All right, everybody, I'm gonna ask you to take your seats.

We're gonna get started here.

You're ready to go.

Good evening and welcome to the November 8th, 2022 Development Review Commission hearing.

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 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 values, aesthetics, and good site planning by promoting harmonious, safe, attractive, and compatible development that is therefore considered to be in the best interests of 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 decision.

Development review commission recommendations to the city council are not final decisions.

With us this evening, um here on the commission, uh we have uh alternate Robert Miller, uh Vice Chair Andrew Johnson, I'm Chairman Mike D.

Dominico, uh, Commissioners Barbara Lloyd, Linda Spears, and alternate commissioner Charles Redman.

Uh with us from staff uh in the audience and here at the desk, uh Jeff Tamilevich, Ryan Levake, Steve Abraham, Separata Skupta, uh Lee Jimenez, Lily Drosos, Joanna Barry, and Eddie Garcia.

Uh during the public hearing, if there are any items uh that you wish to be heard on, uh, we'd appreciate it if you would, and you don't need to wait till the case is called, you can do it right now.

If you wish to be heard, which means coming up and speaking uh at the dais, um fill out one of these white cards.

You can get them in the back of the room or up here.

Joanna has has a stack of them.

Uh, if you don't wish to uh come up and speak publicly, but you have comments that you want to be read into uh the record, you can also fill out one of these cards, write your comments on here, and check the little box that said read them for me, and we'll be happy to do that.

Uh tonight in our study session, uh, we went through the agenda, and it is our intention to have two items uh tonight uh be voted on in a single vote as part of what we call our consent agenda.

Uh the intent of the consent agenda is to take one single motion and one single vote to approve, and in this case it's items one and two uh on tonight's agenda.

Uh that's the annual report and item number two, uh, the use permit rec uh request for the Salim residents.

Uh, does anyone here in the audience have you appeared uh or are you here to be heard or have any questions on either of those two items?

Okay, seeing none, we're gonna leave those on our consent agenda.

Uh Commissioners, I would entertain a motion for approval of the consent agenda.

Uh it's been moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Vice Chair.

Okay.

Uh, all those in favor, signify by raising your hand.

Motion carries six to zero.

Uh item number three on the agenda has been withdrawn, and that brings us to item number four.

Uh, that we will hear.

This is a request for a zoning map amendment.

Uh, the case is commonly known as the Caliendo Residence, 1100 East Knox Road.

Uh, we'll start off with the applicant if you uh want to come up and give us a presentation, and then we'll follow that up with uh staff.

Thank you, Chairman and members of the commission.

My name is Brian Greathouse with the law firm Birch and Crakiolo.

For your record, our address is 1850 North Central Avenue here tonight representing the Calyendos.

Michelle Caliendo is up on the top there.

She is a little bit ill right now, so she's gonna sit up there.

And Ryan Gilbert are uh land surveyors also here because this is a rezoning case, and it's also uh an approval for a pre pre plat preliminary development plan.

Thank you.

So the subject site is located east of rural road, and it's located north of Knox Road, north of the Corona uh high school parking lot.

The let me zoom in a little here.

The Calyendos own what's called lot one, which is on the north here, and the flores is bought lot two from the Calyendos, and as part of that sale, the Calyendos want to reacquire the site as labeled on here for an expansion in the of their backyard.

Um they've told me they would like to have a bigger backyard for their dogs to roll run around and play.

Um so the overall acreage of that site area is 0.172 acres.

So it's essentially, I think of it as a lot line adjustment rather than a total rezoning case because the uses are going to stay the same.

They're both going to be single family homes, they're both gonna be single family lots.

Uh, in order to do this, what I call a light lot line adjustment is the site, which is zoned AG today, needs to be rezoned R115 to match what the Caliendo's zoning is on their property today.

This is just a map showing what the existing zoning is and what the proposed zoning is.

Um, this is about uh about 7,475 square feet.

It's to allow dogs and kids to run around in the backyard.

Um we know that we have 11 statements of support for the rezoning case.

We know we have one statement of support that's only that's conditioned on an extra stipulation that a perimeter wall be uh erected in between the new lots on the new lot line.

And um my client would like to ask the commission not to approve the rezoning case with that stipulation for the following reasons.

Uh, there's no wall that exists between the properties today.

Uh there's no wall required by the Tempe zoning and development code.

Uh the properties are outside of the Las Estatus pre the plat areas for both Las Estatus 1 and Las Estatus 2, so it's not a part of the HOA, it's not a part of the C C and Rs or any other private restrictions.

Um there's perimeter walls around Las Estatus with vehicle gates, pedestrian gates, perimeter walls.

There's no need for this, what we think is excessive regulation.

Um the calliendos and the flores is we believe can work out what barrier goes between that property line.

They're gonna have dogs running back there, so they need a barrier wall, and they also don't want trespassers.

They don't want people walking through the flores lot, they don't want people walking through the calendos lot.