Tempe Development Review Commission Regular Meeting – November 10, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Tempe Development Review Commission Regular Meeting – November 10, 2021
The Development Review Commission (DRC) met on November 10, 2021, at 1:15 PM UTC (evening local time) to consider several land use applications, including a drive-through expansion, a major mixed-use redevelopment, and a character area plan. The meeting was chaired by Steve Bauer with Commissioners Lloyd, Amorosi, Sumners, Cassano, Schwartz, and Spears present. Staff included Ryan Levesque, Suparna Daskuta, and others.
Consent Calendar
- 2021 Development Plan Review Annual Report: Approved unanimously (6-0, with one abstention on minutes).
- Study Session Minutes (October 12, 2021): Approved 6-0-1 (Commissioner Spears abstained).
- Use Permit for Mother Iris Massage (410 E Southern Ave): Approved as part of the consent agenda, with no public hearing requested.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Philip Yates (Riverside Neighborhood Chair): Opposed the First and Farmer project, citing excessive height (7 stories), density (130 du/acre), and lack of context. He expressed concern about inadequate information on apartment layouts and asked for the project to be sent back to planning.
- Edward Wong (Riverside Neighborhood): Opposed, citing building height, rezoning from office to apartments, and traffic congestion.
- Justine Yates (Riverside Neighborhood): In a letter read by staff, she opposed the project, stating that the developer had pressured them for support and that the project would set a dangerous precedent. She noted that 9 of 11 neighbors contacted disapproved.
Discussion Items
1. Dutch Bros Coffee Expansion (1037 S Rural Road) – PL210292
- Request: Use permit to allow expansion of an existing drive-through restaurant and a development plan review for a 185-square-foot building addition to increase drink production capacity.
- Applicant (Bill Cantieri, Dutch Bros): Stated that the expansion is needed to handle tripled business volume since 2007, adding equipment to improve service speed and reduce queueing on Rural Road. They noted active negotiations for a second location to relieve this site.
- Commission Discussion: Concerns focused on existing traffic queuing onto Rural Road. Commissioners discussed adding a "pork chop" (raised median) at the driveway to restrict left turns. The applicant agreed to this as a possible condition.
- Outcome: Approved 7-0, with an added stipulation requiring a review of a pork chop island if feasible.
2. First and Farmer Mixed-Use Development (206 S Farmer Avenue) – PL210226
- Request: General Plan Density Map Amendment (from Medium Density up to 15 du/acre to High Density Urban Core >65 du/acre), Zoning Map Amendment (GID to MU-4 TOD with PAD), and Development Plan Review for a 7-story, 200-unit apartment building with 1,036 sq ft of commercial space and 20 low-income units (60-80% AMI).
- Applicant (Darren Sender, Sender Associates; Sam Gordon, Wexford): Emphasized the project's sustainability features (biophilic design, bioswales, solar-ready), reduced traffic (66% less than previously approved office building), and commitment to affordable housing for 25-30 years. They requested waiver of staff conditions capping density at 45 du/acre and parking at TOD ratios.
- Staff: Recommended neutral, noting that the project is a transition from taller downtown buildings to the Riverside neighborhood.
- Commission Discussion: Mixed views. Supporters praised design, sustainability, and reduced traffic impact; opponents (Commissioner Spears) cited loss of employment land and precedent for high density in a neighborhood buffer. Commissioner Lloyd expressed concern about density but acknowledged the reduced impact vs. the office building. Parking reduction (41% below code) was debated but ultimately accepted.
- Outcome: Approved 6-1 (Commissioner Spears opposed). Motion included modification of staff conditions to allow >65 du/acre and reduced parking, plus three additional applicant-offered conditions limiting building height (78 ft to top of mechanical) and ensuring maintenance of vertical plantings.
3. Papago/North Tempe Character Area 1 Plan – PL210310
- Request: Recommendation of design and placemaking principles for the area north of Loop 202.
- Staff (Ambika Atakari): Presented an 8-month public process resulting in a 50-page draft plan with 15 elements, including sustainability, walkability, and climate resilience. The plan is non-regulatory and advisory.
- Outcome: Commission unanimously approved the plan as a recommendation to City Council.
Key Outcomes
- Dutch Bros Coffee Expansion: Approved 7-0 with a stipulation to study a pork chop median at the Rural Road driveway.
- First and Farmer: Approved 6-1, permitting 200 units, 20 affordable units, 141 parking spaces (0.59 per bedroom), and a height of 78 feet. Density set at >65 du/acre. Added conditions limit height and require landscape maintenance.
- Papago/North Tempe Character Area Plan: Approved unanimously for recommendation to City Council.
- Next Meeting: Scheduled for December 14, 2021.
Meeting Transcript
Okay, you can begin with my review. Good evening, everyone. Um, I'd like to call the November 10th, 2021 Development Review Commission hearing to order. Uh, thank you for being here this evening. I I made a statement in study session about anyone who is planning on addressing the commission this evening. Uh, we do have uh comment cards up front here. If you have an opportunity before you get up to the podium, please grab a comment card and fill that out and uh give it to staff so that we have uh a record of your your comments. 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 recommended or recommendatory power and to render final decisions on specific applications 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 use values, aesthetics, and good site planning by promoting harmonious, safe, attractive, and compatible development that is therefore considered to be in the best interest of public health safety and general welfare. Any person who is 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 decision. Development review commission recommendations to the city council are not final decisions. Roll call of the commission in attendance this evening. We have, and it's on my left on the audience's right, Commissioner Lloyd, Commissioner Amorosi, Commissioner Sumners, I'm Chairman Steve Bauer, Commissioner Cassano, Commissioner Schmidt, and Commissioner Spears. We also have a number of staff with us this evening. Ryan Levesque, Suparna Daskuta. I know that Ambika at Hadakari is going to be presenting one of the items this evening. He will be joining us remotely. For members of the public, if you wish to speak and present to the planning or to the commission, you'll be given up to three minutes to speak. Staff will assist in monitoring this time. And also please note that if you are joining us via WebEx, the chat box is not monitored and will not be moderated. This evening we have a number of items. Chairman, I wasn't planning on presentation, but I'm happy to answer any questions you may have or the commission may have of the it's an annual um report that was implemented by city council because the city has so many boards and commissions. Some are the long form that one of the bigger ones is the development review commission. And in the last four years, we have been providing an annual report that it has a little slightly off year in terms of the annual report. It goes from November of the year before to October of the following um year, and the reason being that city council wishes to um put city clerk's office wishes to put that report on the city council agenda for January. So we just have a little lead time, so it's a little off in terms of the calendar year it follows, but we track the hours and the and the number of projects that's this commission has heard in the whole year, and I'm happy to address any questions or anything that you may have seen that you may have questions or um concerns about or any edits revive revisions that you are proposing. Any questions from Commission? Seeing none, thank you. It's a very thorough report. year it follows but we track the hours and the and the number of projects that's this commission has heard in the whole year and I'm happy to address any questions or anything that you may have seen that you may have questions or um concerns about or any edits revive revisions that you are proposing any questions from commission seeing none thank you it's a very thorough report we'll move on to consideration of minutes uh development review commission chairman we did forgot to put the Joanna the um the we do need a motion on this one oh yes very good all right um do I have a motion for approval acceptance of the 2021 development review commissioner casano I'd make a motion to approve the 2021 annual development plan view report is there a second commissioner amorosi second it's been moved by commissioner casano seconded by commissioner amorosi any questions comments from commission hearing none roll call vote commissioner loyd aye commissioner amorosi aye commissioner sumners aye commissioner casano aye commissioner schmid schmore oh I am sorry this is this is commissioner Michelle Schwartz not commissioner schmidt it is my error I I assume that was an aye aye commissioner spears aye and the chair votes aye moving on to the minutes uh study session minutes from October 12 2021 I understand there's uh a modification to these minutes as contained in our packet yes chairman there is a mod uh a revision to the study session minutes and has been noted and will be corrected um before passing it on to the city city council okay is there a motion uh what what is what uh was the revision it chairman it the word um heat was transposed as head the D by vote so Mr. Chairman uh Commissioner Sumners I'm not really worried about head management I was worried more about heat management with that I'd be happy to uh move to accept the meeting minutes for study session and regular session for October 12th 2021 second mr chairman it's been moved by commissioner sumner seconded by commissioner casano any questions comments from commission hearing none uh roll call commissioner Lloyd aye commissioner amorossi aye commissioner summers aye commissioner sumners we have two microphones open if you're not speaking please be sure you use aye commissioner casano aye commissioner schwartz aye commissioner spears abstain and chair votes aye passes by a vote of six to six to zero with one abstention we have a single item that the commission has no issues with that we plan on putting on our consent agenda that is uh item number four which is mother iris massage located at 410 east southern avenue it is a request for a use permit for a massage facility is there anyone in the audience that wishes to have this case heard if not it will be voted on for approval with a single motion seeing none uh is there a motion uh on our consent agenda mr chairman i would make a motion to for approval of the consent agenda as presented is there second second commissioner amorosi it's been moved by commissioner casano seconded by commissioner amorosi for approval uh commissioner loyd aye commissioner amorosi aye commissioner sumners aye commissioner casano aye commissioner schwartz aye commissioner spears aye chair votes aye passes unanimously um moving on to item number five which is a use permit to allow the expansion of a drive through restaurant for Dutch brothers coffee located at 1037 South Rural Road um is the applicant present good afternoon do I uh okay uh chairman bauer uh commissioners uh my name is Bill Cantieri uh my uh address is 1855 uh west uh southern avenue in Mesa and I'm the development manager for Dutch Bros Coffee uh thank you very much for uh being willing to uh to hear our case tonight um our our planner uh lee jimenez has uh uh done a great job putting a report together so I just I don't want to uh reiterate everything that that he he's about to tell you but I just want to give you a little background on on what we are requesting tonight um uh back in May the uh uh Dutch Bros oops uh can you oh sorry uh uh uh back back in back in May the um uh the the Dutch Bruce leadership team uh received Back in May, the Dutch Bros. Oh can my point. Planning staff, streets and transportation. And the city attorney was also part of that call as well to discuss discuss the issue and what we could do to resolve it. One of which was that we were asked and given permission to add you know add signage along rural road, you know, asking our customers not to cue in the street. Staff was added to help help direct people onto the site to double stack them on site, you know, as need be to help get them off the road more quickly. And back at that time, the average Dutch Bros served about three to four hundred drinks a day over an 18-hour period. Five-car drive-through queue was more than enough. And the equipment that we had inside of one espresso machine, one freeze machine, and one blender was enough to handle that volume. Starting in about uh 2011, uh Dutch Bros uh increased in popularity incredibly. And I mean and business, you know, you know, business over time you know eventually you know eventually tripled. Uh unfortunately the size of our building didn't. Uh the uh the other uh you know issue is you know, over that time since 2007, Dutch Bros menu has changed from a primarily hot uh you know, hot met uh espresso pay-based beverage menu to uh to uh much more emphasis in on cold drinks of uh things like uh lemonade, their own uh energy drink, uh and you know, uh fruit smoothies and uh and freeze, uh which is like blended coffee drinks similar to a frappuccino. Um and so the yeah, but as I've said before, I mean yeah, so adding um you know the the menu increased, the quantity of cold items increased, the uh the drink mix went from primarily hot to primarily cold, and you know, and and just and basically we don't have the room inside the building to uh to make the cold drinks fast enough. Uh and so uh so what our idea was and going back to the recommendation from from Mr. Smith from the police department, how can you be faster? It's like, well, we needed to put more equipment in the building. And the only way that we could do that is by an a building expansion. Uh so um uh what slide are we on, sir?
openpublica.com