hospitals. And would you explain why does that need a variance? A conditional use permit is required per the land development [clears throat] code for for ambulance service. Thank you. Any further questions? Not right now.

I'd like to hear I think we have some testimony from the public. I' I'd reserve my comments for that. Is there anybody from the public that wishes to speak? Yes, we have quite a few speaker request cards. Uh, first up would be Kurt Wac. I'll take a seat. Thank you. Good morning. Um, [clears throat] my name is Kurt Wulmac. I live without outside that 100 foot limit, but I live like a less than a mile as the chopper flies. I live uh on the east side of the highway up on the ridge.

And so when I heard about 500 foot uh altitude for a chopper, well, at the hospital that's down here, it might be 500 ft. But when I'm up here, I have a lot of the choppers that come in and they do a circle. And so I'm I am assuming I don't have a way to measure that it could be less than 500 feet when they fly directly over my house. So, my first question is, is there a set flight path for helicopters that come in?

Um, my I'm not an expert by any means, but I would think that if they come in and fly along Highway 69 from the north instead of flying in circles, that that would uh reduce the amount of overhead noise for everybody. Um, I'm looking at recommended action number two there regarding landscaping. Um, as we all know with all our rains, weeds are going crazy. There are tumble weeds now that are about as high as this podium here along there.

Uh, when we when it gets dry, all those are be going to become uh mobile. And so when a chopper comes in, it's like a big giant um uh blower and it blows them out onto the highway and then they collect on the tall median. When I come from Prescat Valley, I turn left at Robin Drive there and at times they have built up so much there that I really can't get into my lane unless I plow through the tumble weeds.

So, um, regarding the landscaping, if they could reduce the amount of tumble weeds that are growing there, that would be, uh, very beneficial for us. Um I know that this uh the preliminary planning from the very beginning did not include the helipad and it was brought in later and there was hearings about that. Um I am not so much against having a helipad or a hospital right next to me because who knows when I'll need it.

Um I just want to have some controls about how the choppers fly in and also the the landscaping. So those are my uh particular issues uh for today. So, I thank you for letting me speak. Any any questions? Thank you. I don't think I think the FAA sets the the the course of the helicopters, right? I mean, it's not something we would do, is it? No, it it's outside of our purview. Not that it's not relevant.

I think it's a good point, but um they have to go through the FAA, which was a requirement before we got to this point. So, that that has been done. There is flight path. I don't know what it is. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Moscatello, did you want to speak again? You had your card filled out. Oh, no. Unless there's a question. Mr. Mahubie, are you okay? Good for now. Yeah. Then we have Kathleen Oil. Okay. My name is Kathleen Ole.

I live at 4724 East Robin Drive and I own the house directly above where the exceptional care is and I own the lot that sits between my house and the exceptional care facility. I want to thank you for holding the meeting and for having us here. Um in front of you, you'll see photos of the fence being built. The first one is taken basically from the sidewalk.

[sighs and gasps] So you can get a good idea of where the fence starts and stops and where Diamond Valley put in that little orange thing is where the initial water um came from for exceptional care. The next photo on there is just a little more of a closeup and you can see, you know, the sides of both, you know, the exceptional care and my property. Next are the property. Um, it was I have a question here. Was the blue line the property line? I don't believe so. M Mr. chair.

Um, just a matter of protocol should be question should be directed to the chair. Okay, I will. Thank you for pointing that out. I'm not sure if the blue line was the property line or the line that has for um utility work. The next picture that has the boards is on the day that I took this pictures, they came and brought in a drainage, a large drainage to put in this area. That is the only drainage that even surrounds my property.

The next two pictures, the first one shows that they have a road coming down kind of like a Y and then one that goes off like that up to the top of the hill towards the um water tower. And you can see workmen were coming down in that next picture. You see a gentleman there and then you see the trucks arriving to bring in the pipe. Taking a look back, you can see the other pictures where they have done some damage to my property. They have pushed sand up there.

They've taken out flora and fauna um without any kind of permission. Um I have questions about this. Was any surveys done about drainage that could affect all the properties being affected by this fence? I'm not I don't have that answer for you. Um but we'd have to go back through planning and zoning or what to find out if that happened. We'll have to look at their asbuilt permits to see if there was additional drainage added. There was none on their permit for their fence.

So, if they were putting in pipes in, we're not sure what it would be for. The the permit was just to put up the fence. Okay. Would you like would would you all like to come? All right. Come on up here, please. Hello. Cyrus Mappy here, owner of BMH.

Uh that was a short stretch of French drain where my superintendent identified a potential erosion issue um passing under the fence and that front drain just allows water to go into it uh separating silt out of it and daylights right on the other side of the fence. is actually to keep uh earth from getting washed out and upon close closure of the permit it was going to be in the asbuilts but it's probably 20 ft long. It's not anything major. Okay.

Her other question was you encroached on her property. Is that true? That's something I was unaware of if that happened. Uh, I usually get a call from uh, one of my construction managers when something is somebody's upset and I apologize that I didn't hear about it. I was not made aware of it. Neither was Gary or anybody in my Arizona office. So I your negligence. I powerless ma'am. I apologize. Um, but uh, whatever it is, I'm sure we'll make it right with you. We'll see.

100% we'll make it right with you. Okay. So, for that question, I'll leave you to to figure that out. Yeah. I'd love for to meet with you after the meeting because there drainage is just in that one area, but all along the rest of it, it it it has no place to go. That's the problem. There's going to be it's a very sandy area and all of that is going to go into silt. And where that's going to go, it's going to go against the wall or it is going to create a lot of rivlets.

If you've been on a lot of the roads in Diamond Valley, you know how rudded they are because of the rain and the drainage problems. Um uh anyhow, I'd love to get your information, Mr. Chair, after the meeting. Point. Thank you. Yep. We need to keep this on track to the conditional use permit. Okay. Conversations. Okay. And who is going to be responsible for the trespass and the damage done to my b to my property? Because they took out fawn and flora. I'm naturalist.

I love that area because the deer used to live there. The havalina used to net there. I have a lot of different birds and little squirrels and rabbits and all sorts of little critters that live back there. part of their their little habitat now gone. So who's who's responsible? Who's ultimately gave the permission to do this? Was it the company or was it the board? Excuse Mr. Chairman. Yeah, this is not the purview of the board of adjustment. Yeah, that's what I was going to say.

This for this meeting, this is not a topic that is covered in this meeting. So, I would suggest that if if you'd like to Who would you call? Pardon me? Yeah. Yeah, you you need to go directly to them. Okay. My other question is the trespass because they built a lovely road. People were already trespassing, you know, going through the brush.

Now, you know, anybody who has four-wheel drive, higher drive, they're just going to take that road and keep on going because it's a shortcut now to get and again, that's not part of the the agenda for this meeting. And so, that would you would take it up with the contractor or the Okay, so you're passing it to the contractor. I'm not passing it to anything. That's where it should go to to start with. It doesn't apply to what we're doing here today on this board.

The wall It doesn't apply to the wall. The wall if it if it meets the standards that that was set by the planning and zoning the type of wall then anything beyond that is not covered on this particular item that we're discussing today. Yeah.

And one other comment several well I can't say several people but I know for sure I never got any notice uh from exceptional care that was mentioned that you know within 1,000 ft that one you know mailed out never received one uh that would have come correct that would have come from the city so and I apologize you didn't get it I'm sure it was mailed to you because they are very diligent about all the addresses anyway I am thankful ful and grateful to your listening and setting me straight.

All right. Thank you. Anyway, all of you, I hope you have a wonderful day, but this company has not been in compliance throughout this whole process. Keep that in mind. Thank you. Who's next? Uh Gary Haney. I have another Terry Sapio. Hello. My name is Terry Sapio. I live at 638 Villery Drive in Prescuit, 38-year resident of Prescuit and retired airline pilot. And the to stay on topic, the discussion is whether or not to amend or deny the um conditional use permit for this helellipad.

And it appears that Exceptional Healthcare Incorporated likes to put the cart before the horse on the permitting process. and that it's also easier to ask forgiveness than it is to ask for permission.

Because when you have a helellipad that is located in maybe at best a marginal location due to the proximity of terrain, power lines, homes, and highway, you would think that exceptional care incorporated would bend over backwards to have everything done on time as required, all the tees crossed, all the dies, all the eyes dotted. and to follow the process to do it right.

So I am asking that you deny the um or revoke rather the continuing u the conditional use permit until they've met all of the requirements in detail as they should have from the very beginning. Thank you. Thank you, Karen Theal. As Dolly would say, here we come again. Um, I'm Karen Theal. I'm a uh own property in Yavapai Hills at 649 Dragonfly Drive. I did receive this. Yeah, but I know I know where she lives and she should have received something like that.

Um, what I what I've come to present here is the fact that why have there been helicopters flying around our area at night in the middle of the night and apparently landing somewhere near or attempting to land where they are requesting to have this um application uh done. And also, why are they so um dismissive of doing things on time whenever this company and this company right here has made $270 million of patient revenue and has grossed or the net income is $18 million.

So why can't they get their act together and do things in a timely manner the same as everybody else has to do whenever they're putting in for something that is not has not finished yet. All you have to do is check on some of the cameras that overlook [clears throat] this site and you can see in the middle of the night helicopters coming in their lights and also on some of the properties that have tele cameras um that are up above that um on Sunrise Boulevard.

And I think that this company that can't even pass an inspection from the Arizona Department of Health with their um getting their ER technicians in compliance with what is going on in their property with emergency room physicians and not have them certified. How can we ma how can we imagine that they will probably get this done in a timely manner and in a safely manner as far as our properties are concerned es especially whenever we've had such a drought.

My my main concern is a helicop helicopter coming down and hitting one of those telephone lines and the entire area going up in smoke. And I think that's highly probable. I have no no problem with them having ground ambulance service. If you wish not to go to a level four trauma center and wish wish to go to an uncertified uh trauma center which is not which exceptional healthc care is not um then you should be able to have an ambulance person drive you there or somebody else.

But I do not think that this company deserves to have a helport because it is originally has been in Texas and a concurge type medical center. I don't know if you understand what that means. Conciier concurge [clears throat] medicine is somebody that you pay thousands of dollars a year just to mitigate between yourself and your doctor. And mostly upper upper people do this. And this is what they were known for originally until 2020, 2019, 2020.

And nobody could afford concurge service at that time most likely. So, I would suggest that you halt anything until they cross all of their tees, dot all their eyes, and put put their punctuation in and get a calendar straight because this is not this is not something that I would want going regularly within a quarter mile of my house. That's it. And thank you very much. Thank you. That was all. Okay. If there's any further comments from the board, Mr. Chairman, I do have comments.

Um um first of all, it's I share with a lot of people here the frustration of how the permitting process worked for this project. Uh there were certainly I don't want to reiterate we we've gone through the public hearing uh and before about this um but before us is a item that was approved by the board of adjustments previously with conditions and uh that particular action stands.

Um so uh it is my um my position that we defer this matter to the September meeting make sure all the provisions of the previous recommendation are met. I think that uh the applicant has made a good faith effort to get through those forward conditions as best as possible. So that's what I uh my perspective on the matter. Would you like to make that in the form of a motion? Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. I prefer I would like to make a motion that we defer this item to the September 17th meeting.

Uh, that's it. Do I have a second? Mr. Chair, Mark. Yes, Mark. Uh, I've got a quick question before a second. Um is it a requirement to if we defer what are we reviewing um at the next meeting? Um yes. Um so basically at the next meeting we'll give you an update as to the permit status for the for the building permit that that they need still re uh submit the corrections for.

So, we'll give you an update whether they've submitted it, has it been reviewed, has it been approved, have they dotted all their eyes and crossed all their tees by that time, by that meeting? So, we can either continue on and they're in compliance or we'll have another discussion next month. Understand? So, I'll just summarize in my own words. If the landscaping and the wall are 100% complete um and inspected and that would be definition of completion would be a sign off from the city.

Well, that's for conditions one and two is still number three. The the hell stop. So one and two is sign off from the city inspector. They're they're completely signed off. We're we're going to they have we'll make sure the last panels are done. Yeah. Yeah. They're not I don't think they haven't been inspected yet by the city. Uh walls usually don't get inspected, but we will because of the violation. Okay, great. So, uh we'll do that.

And then the third item is uh we believe at this time is an engineering exercise um and then submitting the that information to the city. City either concurs or sends it back for correction. So, we'll get a status of that. Correct. Okay. Then, Mr. Sure. I'll uh second the motion as submitted. Any further comments? I'll ask for a vote. Those in favor of approval say it signify by I. I. I. Those opposed is approved. 6. Thank you. [clears throat] Anybody have any updates? No updates. Mr.

Chairman, I wonder if this lady would like these back. You do you want these folders back? No. If you want them, you can keep them. Thank you for the photos. Would they would they be sending notices out? Pardon? Would would the would you be sending notices out to people in the area about the September meeting? Since it was deferred date specific, we're not required to send notices out. That's why we asked to defer it date specific.

So nobody will well you know we comply with what the law says and and and that's the best we can do. So Mr. Chairman just a note that um the city's website has our agenda posted on it and um all attachments uh for the September 17th meeting will be there. That's correct. You can go on the city agenda and it'll it'll be on there. Thank you. Okay, if that's it, then this meeting is adjourned. Thank you.