Tempe Development Review Commission Meeting - September 14, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Tempe Development Review Commission Meeting - September 14, 2021
The Development Review Commission held a regular meeting on September 14, 2021, at 2:15 PM UTC. The commission approved the minutes from the August 10, 2021 study session and regular meeting, and considered one land‐use application—the Adams Family Garage Addition—which was placed on the consent agenda and approved unanimously. No public testimony was taken. The meeting also included announcements about the next meeting date and a potential future retreat with the City Council.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The commission unanimously adopted the minutes from the August 10, 2021 study session and regular meeting (roll call vote: 7–0).
- Adams Family Garage Addition (PL210252): The commission determined this case was suitable for the consent agenda and approved it unanimously (roll call vote: 7–0), subject to the stipulations in the staff report. The request was for a Use Permit Standard to allow a 20% reduction of the required side yard setback from 7 feet to 5 feet 7 inches at 8661 South Kenwood Lane.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were received because the only case on the agenda was placed on the consent agenda.
Key Outcomes
- Minutes adopted from both the August 10, 2021 study session and regular meeting.
- Adams Family Garage Addition approved subject to stipulations.
- Next meeting scheduled for October 12, 2021.
- Possible retreat with City Council members was mentioned; further details will be provided later.
- Meeting adjourned after announcements.
Meeting Transcript
Welcome to the uh September 14th, 2021 hearing of the Development Review Commission. The Development Review Commission is created to hold public meetings and hearings to provide analysis and recommendations to the City Council regarding general land use policies and applications where the commission has recommendatory power and to render final decisions on specified application where the commission has final decision making power, including but not limited to all aspects of a proposed and future development. The development review commission recognizes that the creation of a desirable environment throughout the city for residents, businesses, and industry is a prime requisite for the interdependence of land values, aesthetics, and good site planning by promoting harmonious, safe, attractive, and compatible development that is therefore considered to be the in the best interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare. Any person aggrieved by a final decision of the development review commission may file an appeal to the city council within 14 calendar days after the development review commission has rendered its decisions. All development review commission recommendations to the city council are not final decisions. We have Commissioner Michelle Schwartz, Commissioner Don Cassano, Commissioner Scott Sumners, Commissioner Phil Amarosi, Commissioner Barbara Lloyd, and alternate commissioner Rihanna Corbett, who will be sitting in for Chairman Mike D. Domenico. We also have Commissioner Charles Redman, who will be not directly participating in the Commission hearing, but will be a guest viewing the activities. It looks like Shelley Sailor is here, Ryan Levesque, Saparna Daskupta, Steve Abrahamson, Joanna Barry, Diana Kaminsky, and Jason Wolf, who is handling all of our media media and channel 11 activities. For members of the public, you'll be given up to three minutes to speak if indeed a case is on the regular agenda. Staff will assist in monitoring this time, and please note that the chat box that is on our Cisco WebEx screen is not monitored, nor will it be moderated. Tonight we have one case that was scheduled for public hearing, and the commission has determined that this case is worthy of being placed on our consent agenda, which means we will not need to take public testimony that the commission will vote on this case immediately after consideration of the meeting minutes. If there is anyone in the audience that wishes to have this case polled for a public hearing, you need to let staff know that at this time. Otherwise, this case is intended to be recommended recommended for approval and moved on. Tonight we have two sets of minutes for consideration by the commission. The minutes uh from the commission study session of August 10th, 2021, and the regular commission meeting minutes from August 10th of 2021. Uh the commission has had an opportunity to review these minutes as prepared by staff from our former meeting. Uh Commissioners, uh, any need to revise the minutes as presented, or I'd be willing to accept a motion. Mr. Chairman, no um no minutes for the minutes at all. I would move the uh commission adopt the minutes as submitted. Second that motion, Commissioner Cassano. It's been moved by Commissioner Sumner, seconded by Commissioner Cassano. We need to do a roll call vote because we are uh virtual. Uh Commissioner Schwartz. Aye. Commissioner Cassano. Aye. Commissioner. Commissioner Sumner's aye. Commissioner Amorosi. Aye. Commissioner Lloyd. Aye. And the chair votes aye as well. Thank you very much. Moving on to application PL 210252, the Adams Family Garage Edition. Uh the Commission has recommended that this be placed on the consent agenda. Uh can I have a motion to place this on the consent agenda? So moved, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Cassano. And a second. Second, Commissioner Amarosi. It's been moved by Commissioner Cassano. Seconded by Commissioner Amarosi. Roll call vote. Commissioner Schwartz. Commissioner Passano. Aye.
openpublica.com