Buckeye Planning Commission Unanimously Endorses Montaverie's 862-Unit Mixed-Residential Amendment After Developer Heeds Neighborhood Concerns

Welcome everybody. Will you join me by standing the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to [clears throat] the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Will you please take the role? Chair Burton, present. Commissioner Puppy here. Commissioner Ragdale here. Commissioner Cubs here. Vice Chair Damasio here. Commissioner Bassler here.

Commissioner Traniano here. Alternate Hester here. Alternate Manuel. Thank you. From what I understand, the traffic was bad. That's why Ken just slid in here on two wheels. All right. The next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes from July 28th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting. May I have a motion to approve the minutes? I motion we approve the minutes. Is there a second? I'll second that. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Number three, item agenda 3A, Montaverie major community master plan amendment, case number plzz 00013. public hearing and request that the planning and zoning commission recommend approval to the city council of an amendment of approximately 156 acres generally located at the west of Miller Road between Lower Buckeye Road and Warner Street. Presenting is my friend Hot Wheels Kin Gal. Uh chair, uh members of the commission, great to be before you this evening.

I'm a believer in uh you know the efficient use of time. So sitting around five or six minutes early is I could probably be doing something more productive. Uh no in in reality um my computer decided it was time to install updates and it wouldn't let me shut it down and I need to bring it with me to to come to the meeting. So um you mentioned uh what this case is.

It is a major CMP amendment or community master plan amendment uh for Montaverie and I'll talk about that in a little bit more detail. The applicant this evening is Jeff Blly Gilbert Blightly PLLC on behalf of the owner which is Sunb Belt Land Holdings LP may be familiar with some of Sunbelt's projects. They're developing the Buckeye Commons projects on both sides of Roaway south of I 10 with the Costco and the In-N-Out and the Home Depot and those projects.

Uh the request this evening is [clears throat] for a major amendment to the Monavvery CMP. Uh the location is uh the portion of the CMP that's west of Miller from lower Buckeye to Warner. I'll show you what that looks like on a map. Uh it's approximately 156 acres. Uh Monovery CMP itself is much larger than this 156 acres. It actually extends all the way east uh to Watson Road. Um but this is again just the portion west of Miller that we're talking about tonight.

Uh so you can see the uh 156 acres uh with the box uh yellow box drawn around it on the left hand side of the aerial. Uh it is an agriculturally used property currently for farming. Um West Park single family subdivision is located to the west. Uh to the south across Warner Street, so not directly adjacent, but across Warner uh is the Northwood Park Estates, the rural residential community. Um to the north of the project, north of Lower Buckeye are the two large distribution centers.

Uh one for Five Below and the other for Funkco. Uh and then the uh east u of this property across Miller Road is largely undeveloped and used currently for agriculture. Um it is part of the the Monoverty CMP in the future is anticipated develop with uh primarily residential uses but also a little bit of supporting commercial. Um the uh exceptions to that are um the existing McCain Elementary School. Uh there is currently a church under construction as well.

Uh Christ's Church of the Valley is developing a campus out on that property as well. Um moving to the the middle map, the zoning map. Um the property again is part of that larger Monovery CMP, which is that kind of chocolate brown color. Um surrounding zoning is General Commerce. To the north, which is that industrial zone. Uh to the west, the West Park CMP, fully developed in this portion. Uh and then to the south that rural residential for that uh acre lot, Northwood Park Estates community.

Uh the general plan is uh master plan community which is the ideal um land use designation for a CMP. It's basically kicks the can on the general plan uh to the zoning step. Uh I've already uh mentioned, but I'll say it one more time. This amendment is applicable only to that 156 acres. So all the brown that was on that map to the east of Miller Road are not impacted at all by this proposal. Um the primary purpose of this amendment is to modify the land use plan for this 156 acre property.

Uh it would um I guess I'll point to the exhibit on the right side of your screen. Um first you can see on top the existing uh land use plan uh and then on the bottom the proposed uh they're actually quite similar in terms of how they're configured. Um the uh commercial uh which is on the top picture kind of the orange color on the bottom the red is located at the northeast corner at the intersection of lower Buckeye and Miller.

Uh and then there are surrounding residential parcels of various densities uh all with a internal collector street that's serving them all. Um the proposal as you can see basically maintains that same uh configuration. It just modifies uh the size of the commercial. It takes up a significantly larger area from 15 acres originally to about 50.

Um and also uh reconfigures uh some of the density uh in terms of uh number of units that could be developed in these residential clusters or pockets uh from 433 which is around 2 and a half 2.7 units per acre up to 862 which would be 5 and a half. Um that's primarily still single family residential. The only exception actually it's not working. Um but the only exception is just south of the red on the on the lower image. Um you can kind of see the the caramel color there.

That parcel is reserved for multifamily residential or garden style apartments. Threetory uh around 20 dwelling units per acre. And that that density is factored into that total unit calculation that I just mentioned. Uh in terms of commercial uses, the CMPA would permit primarily retail, restaurant, service office entertainment and institutional uses like schools or churches.

Um, it uh it does not allow for your heavy industrial or even your uh light industrial types of of buildings like you see to the north like the five below and and the Funko does allow some limited business park uses. Uh but those are capped at buildings of no more than 50,000 square feet. Uh just to give you an idea, our facility at the landing, the city's landing uh city hall annex um is about a 200,000 foot building.

So even that which is generally considered a smaller business park type building uh that's four times as big as anything that that this would allow. Uh and then 40 ft in height which is a fairly standard commercial building.

[clears throat] Uh there are standards included within the CMPA designed to accommodate a variety of housing types which is something that is [snorts] a goal at the city when we did the housing action plan uh to try to accommodate uh all different types of residents who want to be a part of our community and they don't all necessarily want the same type of house.

Um so the uh development standards proposed uh accommodate your traditional detached single family homes where you know one one home on a lot and five foot setback to the next etc. Uh but also uh cluster homes where there might be like a courtyard between uh three or four homes sometimes called four packs. Um patio homes where you might share a wall um with uh with one other homeowner but those are typically owned. uh alley loaded homes.

You see those in Verado where where the garage is accessed from an alley in the rear. Uh attached town homes um you know your your six or eight unit type of building where uh your living space is above your garage uh type of thing. Uh and then uh garden apartments on that one parcel that I mentioned uh which would be up to three stories. The development standards are all based on zoning district uh equivalents within our code.

Um but they have proposed enhanced buffering to uh really make sure that this proposal is in line with the surrounding area. [clears throat] Excuse me. Uh the commercial standards in terms of height and setbacks and whatnot are are based on the C2 district with uh no deviations. Um some of the other uh kind of aesthetic uh and open space type of stuff uh minimum 20% open space which is a significant number more than our code requires in in some of these instances.

Um there is a western buffer that is proposed a 30foot. And I'll just go back. Uh along the western property line might even be better to look at it on this. Um where the site abuts West Park, there will be a 30-foot buffer um provided where there's going to be a trail uh so that the rear of any residential lot on this site doesn't uh directly back up to the West Park neighborhood. There'll be a trail corridor in between. Oops, went too far.

Um, and then of course there will be pedestrian connections provided from this new portion of residential neighborhood uh to the surrounding street. So, Miller Road, uh, Warner and Lower Buckeye. that will help not only to to connect the residents to future services and commercial um but also to the schools uh existing in the area particularly the elementary school in West Park as well as the school across the street in uh in Monovery the McCain school.

[snorts] Uh there was a neighborhood meeting uh very lively one actually that was held in early May 4th. Um there were approximately 30 residents, maybe a few more than that, uh that attended. Uh the concerns were varied uh that were raised at that meeting. Um some had some residents had concerns with more commercial. They definitely didn't want to see industrial. I would say that's that was a consensus. Um some voiced some concerns with residential density or building heights.

Uh traffic of course is is something that always comes up um as being a concern. uh buffering screening um you know making sure that people can't see from somebody's house in this uh development into the backyard of somebody's home in one of the existing projects. Um and then um parks and schools whether there was adequate capacity to to handle uh the additional uh residents that would be generated here.

Um pleased to to say that based on that feedback, Jeff and his team revised the proposal um fairly sub substantively. Um in response, um there is they they reduced the amount of commercial. There was previously an additional uh commercial parcel proposed uh at the south, it's at the southeast corner of the site uh closer to Northwood Park. They've turned that to single family residential. Um they've lowered the density by over 100 units from what the original proposal was.

Uh and then provided stronger western edge screening and buffering with that trail corridor. Um so um in staff's view, they've they've worked quite well to try to um meet the the the surrounding residents in the middle. Um additional written comments uh were received in addition to that neighborhood meeting. uh very similar concerns um that were were raised in those and all notices of this hearing have been completed.

Uh with regard to the school uh issue, Buckeye Union um has signed off and and said that they have more than adequate capacity. They've worked with this particular developer in the past to get a school site. So, they have a good relationship uh with them. Um they've tried to reach out to Buckeye Elementary. They here to have been unsuccessful. They've tried two or three times. We'll continue to keep trying to to connect with them. Um but to date, we've received no responses.

Uh with regard to uh staff's findings on this proposal, um first being that consistency with the general plan, we're always checking for that. And in this case, the Monovery CMPA property all has that master plan community designation, which just means that um we can propose or the developers can propose uh uses, development standards within that to be guided by the CMP. So, we're good there. No general plan amendment is needed.

Um we find this uh an appropriate location for some increased residential density. Um, I don't think we would look at this site as being appropriate for a bunch of, you know, apartment complexes, but the predominantly single family homes that are proposed here with a small amount of of multif family we feel is appropriate. This area has changed quite a bit in the 20 years since the original CMP was approved.

Uh, Miller can can handle certainly much more traffic than than what it used to, particularly north of the canal. um you know the freeway Buckeye extends to this area now rather than kind of being an isolated island uh as it was in 2005. Um so that kind of more urban style of development is is appropriate in staff's view. U we like what this proposal does in terms of providing transitions uh between uh the higher intensity uses like the commercial and the multifamily.

Uh neither of those directly abut any of the existing neighborhoods uh in the area. Um only single family is proposed adjacent to uh to both of those uh existing neighborhoods. Um whereas the commercial is is proposed across the street from the industrial. Um so very very appropriate transition there. [clears throat] Um, and then, uh, I mentioned already, but I I'll mention again, uh, the 30-foot landscape buffer as well as a screen wall will provide additional separation from from West Park.

I touched on the commercial uses are being uh, appropriately located at that intersection of the two arterial streets. Uh, very typical configuration where you'll have commercial at that arterial to arterial corner. Um this would not just to to rectify any concerns residents would would have uh would not permit any sort of conventional largescale warehouse or distribution. They don't residents would not have to worry about this becoming another five below for example.

Um this would be very small scale if if it's even proposed at a future date be very small scale 50,000 foot buildings or smaller. More likely this will develop with retail uh service uses like the the shopping centers that I mentioned. um open space, uh trails, pedestrian connections, all all provided uh through this amendment uh to provide a more integrated development. This will feel like a a unified project as opposed to a series of kind of disconnected parcels.

Uh and we are very um we're happy to see that the applicant made meaningful revisions to the proposal following their meetings with the community. Um so chair commission with that uh happy to answer any questions. Um this uh our recommendation of course is for approval this evening subject to conditions A through Z uh and a public hearing is required and Jeff is available as well. Jeff, your mic's not working. Um, is that something it needs to turn on or is that something you Hello? Yeah.

Testing. Well, I thought it was working. Y thank you. I'll see. Okay. Um we've been uh working with staff on this project for about about two and a half years. It's been a two two and a half years. I think it's been quite a long process. Um and the reason being that, you know, when we first started the process, we were anticipating or looking to see to maybe extend some of that industrial type use onto this property. So our initial vision was to to do more of that industrial.

Um but however, after meeting with staff and council member Beard and getting beaten up pretty well, we've worked over this plan a number of times um and ultimately uh you you've seen the plan that we we came up with and it and it it eliminates any type of industrial warehousing. Uh what what Ken's talking about with the 50,000 square foot that would be an office building, a small office building. I mean these aren't I mean about a Walmart's you know 200,000 square feet.

So this we just wanted to pursue to to allow us in the event there's some type of uh that type of use that you'd see that would allow you know that kind of that really small level business park on a portion of the property that it would be permitted uh because the site is 51 acres. It's a very large site.

However, uh again, after meeting with everybody and many of the council members were were pushing us to add more commercial and I think in our uh as we kept looking at the site and seeing what's happening on Miller and the lack of commercial opportunities uh with a lot of the property already being developed along Miller, we we think that uh in time this probably will be the next large scale commercial center for this area of the city because you know as we've seen what's happening at Broadway and then we see what happened at Watson and you know, this is a couple miles away and it's going to need those type of services eventually and and so I think we're we're well we're well set up for that.

Um, as Ken pointed out, we we did have a neighborhood meeting. Um, we had initially proposed I think a cap of about 1,50 units or something around there. Uh, as well as about 25 units to the acre on on the multif family piece. We did have another piece of commercial on the south end that could have kind of gone either way. Um, and in response to that, we reduced the overall unit count by 150, not just 100, it was 150. Uh, and we also reduced the multif family piece down.

So, I think we have an overall density of about five and a half. So, um, we think that's quite compatible what's happened in the neighborhood. We think it's compatible with what's going to happen along Miller Road. I mean, that's a major arterial roadway. Um, and so we'll be, uh, with the roads we'll be building, we think everything is going to accommodate that. Well, um, we know there is the Northwood Park or Northwood estates project door south.

Um, and one of the good things about that is and then currently there's a there's a canal, the RD canal. I think it's RD or Buckeye. I don't know whose canal it is, but there's a canal. Then you've got all of Warner Street and then you're going to have our setback. So you we're going to we're well over 200 feet away just from where their property lines would start. So there's a there's already kind of a built-in buffer there.

And then we're going to provide the additional buffer along West Park so we don't have, you know, homes backing up to existing homes over there. we'll have a 30- foot trails to be there. So, um we think we've done uh everything we can do to accommodate, you know, the concerns we've had, uh to also address, um like I say, we've had many meetings over the past 30 months to try to hone in this land use plan.

And I think we've got it in a good place right now and we're hoping that the P&Z commission can give us a recommendation for approval. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you, Mr. Tripppiano. Yes. Um got just a couple questions. Um what is the standard for open space? I thought it was more than 20%. Uh chair, commissioner, um it depends on our uh in the code, it depends on the the specific use and uh density.

So for residential um for multif for well, let me start on on the lower end. So for a single family with like a suburban density of three to four dwelling units per acre, it's around 15%. Um and it steps up as the density increases, we require more. Um for like multif family, for example, um with densities of 20 plus, it's 25% overall, but the in this case 20% would be provided across the entire property.

So it it'll it'll balance out in favor of more open space than um if we were to kind of say this is 15 and this is 25 type. Um Sun Belt does a good job. So I'm not it looks like all doing this one is just rearranging what's already there. So um they do a good job. I think they're doing a good job in Buckeye promoting commerce and things like that. So I got no problem with the plant itself.

The one thing that does worry me is, and it's been brought up before probably, is the Warner and Miller intersection there with that bridge being so narrow and you're just going to be shoving more traffic onto it. Um, I know it's not part of their property, but is there any plans to fix that? Because I know there was a long time ago someone said they'll give you this much other property. Good evening, chair and commissioner. Anisa Gerard, city traffic engineer.

Um, yes, the that that crossing is currently under design as part of our CIP project that will extend from Lower Buckeye to Broadway. Okay. I just want to make that just more traffic. I know it's going to take a little while to get this built up and everything. So, and I love that commercial is going down that corner. we need commercial instead of the big industrial buildings because no one the guys that work in those industrial buildings have no place to go to get food and everything.

So that's good. Um the other thing that concerns me and I don't know who owns the property to the northeast of the property and um between Lur Buckeye Road there's like a sliver of land. Is that city is that city right away or is that owned by our developer? Yes. Uh, I know I wish I had a a more zoomed in photo. I know what you're talking about. Yes. Just north of Lower Buckeye. Um, between the street and the start of the Funko distribution property. Is that what you're talking about? Yeah.

Yeah, that is uh that is city-owned. I don't I don't know if we realized that until three or four months ago. Um, one of one of the concerns that the neighbors brought up is it was collecting trash. Yeah. Um, we shared that information with public works, um, who hadn't had it on their maintenance schedule. Now it's on their maintenance schedule and I I believe we're we're picking that area on a regular basis. Good.

I was worried that it wasn't theirs and the the other property that was owned by the same people that originally owned uh, Funko and all that stuff. They don't have any incentive to do anything with that little piece of land. But if it's city own, the city will take care of it. I agree with that. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Basselor. Um, first of all, I want to compliment you on all the changes you made after your meeting with about the 30 people. You made a lot of changes here.

I've shared this with some people were at that meeting and they have been very impressed about the fact that you listened to them and that you made the changes. So, you'll be you're going to be commended for for listening and and making the changes. So, thank you. to include the removal of trash that they asked about and it was removed within a couple days. So, they were impressed and they were happy with uh with what they had seen. So, I think your new plan is a is a good one.

It's a modification and I think it it blends well into the neighborhood that that you're going into and answers the concerns of the group of 30 [clears throat] that were at that meeting. Um Ken mentioned it and I'm still going to bring it up and that is schools. Um we have a lack of schools and I don't understand how the superintendent can continue to sign off that we have adequate schools. That's not your issue. You have got nothing to do with that issue. But it is still an issue.

And I I the document that I had does not have the Buckeye Union School signed off for this year. It's got one signed off for last year, but not this year. So, I know and I know that you're still pursuing it with the elementary school. So, I don't know how to get the attention to the city of Buckeye that we have a school system issue and a shortage. Our schools are overcrowded and we keep signing off that we have adequate schools. So, um again, not your issue, it's a city issue.

Your plan looks great. and got my full support for it. Mr. Damascio, I have no questions. Thank you, Mr. Cubs. No questions. It looks great. Thanks. I was at the public hearing, so I remember all I had a bad all the concerns. [laughter] Thank you, Miss Ragdale. No questions. It looks like a very good plan. Thank you, Miss Puppy.

I don't have any questions, but I would re like to re reiterate what Commissioner Bassler had just mentioned about the schools and that Buckeye Elementary hasn't responded. So hopefully that's going to happen soon. I know that's not on you as well. Um that they haven't and but you're to be commended. I I feel like you Kenneth and Mr. Ly have done a really good job together making this plan very co comprehensive and just to work for the community and for that area. Good job. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Puppy. But I was wondering who is Kenneth? That's me when I'm in trouble with my mother. Sorry, I meant to say Mr. [laughter] Thank you. I too would like to uh echo the sentiments of uh my friends. Uh this looks like a win for the city, but I don't know if I can say this or not, Tashka. You can censor me later and smack my hand, but we've got to learn how to pass bonds and Moss overrides that would stop all most of it anyways. And I'm off my soap box.

Uh let's open this thing up for public hearing. I have one speaker request card from Tracy Wolf. Tracy, Miss Wolf, will you step up to the podium here and give me your name and address and you will have three minutes to state your case. Sounds good. and thank you for allowing me to speak and happy evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Tracy Wolf. I live at 25859 West Crown King Road, Buckeye 85326 in the West Park neighborhood happily for the last almost 14 years. Seen a lot of changes.

I graduated from Buckeye Union High School in 1986. 40-year class reunion coming up next month. And my dad graduated also from Buckeye Union High School. Um, I do I feel okay with the changes to the plan. I do have some concerns about ingress and egress off of Wernern as that whole street is part of our West Park community. It's landscaped. We pay for that. And on my little map here, I don't necessarily see entrances to this new development from Warner.

and looking for maybe clarification if those entrances to the new developments will all come in off of lower Buckeye and Miller and eliminate Warner traffic completely. Just unsure about that. Um, and I probably don't have a complete comprehension, but the land you the land is for sale. Is that correct? And this reszoning is, I'm presuming, part of the marketing strategy tra str strategy for new developers to already understand how the land is zoned. Is that chair?

[clears throat] Chair, we're not allowed to uh directly address speaker questions, but I'd be happy to add a little clarity to those items um following the conclusion. Okay. Thank you. And um I guess my strongest concern would be the the density and multif family this strange three-story building in a sea amongst mostly I presume single possibly two-story homes just seems really out of place.

Um, so I'm not really keen on a three-story apartment building and if we could limit that to two or just eliminate the multif family altogether because I think that's going to be factored in somehow in this 20% open space. As the gentleman said, the higher density, the more open space requirement.

So to balance it out at this 20% I think putting the multif family in there with a higher open space really subtracts from the open space allowed for the medium to high high density not the multif family. So, I don't know that it'll be 20% universal because some of that's going to be limited to the multif family dwelling, but I'd like to see the multif family housing eliminated completely.

If we're having row houses, town homes, that serves almost the same purpose, and that's 30 seconds I apparently, and then actually have 20% open space. Uh, the 30-foot barrier between the new development and the existing West Park. Thank you all for cleaning that up. Um, but I think it exists anyway because there's power lines there. Much like on West Park from West Park Reserve, there's a big landscape barrier and there's power lines. So, I presume that's well correct.

And I wasn't real clear on the this wall that you're referring to. Anyway, thank you very much. Have a nice app. Thank you, Miss Wolf. Uh, that was the only card. Is there anyone else before I close the public hearing? You may step up to the podium. Uh, but I'll need you to fill out a speaker request once you're finished. Sir. Thank you, Doug. Thank you. If you'd state your name for me and your address. Frank F.

I live in West Park and I just wanted to tell the council that um I was at the previous meeting when everyone was discussing the potential um land development. I live in a piece of property just to the west of plot s that's going to go in there. Um and I heard the complaints about everything that was going on.

And I just wanted to to tell you that the people that represent um the owner the owners did a fantastic job of listening to what the people had to say and they did what we asked them to do. They cleaned up a mess that was alongside the property line along um plot F. Um, there was a few people that were concerned about retail on Warner as you came in, the people that live on the other side, and that's been taken care of.

So, I just want to point out as a homeowner that I was impressed at the fact that we we hear so many times that people just don't listen and they listened. So, you should take advantage of knowing that these are at least decent people to deal with. I'll fill out the form. Thank you, sir. Where's the form? I'll go get you. Thank you. All right, I'm going to close the public Oh, excuse me. Did you do you speak first? Address or do I close it? I will close the public hearing. Back to you, Mr. Kika.

Chair, assuming um you'd like me to to touch on some of the topics um that were raised. I'm good. If you would talk to Miss Wolf afterwards. Uh, we can do that or I can I can I can just briefly highlight a couple of the things right now.

Um, so the um and I [clears throat] wish I was writing everything down, but um we purposely worked with the applicant on on the apartments to put them interior to this project um so they're not on the perimeter so that even with the three-story buildings, it's going to step down um to no more than two stories as you get to the edges of the project. Um so um there shouldn't be in staff's view anyway, um you know, it shouldn't look out of place.

It should look like a normal progression of of development within this site. Um the western uh trail tract um is in addition to any uh existing power line easements that might be on the West Park property. So um this will be an additional 30 ft beyond that. Uh, and within that there would also be a six-foot wall um separating the the two neighborhoods um from one another.

Just, you know, some people I I personally like when they're open so people can easily get around, but I know there's there's a lot of thought um people kind of want to keep people from their own neighborhood um in their own neighborhood. So um trying to remember what else was raised Oh, access to Warner. Um, so I don't believe we have I I know for a fact we haven't gotten into any site planning yet.

Um, but none of their materials I don't believe they're going to access Warner except for emergency purposes. Jeff, do you want to talk about that? I know it's kind of West Park's driver, but it is public. The city of Buckeye owns it. And so if we had to access at one point, you know, we build a local road to Warner, we would replace all the existing landscaping. It would look the same as it does now with an access point.

There won't be multiple access points, but I think there was a requirement in the traffic, one of the traffic that I think the city wanted an access point to Warner at some point. We didn't want to we didn't want to locate it yet because we're not sure how that southern, you know, how they're going to parcel out. So we'll probably address that when we get to platting.

I know I know one point I think we wanted to put an access point too close to uh Miller when we had a we at one point we had a commercial piece down there and so we were trying to get an access point on the back side of that commercial but now that that's gone that is no longer an issue for us so it'll really come down to the platting and access most of our accesses are going to come in off of lower Buckeye and Miller on that main collector road that we have chair and commissioners I'll just add the fact that the TIA did analyze an access to Warner.

It was beyond the landscape tracks. So, it was in the area where there was just the two-lane road not to impact any of the landscaping. Um, and that was provided and analyzed and everything worked appropriately. Um, as far as level of service and um being able to find enough gaps within the traffic along Warner to allow it to work safely and and operate efficiently. All right, commissioners. Any other questions or comments? I got one question. Just looking at the pictures again.

Um, it seems like on the west boundary that's a trail, not a road. Am I correct? Yes. There. I'll I'll go again. This is a great uh opportunity for a closer zoomed in aerial. Um, so there is actually a street on the west boundary um with a sidewalk um that separates uh this property from West Park. So in other words, no lots in West Park directly back up to this property. Um there's a street between them. So that's an even greater buffer between that neighborhood. Okay.

It look it was hard to tell if it was a street or it was a the the trail that you guys mentioned down the west side. So yeah, it is a street. all the the the homes uh there are on roads that that run east west. Um so their backyards face north and south and so no backyards face uh east again against this property. So and then maybe a city requirement there wouldn't be really any sense in putting a road there anyways. So any access to Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Will there be any more? All right.

And I'd like to uh may I have a motion to recommend approval to council of case number plzz-24-0013 subject to conditions A through Z. Chair, I'd like to make the motion to um recommend approval to city council Vermont CMPA PLZ-24-000013 with conditions A through Z. I'll second that. It's been moved and second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Will there be any comments from the public? Do you have any more clarification and and chair for the record?

The comments to the public is for items that are not on not listed on the agenda. Correct. And um I believe Mr. Galik will be available after the meeting if there are any additional questions from the public offline. Thank you. If I would have read further, I would have known that. All right. Uh, planning manager report. I've wanted to call you mayor like three times today. I'm not sure why, but chair [laughter] chair. Um, very limited uh amount of information to share tonight.

Um, we do have an agenda item, uh, a big one, um, for two weeks from today. Uh, on the 22nd, we'll be bringing the, um, proposed new planned area development for what was previously called Elanto, um, which is a 2,000 plus acre master plan community north um, of I 10 on Sun Valley Parkway on the east side of Sun Valley Parkway. So we have a lot of development occurring on the west with Terra Valis and festival and um what am I forgetting? Oh, Cartesso.

Um this would be the first uh first real kickoff on the east side. So excited to bring that forward um for your consideration in two weeks. Um otherwise um I don't think I have anything. Uh no more wearing white. It's after Labor Day. Thank you. That that doesn't count here. Doesn't count here. Uh, any commissioners [clears throat] would like to speak on current events? Mr. No, thank you, Mr. Puppy. No, thank you, sir. Nothing to report. Miss Ragdale? No, thank you. Cubs, nothing.

Nothing to report, sir. What was skipping you, Mr. Basselor? Nothing, Mr. Tribiano. Nothing to report. Thank you. All right. Well, this meeting is adjourned.