Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Bullhead City Planning & Zoning Commission Work Session on CityCentre District PAD – January 2, 2025

Boards & Commissions — Thursday, January 2, 2025

BodyBullhead City, Arizona

SessionBoards & Commissions

DateThursday, January 2, 2025

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:18:17

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

1:10

Good afternoon.

1:12

Happy New Year to all.

1:14

Uh today is Thursday, January 2nd, and this is a special workshop meeting.

1:20

We will not do any voting in this meeting, but it's an opportunity to ask all our questions and for the public to ask their questions as well.

1:28

Can we um call the meeting to order and a roll call, please?

1:32

All commissioners are present.

1:35

Awesome.

1:36

Okay, discussion discussion item is regarding the city center district excuse me, PAD zoning application.

1:48

Okay, Madam Chair, Commissioners.

1:51

So I think we're all familiar with this project.

1:53

It was in front of the commission a few months ago for the conceptual plan.

1:56

This is now the zoning map change.

1:58

The applicant is here with the presentation.

2:00

We have the property owner on Zoom if if there's any uh questions for him.

2:05

But uh to build upon what we did last time on the conceptual plan, my staff report I broke out each of the individual items they're asking for uh kind of variances from the the typical code requirements.

2:16

So I'd be happy to answer any questions when we get to that point, but I think if you're okay with it, we'll start with the presentation from the applicant.

2:23

Sounds good to me.

2:31

Good afternoon.

2:32

My name is Jay Corda from Phoenix.

2:34

I'm representing Mantle Investments, the applicant for this project.

2:38

Um first and foremost, just thank you everybody, city staff, the commission for taking the time on really right after the the holidays to discuss this project with us.

2:46

We certainly appreciate it.

2:48

Um as you all know, we discussed the conceptual plan of City Center District a few months ago.

2:53

So I'll spare you the lengthy presentation this time around and won't put you through that.

2:57

Um but did just want to touch on a couple things before we really get started in the the kind of meat and potatoes of the present or of the the discussion itself.

3:05

Um as we begin the discussion, I would just like to remind really everyone here that this development as we see it today, as it's been presented today, there's a lot of thought.

3:15

It was methodically designed, there was a lot of time and effort from various different parties in putting this together um with reason and with purpose.

3:24

Um, from the various uses that you see included um to the locations within the respective development.

3:29

Um the zoning requests and the modifications, everything has a purpose, everything has a reason for why you see it as it is today.

3:37

The design itself takes into consideration the scale and centrality of the property um as well as all of the potential end users and the goal of all of the involved groups from the developers to the city to the end users to the residents is really honestly to create a true destination and a sense of community within city center and within Bullhead.

3:58

I think it's important to note, and I think everybody here can recognize and probably agree that Bullhead itself is largely a suburban city.

4:05

It's a suburban market.

4:07

That aside, this project, given where it's located, given the downtown walkable component, given its core location, this is largely an urban project.

4:15

So I just ask as we start that as we start to get into the questions and and discuss all the modifications and the zoning, um, just bear that in mind that this is largely an urban project for the focus of of this conversation.

4:28

Um lastly, the application itself is largely similar to the conceptual plan that came through a few months ago.

4:34

Um there are a couple updates as we've had further discussions, not only with the commission and city council, but also with the city.

4:41

Um so I will pass it on to our lead consultant Jason Sanks, who's joining us here.

4:45

We'll just go into a little bit more detail on that portion.

4:47

Thank you very much.

4:50

Thank you, Jake, and good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Commissioners.

4:54

Uh it's great to be back.

4:55

I think it's almost four months now since we last saw you.

5:00

And as Jake mentioned, the conceptual plan that was brought before you, you may recall it was a pretty packed application for conceptual plan.

5:07

We had a lot of planned area development components in there.

5:10

There's a lot of content.

5:11

And I wanted to thank staff for getting out the P and Z packets early this time around so that you'd have more time to start digesting that.

5:17

As well, they accommodated our joint interest in having a study session or work session prior to your hearing, so we can kind of work through any number of questions you might have regarding the planned area development.

5:29

And as Jake alluded to, um, I think just to kind of start off, I do have a brief PowerPoint.

5:34

I promise not to take forever.

5:36

But we are doing a planned area development.

5:38

It's a unique site, it's your city center, it's your downtown.

5:42

And so, as many of you already know, your zoning code is largely written to address more suburban development, development standards.

5:51

And so what we did is rather than really view everything as a variation or a variance or a deviation, is we're crafting zoning districts that make sense for urban development, uh, for compact walkable development.

6:04

And so our intention through all of the deviations was to create zoning districts that make sense for the project, not to spread everything out with large Walmart style parking lots with large ranch at lots, where if you're gonna walk from your house to go shopping or go get a cup of coffee, because you choose to live in a lifestyle destination like a downtown center, rather than live on the outskirts of town in a large spread-out neighborhood.

6:27

You can walk from your home to development, like getting a coffee and not have to walk past super large lots.

6:34

Um it's all compact and walkable.

6:36

So, with that said, I'll start with a brief presentation.

6:39

We'll go to the next slide.

6:40

And as Jake mentioned, we have um several members of our team have looked at this.

6:45

We've had a civil engineer, land planners, traffic engineer, I'm an entitlements consultant.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning Regulations█████████████████████████████████████████████47%

Public Engagement████████████13%

Watercraft Safety████████8%

Education and Workforce███████7%

Tourism Promotion███████7%

Affordable Housing██████6%

Senior Services████4%

Procedural██2%

Parks and Recreation██2%

Summary of Proceedings

Bullhead City Planning and Zoning Commission Work Session on CityCentre District PAD – January 2, 2025

The Bullhead City Planning and Zoning Commission held a special work session on Thursday, January 2, 2025, at 4:00 PM in City Council Chambers to discuss the CityCentre District Planned Area Development (PAD) zoning application (Case Z24-011). The applicant, Mantle Investments (represented by Jake Kwarta, Jason Sanks, and property owner Ali Salass), presented a proposal to rezone a 246‑acre parcel at 2541 Highway 95 from PL (Public Lands) to PAD with underlying R1L, R1MH, R2MF, RP, and C2 uses. No votes were taken, as the session was for discussion only; a formal public hearing and vote will occur at a later commission meeting.

Discussion Items

Project Overview: The CityCentre District is a mixed‑use, urban‑style development centered on a "Main Street" concept, including single‑family homes, multi‑family units, townhomes, build‑to‑rent, senior living, luxury RV park, self‑storage, and commercial uses. The maximum residential units are capped at 2,400, with no more than 480 off‑site constructed homes (manufactured, modular, etc.).
Development Standard Modifications: The applicant requested numerous deviations from standard zoning, including:
- Minimum lot size reduced from 6,000 to 4,000 sq. ft. for single‑family residential.
- Front setback reduced from 20' to 15' (with a required 20' driveway for off‑street parking).
- Rear setback reduced to 10' for both single‑family and multi‑family.
- Lot coverage increased to 65% (single‑family) and 65% (multi‑family).
- Commercial parking reduced by 25% (to 1 space per 333 sq. ft. for the first 100,000 sq. ft. and 1 per 400 sq. ft. above).
- Maximum building height for commercial increased to 5 stories/60' (plus 12' for architectural features) – hotels already allowed 5 stories under current code.
- Zero‑foot setbacks and 100% lot coverage allowed in commercial districts, with the caveat that sight triangles be maintained.
- Open space requirement (normally 5% of gross area) waived in favor of a landscaped trail corridor along an existing gas line easement.
- Maximum cul‑de‑sac length increased to 1,000 feet (contingent on Fire Department approval).
- Off‑premise (billboard) signs allowed up to 50' in height, limited to three signs within 390' of Main Street, advertising only CityCentre tenants and events.
- Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) permitted by right; assisted living, bed‑and‑breakfasts, and other uses added to land use tables.
Commissioner Concerns:
- Commissioner Stein expressed concern about zero setbacks and 100% lot coverage for commercial uses, particularly along Highway 95, arguing the language could allow buildings directly on the street without landscaping or sidewalks. Applicant and property owner clarified that along Highway 95, the city’s right‑of‑way (including a future third lane, sidewalk, and buffer) extends approximately 25–30 feet from the curb to the property line, making zero setback effectively irrelevant there. On Main Street, buildings would be placed close to the sidewalk to create a walkable urban environment, with parking behind. Commissioner Stein remained uneasy about selling parcels to future developers who might exploit the zero setback allowance.
- Commissioner Kramer suggested that in lieu of the 5% open space waiver, the developer consider a voluntary contribution to improve nearby city parks (Rotary Park and others). The applicant acknowledged the idea and noted that the gas line easement trail and a retention basin/park area would serve as open space.
- Commissioner Del Bob asked about the scope of future approvals; staff clarified that after PAD zoning is approved, preliminary plats for each development unit will come before the commission, but the zoning standards (setbacks, heights, etc.) will be fixed.
- Commissioner Gary questioned whether residents would have to pay extra for RV/boat storage if it is not provided on individual lots. The applicant stated the cost would be market‑based, but that smaller lots would save buyers money.
- Commissioner (unidentified) raised concerns about the five‑story height allowance (60' plus 12') being too tall for Bullhead City. Staff noted that hotels already allow 60', and the additional 12' is only for architectural projections. The applicant indicated that taller buildings would be limited to the Main Street core.
Affordable/Attainable Housing: The applicant emphasized that a triangular parcel in the northwest corner is designated for affordable (LIHTC) housing, and the smaller lot sizes and reduced standards are intended to lower costs for attainable market‑rate homes.
Traffic and Access: A third lane on Highway 95 will be provided as part of the development, tapering south of the hospital. A roundabout and art feature are planned at a main entrance. A traffic impact analysis was reviewed and found acceptable.

Key Outcomes

No formal action was taken; the work session was for discussion and to gather input from the commission.
The commission did not vote on the zoning map change; a public hearing and recommendation vote are expected at a future meeting.
The applicant agreed to consider adding a specific setback requirement along Highway 95 if the commission desires, and to explore the possibility of a park contribution in the development agreement.
Staff confirmed that if the PAD is approved by City Council, the zoning standards will vest, and future preliminary plats will be reviewed by the commission but cannot alter the adopted zoning provisions.
The meeting adjourned without a set date for the next hearing, but the matter is anticipated to appear on a subsequent commission agenda.

Meeting Transcript

Good afternoon. Happy New Year to all. Uh today is Thursday, January 2nd, and this is a special workshop meeting. We will not do any voting in this meeting, but it's an opportunity to ask all our questions and for the public to ask their questions as well. Can we um call the meeting to order and a roll call, please? All commissioners are present. Awesome. Okay, discussion discussion item is regarding the city center district excuse me, PAD zoning application. Okay, Madam Chair, Commissioners. So I think we're all familiar with this project. It was in front of the commission a few months ago for the conceptual plan. This is now the zoning map change. The applicant is here with the presentation. We have the property owner on Zoom if if there's any uh questions for him. But uh to build upon what we did last time on the conceptual plan, my staff report I broke out each of the individual items they're asking for uh kind of variances from the the typical code requirements. So I'd be happy to answer any questions when we get to that point, but I think if you're okay with it, we'll start with the presentation from the applicant. Sounds good to me. Good afternoon. My name is Jay Corda from Phoenix. I'm representing Mantle Investments, the applicant for this project. Um first and foremost, just thank you everybody, city staff, the commission for taking the time on really right after the the holidays to discuss this project with us. We certainly appreciate it. Um as you all know, we discussed the conceptual plan of City Center District a few months ago. So I'll spare you the lengthy presentation this time around and won't put you through that. Um but did just want to touch on a couple things before we really get started in the the kind of meat and potatoes of the present or of the the discussion itself. Um as we begin the discussion, I would just like to remind really everyone here that this development as we see it today, as it's been presented today, there's a lot of thought. It was methodically designed, there was a lot of time and effort from various different parties in putting this together um with reason and with purpose. Um, from the various uses that you see included um to the locations within the respective development. Um the zoning requests and the modifications, everything has a purpose, everything has a reason for why you see it as it is today. The design itself takes into consideration the scale and centrality of the property um as well as all of the potential end users and the goal of all of the involved groups from the developers to the city to the end users to the residents is really honestly to create a true destination and a sense of community within city center and within Bullhead. I think it's important to note, and I think everybody here can recognize and probably agree that Bullhead itself is largely a suburban city. It's a suburban market. That aside, this project, given where it's located, given the downtown walkable component, given its core location, this is largely an urban project. So I just ask as we start that as we start to get into the questions and and discuss all the modifications and the zoning, um, just bear that in mind that this is largely an urban project for the focus of of this conversation. Um lastly, the application itself is largely similar to the conceptual plan that came through a few months ago. Um there are a couple updates as we've had further discussions, not only with the commission and city council, but also with the city. Um so I will pass it on to our lead consultant Jason Sanks, who's joining us here. We'll just go into a little bit more detail on that portion. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jake, and good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Commissioners. Uh it's great to be back. I think it's almost four months now since we last saw you. And as Jake mentioned, the conceptual plan that was brought before you, you may recall it was a pretty packed application for conceptual plan. We had a lot of planned area development components in there. There's a lot of content. And I wanted to thank staff for getting out the P and Z packets early this time around so that you'd have more time to start digesting that. As well, they accommodated our joint interest in having a study session or work session prior to your hearing, so we can kind of work through any number of questions you might have regarding the planned area development. And as Jake alluded to, um, I think just to kind of start off, I do have a brief PowerPoint. I promise not to take forever. But we are doing a planned area development.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com