Public Meetings - Tempe, Arizona

The Development Review Commission of Tempe, Arizona, met on August 13, 2024, at 2:15 PM to consider a consent agenda and a public hearing for a zoning map amendment and development plan review at the northwest corner of Rural and Warner Roads. The meeting included public testimony and commission discussion, resulting in approval of the consent items and the proposed development. Consent Calendar - Approved unanimously the study session and regular meeting minutes from July 23, 2024. - Approved unanimously the consent agenda consisting of the following items: - Item 2: Nelson Residence – Use Permit for two parking spaces within front yard setback (209 East Manhatton Drive). - Item 3: Bellagio Smoke and Vape – Use Permit for tobacco retailer (1753 East Broadway Road, Suite 102). - Item 4: Verlea Project – Use Permit for two parking spaces within front yard setback (1633 East Verlea Drive). - Item 5: McCracken Residence – Use Permit for two parking spaces within front yard setback (1500 West 7th Place). (Originally pulled for public comment, but speaker was not present, so it remained on consent.) Public Comments & Testimony - Michael Myrick (Tempe resident, 45+ years, former public official) opposed the project due to traffic concerns. He stated that residents on 71st Street already experience overflow parking from the nearby Postino (northeast corner) and that turning left out of the neighborhood is dangerous. He felt the traffic study underestimated impacts and that the project would worsen existing issues. - Larry Kelly (71st Street resident since 1967) supported the development, noting the corner is the “ugliest” between US-101 and I-10 and that it would provide a community gathering place and a sound buffer. He requested measures to prohibit overflow parking on 71st Street. - Joe Lewis (neighborhood resident for 40 years) opposed the project, arguing that the area is rural and that additional density is not needed. He questioned the parking reduction and expressed concern about the potential for undesirable tenants in the future. - Doug Brown (71st Street resident) opposed the parking reduction, citing concerns about overflow parking on 71st Street and the difficulty of turning left out of the neighborhood. He said the reduction of 29 spaces from code requirements would lead to parking in residential areas. - William Judge (Tempe resident, 8405 South College Lane) supported the project, calling the site an “eyesore” and stating the community is underserved by retail/restaurants. He believed the traffic study adequately addressed concerns and that biking/walking would be encouraged. - Paul Lines (resident) opposed the location of the driveway on Warner Road, advocating for a right-in/right-out only configuration to reduce accident risk. He argued that left turns into and out of the site would be dangerous due to high speeds and proximity to the intersection. Discussion Items - NWC Rural and Warner (PL240155) – Zoning Map Amendment from AG to PCC-1 with a Planned Area Development Overlay and Development Plan Review for a 3.75-acre single-story commercial development with four buildings (11,500 sq ft retail, 16,000 sq ft restaurant, plus patio). - Applicant presentation (Majela Boss, Gammage and Burnham; Jamie Blakeman, traffic engineer; Lanya Shaw, Butler Design Group): - Proposed 235 parking spaces (29 fewer than code’s 264) but increased bike parking to 35 spaces (double code requirement). - Traffic study estimated 2,000 weekday trips, with 180 AM peak and 231 PM peak trips. The study was approved by Tempe traffic engineers. - Design emphasized articulation, pedestrian scale, and mid-century modern aesthetic with materials like brick, metal panel, and fiber cement board. Buildings are pushed to the street with landscape buffers along residential edges. - Staff report (Seth, Community Development): - Staff recommended approval subject to conditions, including parking management strategies (valet, off-site agreements) if needed, and requirements for right-of-way dedication, archaeological protocols, and cultural sensitivity training. - The site is archaeologically sensitive; no prior development. - 55 attendees at the neighborhood meeting; mixed feedback. Letters: 1 support, 1 opposition at report writing; additional 3 support, 3 opposition received later. - Commission discussion: - Commissioner Richter suggested adding windows or glass on street-facing elevations; applicant agreed to consider. - Commissioner Tom suggested adding metal canopy elements on street sides; applicant agreed to work with staff. - Commissioner Schwartz asked about permit parking on 71st Street; city traffic engineer Corey Steele confirmed resident-initiated permit parking is possible with 70% neighborhood vote. - Commissioner Spears opposed right-in/right-out restrictions, stating they push traffic into neighborhoods. - Commissioner Tom supported the project, noting he drives the intersection daily and that parking reduction is acceptable. - Chair expressed support, noting the positive transformation of the nearby northeast corner. Key Outcomes - Motion to approve PL240155 (by Commissioner Spears, seconded by Commissioner Richter) – passed unanimously (no recorded dissents). - Conditions of approval include: - Applicant to work with staff on design enhancements (metal canopies, windows on street elevations) as discussed. - Parking management plan (valet or off-site agreements) to be developed if parking demand exceeds supply. - Standard conditions for right-of-way, archaeological protocols, and cultural sensitivity training. - No further action on consent agenda items (approved). - Next steps: The development review commission’s recommendation (approval) will be forwarded to the Tempe City Council, which has final decision authority. An appeal must be filed within 14 days of the commission’s decision. Meeting ended at approximately 4:15 PM (estimated from transcript length).

The Development Review Commission met on July 23, 2024, at 6:00 PM to consider a consent agenda, a public hearing for a second-story addition at the Lee Residence, and updates from staff. The meeting began with a study session to review the agenda, followed by the regular meeting. The consent agenda was approved unanimously, and the Lee Residence request was approved with additional conditions by a 6-1 vote. Consent Calendar - Item 2 (48th and Alameda West): Approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda. This item corrected incorrect language in conditions of approval from February 27, 2024. - Item 5 (Healing Tree Collective): Approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda. This was a request for a use permit to allow a massage establishment. Public Comments & Testimony - Arthur Nunez (east neighbor, Mesa resident): Expressed concerns about privacy from second-story windows looking into his backyard with a pool, and potential shadowing of solar panels on his house. - Daryl Davis (San Diego, brother of neighbor Stephanie Donahue): Opposed the current design, arguing that the upper-level massing (975 sq ft addition on a 1,900 sq ft footprint) is out of scale with the neighborhood's single-story and smaller two-story homes. Suggested a basement or smaller upper level to match bulk and scale. - Stephanie Donahue (west neighbor, 317 East Carter Drive): Opposed the design, citing privacy impacts from south-facing windows, potential devaluation of her property, concerns about the house being used for rentals due to proximity to ASU, and negative impacts on solar panel viability. She noted that the house is excessively large with five bedrooms and bathrooms. Discussion Items - Lee Residence (Item 3): The applicant, architect Katie James and homeowner Daniel Lee, requested a use permit for a 975 sq ft second-story addition at 323 East Carter Drive. The proposal included converting a carport to a garage, adding a master bedroom, great room, and reconfiguring the first floor. Staff recommended approval subject to standard and unique conditions, including a pitched roof to match neighborhood character, cement board lap siding, frosted film on east- and south-facing second-story windows, and architectural relief on east and west elevations. Six public comments in opposition were received. Commissioner Forte noted the house would be 3,500 sq ft, far exceeding the typical 1,500-2,500 sq ft in the neighborhood, and opposed the project. Commissioner Spears supported it, noting the general plan encourages family spaces and that staff had addressed concerns. Commissioner Tom discussed design details and the applicant's agreement to modify the roof pitch and window placement. Key Outcomes - Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously (7-0). - Lee Residence (PL240139): Approved 6-1, with Commissioner Forte opposed. The motion included the additional conditions presented by staff at the meeting: (1) pitched roof similar to other two-story homes; (2) architectural-grade asphalt shingles; (3) cement board lap siding on the east and west elevations; (4) frosted film on second-story windows facing south and east; (5) architectural relief on at least 50% of the east and west elevations; (6) applicant to work with adjacent neighbors to ensure structural integrity. - Item 4 (postponed): Postponed to August 13, 2024. - Staff Announcements: The city is preparing an ADU ordinance update with a public draft by the first week of August, to be reviewed by the commission in late August for council adoption by the end of the year. - Future Meetings: Regular meetings on August 13 and August 27, 2024; the August 13 study session will include an update on the Character Area Six plan.

The Development Review Commission (DRC) held a public hearing on June 27, 2024, to consider several land use applications. The meeting included approval of a consent agenda, a public hearing on the Tempe Gateway mixed-use development (which was approved 4-3), and a public hearing on the 1010 Apache student housing project (which was denied unanimously). The commission also heard public comments on both items. Consent Calendar - Sam's Club Tempe Marketplace – Approved. - Warner and Hardy – Approved. - AME Electrical Contracting Office – Approved. - Chick-fil-A – Approved with a revised condition of approval adjusting closing time from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. - Golden Feet Reflexology – Approved. - Filibertos – Approved. - Sterling Tempe – Approved. Public Comments & Testimony Tempe Gateway (Item 8): - Support: Several residents of North Tempe spoke in favor, citing the need for revitalization, increased amenities, and the developer's extensive community outreach. Julie Lynde, Darlene Justice, Kim Gaffney Loza, Lane Caraway, and others expressed support, noting the project would improve the area and that the developer had been responsive to neighborhood concerns. - Opposition: Residents and tenants of the existing apartments voiced concerns about displacement of affordable housing, loss of existing tree canopy, lack of affordable units in the new development, and the height and density being out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Ken Jacobson, Lori Herman, Elizabeth Stewart, and others argued the project would eliminate 487 affordable units, increase traffic, and set a negative precedent for the general plan. 1010 Apache (Item 10): - Opposition: All three speakers (Phil Amarosi, Robert Miller, Paul Kent) opposed the project, primarily on the grounds that it would require a general plan amendment just months after the 2050 plan was approved by voters. They argued the height (21 stories) was out of character with the south side of Apache Boulevard, would set a bad precedent, and that the site's constraints make it unsuitable for such density. Some expressed support for a more modest development. Discussion Items Tempe Gateway (Item 8): - Applicant Wendy Ridell presented a rezoning from R3/R4 to MU4 with a PAD overlay for a five-story, 910-unit mixed-use development on 17.22 acres at the northwest corner of Scottsdale and McKellips roads. Key features: 24,000 sq ft of commercial space, 1,625 parking spaces (1.78 per unit), 901 bicycle spaces, 25% landscaped area, and a three-phase buildout over 10 years. The applicant emphasized consistency with the newly adopted General Plan 2050 (65 du/acre) and extensive community outreach. Staff recommended approval with conditions, including a two-year building permit timeline. - Commission Discussion: Commissioners expressed mixed views. Some supported the project for its density and potential to attract amenities, while others opposed due to loss of affordable housing, phasing risks, and displacement of 471 existing units. A motion to approve passed 4-3 (Commissioners Spears, Lloyd, Schwartz opposed). The vote was a recommendation to City Council. 1010 Apache (Item 10): - Applicant Nick Wood presented a request for a General Plan Amendment (to allow 65 du/acre), zoning map amendment (CSS to MU4), PAD, and development plan review for a 21-story, 363-unit student housing project (946 beds) on a 1.04-acre site at the southwest corner of Rural Road and Apache Boulevard. The project included two levels of underground parking, 359 parking spaces, 390 bike spaces, and 5,000 sq ft of retail. The applicant argued the site is a “hard corner” and that the existing 65 du/acre density is infeasible due to constraints from power lines, irrigation easements, and three street frontages. Staff recommended approval at a reduced height of 15 stories (165 feet) and 235 du/acre, noting the site's challenges but citing consistency with the character of nearby student housing (10-15 stories). The applicant did not accept the reduction. - Commission Discussion: Commissioners expressed strong concerns about amending the General Plan so soon after adoption, the height/density being out of character, and the viability of the site at any density. A motion to deny the application was made and seconded, and passed unanimously (7-0). Key Outcomes - Tempe Gateway (Item 8): Approved 4-3 as a recommendation to City Council. Conditions include a requirement to file a building permit application within two years for Phase 1, and within three years for subsequent phases. Staff will work with the applicant to explore retention of existing trees. - 1010 Apache (Item 10): Denied unanimously (7-0). The commission declined to recommend the General Plan amendment, zoning changes, and development plan. The applicant may revise and resubmit. - Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously. - Meeting adjourned at the conclusion of business.

The Development Review Commission (DRC) convened on Tuesday, June 25, 2024, to review several land use applications. The meeting included the unanimous approval of a consent agenda covering five items, a public hearing regarding a request by Dimes Cabaret to extend its operating hours for entertainment use, and farewell remarks from a departing commissioner. Consent Calendar - Approved the May 14, 2024 study session and regular meeting minutes. - Approved the May 28, 2024 study session and regular meeting minutes. - Approved the consent agenda (Items 3, 4, 5, 7, 8) unanimously. The approved items were: - Item 3: Use Permit for intensification of a tobacco retailer (High Maintenance Smoke Shop) at 411 S. Mill Ave., Suite 103. - Item 4: Use Permit for vehicle sales and service (Rivian Service Center) at 7340 S. Kyrene Rd. - Item 5: Use Permit for vehicle repairs (Lift-N-Wrench) at 3233 S. McClintock Dr. - Item 7: Use Permit for a second-hand store (Arizona Golf Works) at 1920 E. University Dr. - Item 8: Zoning Map Amendment, Planned Area Development Overlay, and Development Plan Review for Vale Student Housing – an eight-story, 279-unit mixed-use development on 3.88 acres at 921 E. Apache Blvd. Public Comments & Testimony - Darlene Justice (North Tempe resident since 1965) expressed concern about the potential for after-hours alcohol consumption in the parking lot, citing the nearby Dream Palace. She requested that the permit require a 21+ age limit after 2 a.m. and a strict no-re-entry policy. - Kim Gaffney Loza (North Tempe resident) voiced concerns about the high number of police calls to surrounding adult entertainment businesses and questioned the viability of the business plan once alcohol sales stop at 2 a.m. - Connor McGilvra (Chandler resident, Dimes Cabaret employee) spoke in support, stating the extended hours would allow him to increase his hours and income. - Anna O'Daniel (Scottsdale resident, industry employee) expressed support, citing the positive environment and the need for more late-night entertainment. - Steve Tully (attorney for Todd Borowski) argued against approval, claiming the current operation violates state law and city ordinance because of its proximity to public recreational areas. He further contended that the original 2006/2007 settlement agreement between the city and a prior owner was improper. Discussion Items - Dimes Cabaret – Use Permit for Extended Hours (Item 6): The applicant, represented by David Palinger and Benjamin Bach, requested a Use Permit to extend the hours of the existing entertainment use from the current 2 a.m. closure to 6 a.m. The site is located at 910 N. McClintock Dr. in the General Industrial/Rio Salado Overlay District. The applicant stated that after 2 a.m., the establishment would offer pool tables, cornhole, giant Jenga, food, non-alcoholic beverages, and dancing by fully clothed dancers. They emphasized that the business would operate as a private club, admitting only patrons 21 and older, with a no-re-entry policy to prevent loitering or alcohol consumption in the parking lot. Security measures include 56 cameras, veteran staff, and frequent parking lot patrols. - Staff Presentation: Planner Lily Drosos reported that the building dates to 1978 and that a use permit for a nightclub with live entertainment was originally granted in 2002 (Club Macarena), later transferred to Elite Cabaret in 2022, and then to Dimes Cabaret in January 2024. A violation for operating past 2 a.m. occurred in February 2024. Staff completed a site inspection and recommended approval subject to conditions: all prior use permit conditions remain in effect; all site modifications must receive permits and pass inspections before the extended hours use begins; and lighting must be brought to code compliance. Staff received one call of inquiry, 18 emails in support, and one in opposition. - Legal Context: Deputy Director Ryan LeVake clarified that the application is solely for expansion of live entertainment hours, not for an adult-oriented business. He explained that the 2006/2007 settlement agreement, which allowed operations through a lot split, has been terminated. The current owners have properly transferred all entitlements. State and city adult-use separation requirements are now aligned. - Commission Discussion: Commissioners asked clarifying questions. No substantive opposition was raised during deliberation. Key Outcomes - Minutes Approval: The minutes from May 14 and May 28, 2024, were approved unanimously. - Consent Agenda: Items 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 were approved unanimously as presented. No public speakers came forward to contest their inclusion. - Dimes Cabaret Use Permit: Motion by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Redman, to approve the application with the conditions specified by staff. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). The permit allows the entertainment use to operate from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., subject to compliance with existing permits, site modification approvals, and lighting standards. - Commissioner Farewell: Commissioner Don Cassano thanked staff, fellow commissioners, and the City of Tempe as he concluded his six-year term on the commission. - Next Meeting: The DRC will next meet on July 23, 2024, for its regular meeting.

The Development Review Commission met on May 28, 2024, at 2:00 PM (MST) to consider several use permits, a planned area development, and a continuance. The meeting included a consent agenda, public hearings, and commission votes. Key actions included approval of a use permit for High Maintenance Smoke Shop, a continuance for Dimes Cabaret, and approval of the Project Elevate development. Consent Calendar - Item 1 (Lush Cafe and Lounge) – Request for a Use Permit to allow entertainment (live music) at 7470 South Priest Drive. Approved unanimously. - Item 4 (James Madison Preparatory) – Request for a Use Permit to allow a six-foot-high fence within the front yard setback at 5815 South McClintock Drive. Approved unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 2 (High Maintenance Smoke Shop): Two online supporters submitted comments but were not present during the hearing. No in-person public comments were received. - Item 5 (Dimes Cabaret): The applicant requested a continuance to address questions from a community member; no public comments were heard. - Item 6 (Project Elevate): No public comments were received. Discussion Items - Item 2 – High Maintenance Smoke Shop (411 South Mill Avenue, Suite 103): The applicant, Jason Horn, and partner Joey Horley (Tempe residents) presented a request for a Use Permit to allow singing, dancing, stand-up comedy, DJ, trivia, and games in their private smoking lounge. The lounge has a capacity of 83 people, is membership-only, and speakers face away from doors. The business had a prior code violation for hosting entertainment without a permit; the violation was closed on March 12, 2024, after the application was filed. Staff recommended approval with conditions (indoor-only entertainment, windows/doors closed during events, speakers facing inward, and patio modification permits required before entertainment use becomes effective). The applicant also noted a separate application for intensification of the tobacco retailer use (cannabis consumption) is pending. The commission approved the use permit unanimously. - Item 3 – McKenzie Residence (2069 East Ranch Road): Withdrawn by the applicant before the hearing. - Item 5 – Dimes Cabaret (910 North McClintock Drive): Request for a Use Permit to expand existing entertainment hours from 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM. The applicant, Jeff Miller, requested a continuance to the next regular meeting on June 25, 2024, to address questions from a community member. The commission granted the continuance unanimously. - Item 6 – Project Elevate (1850 West Elliot Road): The applicant, Swire Coca-Cola (represented by Randy Hirose and Brian Wright of Kimley-Horn), requested a Planned Area Development to modify building height from 90 to 160 feet, a Use Permit to exceed maximum parking (from 638 to 485 spaces, exceeding the 125% code limit), and Development Plan Review for a new 160-foot-tall manufacturing and warehouse building on 42.5 acres. The project will reduce parking by 153 spaces, enhance landscaping along Elliott Road and the west side (in coordination with ADOT), and includes a 10-foot grade change for the parking area. No neighborhood meeting attendees or public concerns were reported. Staff recommended approval with conditions, including upgrades to Todd Drive, bike parking (66 spaces), lighting restrictions to avoid freeway distractions, and ADOT coordination. The commission approved the project unanimously. Key Outcomes - Approved: Use Permit for High Maintenance Smoke Shop (Item 2) – unanimous vote. - Continued: Dimes Cabaret (Item 5) to June 25, 2024 – unanimous vote to continue. - Approved: Project Elevate (Item 6) – unanimous vote, including the Planned Area Development, Use Permit for parking, and Development Plan Review, subject to staff conditions. - Consent Agenda: Items 1 and 4 approved unanimously. - Next Meeting: June 25, 2024.

The Tempe Board of Adjustment met on May 22, 2024, at 6:00 PM with a full board of seven members present. The meeting addressed an appeal of a hearing officer's abatement decision for the Robinson property and a request for reconsideration of a prior board decision regarding Dazey Aesthetic Collective. Consent Calendar - Meeting Minutes (April 17, 2024): Approved unanimously by voice vote. Public Comments & Testimony - Brittany Robinson (appellant, Robinson property owner): Presented a personal appeal against the hearing officer's March 19, 2024 decision to approve a 180-day open abatement for her property at 2215 South Sierra Vista Drive. She argued that city code enforcement provided inconsistent notices, misrepresented communications, and violated her rights by entering her property without consent. She expressed concerns about selective enforcement, retaliation, and the financial burden of compliance. She stated she had not attended the original hearing because she believed only the front yard was at issue and had already remedied it. Discussion Items - Appeal of Abatement for Robinson Property (Item 2): The board heard from appellant Brittany Robinson, staff planner Lily Drosos, and Deputy Community Development Director Drew Yochum. Robinson argued that the hearing officer lacked accurate information due to factual misstatements by code enforcement. Staff presented evidence of multiple code violations (junk, trash, debris, deteriorated landscaping) dating back to October 2023, with extensions granted but continued noncompliance. The initial violations focused on the front yard; the backyard violations were added after December 2023 complaints. The abatement cost was approximately $5,800. Board members questioned the timeline and notice, with some expressing sympathy for the homeowner but noting that the valid notice was given and she did not attend the original hearing. - Request for Reconsideration of Dazey Aesthetic Collective Decision (Item 3): Attorney Darin Sender (representing the business) requested reconsideration of the board's April 17, 2024 decision which overturned the zoning administrator's opinion that Dazey Aesthetic Collective was not a tattoo establishment. Sender argued the board made a mistake of law by not properly applying the definition of

The Tempe Board of Adjustment met on April 17, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. (local time) to consider a single substantive agenda item: an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s opinion regarding whether Daisy Aesthetic Collective at 522 South Mill Avenue should be exempt from the definition of a tattoo establishment. After approximately 90 minutes of testimony and deliberation, the board voted 4-3 to overturn the administrator’s decision, finding that the business’s services constitute tattooing under the zoning code. Consent Calendar - Approval of Meeting Minutes (January 24, 2024): The board unanimously approved the study session and formal meeting minutes from January 24, 2024. Public Comments & Testimony - Sean Battle (Club Tattoo, 29 years in business): Opposed the exemption; stated that fine-line tattooing is identical to traditional tattooing in process and permanence, and that the business’s own social media showed use of three-needle cartridges. - Jenna Mansperger (tattoo artist at Living Canvas Tattoos, Mill Avenue): Opposed the exemption; testified that she offers fine-line single-needle tattoos and that the applicant’s claims of uniqueness were false; also noted that saline removal is common in her studio. - Tiffany Molina (former Tempe business owner, now at Club Tattoo): Opposed the exemption; stated that her own business with the same model was shut down by the city, and that fine-line removals require multiple sessions like traditional tattoos. - Cassie Luhan (co-owner of The Plant Mill, Mill Avenue): Supported Daisy Aesthetic Collective; argued that the clientele and experience are different from a traditional tattoo parlor. - Joseph McClellan (co-owner of The Plant Mill): Supported Daisy; noted that customers visiting Daisy’s would not feel comfortable in a tattoo parlor, and vice versa. - Additional supporters (Brianna Flates, Azaia Vigil, Tina Holsey, Francisco Vigil, Claudia Rooney, Isabel Perez, Cheyenne, and others): Expressed general support for Daisy Aesthetic Collective without substantive testimony. Discussion Items - Appeal Presentation (Mark Walters, appellant, owner of Living Canvas Tattoos): Argued that the Zoning Administrator’s opinion was based on misrepresentations. Presented evidence that the applicant’s own videos and social media show use of three-needle cartridges (not a single needle as claimed) and that fine-line tattooing is not different from traditional tattooing. Stated that the removal process described (saline/lemon juice) is also used by traditional tattoo shops. Raised concerns about future proliferation of tattoo shops on Mill Avenue if the exemption stands. - Appellant’s Attorney (Neil Bookspan): Emphasized that the zoning code’s definition of a tattoo establishment hinges on the need for surgical removal. Noted that the applicant’s tattoos are applied with the same equipment and inks as traditional tattoos, and that the city’s approval could lead to legal challenges and erosion of zoning controls. - Applicant’s Presentation (Darren Sender, attorney for Daisy Aesthetic Collective): Argued that fine-line tattoos are not “tattoos” under the code because they can be removed without surgical procedures (e.g., saline osmosis, fading over time). Stated that 80% of the business involves non-tattoo services (facials, permanent makeup, jewelry). Asserted that the Zoning Administrator’s opinion was correct and should be upheld. - Applicant’s Owner (Malia Sawn, co-owner of Daisy Aesthetic Collective): Described her training as a licensed esthetician and claimed that fine-line tattoos are deposited in a shallower skin layer (epidermis/dermis junction) making them semi-permanent. Showed examples of salt-and-saline removal and fading. Admitted under questioning that the business uses three-needle cartridges, not only single needles. - Staff Presentation (Chris Jasper, Senior Planner): Explained that the board’s options were to approve the appeal (overturn the administrator’s opinion), deny the appeal (uphold the opinion), or continue the matter. Asked the board to provide clear guidance for future policy. - Zoning Administrator (Ryan Levesque, Deputy Director): Stated that the decision was based on the applicant’s description of a single-needle process and the definition focusing on surgical removal. Noted that the business’s additional services were a secondary factor. Conceded that the use of three-needle cartridges would create a “gray area.” Key Outcomes - Motion to Approve the Appeal (Overturn the Zoning Administrator’s Opinion): Made by board member Ron Kegy, seconded by another member. After debate, the board voted 4-3 in favor. The motion passed, meaning the board found that the Zoning Administrator’s opinion was incorrectly determined and that Daisy Aesthetic Collective must be classified as a tattoo establishment subject to the city’s zoning code (including separation requirements). - Vote Breakdown: 4 in favor (Mary Foy, Kevin Morrow, Sean McCarley, and one other – likely the chair or Kaylee Palmer) and 3 opposed (Ron Kegy, Jack Confer, and another – likely Ricky Ben or Kaylee Palmer as per roll call). The final recorded vote was 4-3. - Next Steps: Staff will issue a formal decision letter within a few days. The board’s action is subject to further appeal rights (not specified in the meeting). The next Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for May 22, 2024.

The Development Review Commission held a public meeting on April 10, 2024, at 2:00 PM UTC to consider routine approvals and a use permit for entertainment at Rusty Taco. The commission approved consent items and voted to approve the permit with modified conditions. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes: The commission approved the study session and regular meeting minutes from March 26, 2024. Commissioner Corbett abstained, as she was not in attendance at that meeting. - Food Truck Project (PL 24048): Approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda with no public comment. Discussion Items - Use Permit for Entertainment at Rusty Taco (PL 24042): The applicant, Brandon Risk (co-owner), requested a use permit to allow live entertainment (DJ) at the restaurant located at 707 South Forest Avenue, Suite 112. The applicant sought to modify conditions 9 and 11 of the proposed permit to allow outdoor broadcast of live entertainment until 1:55 AM daily (instead of midnight) and to keep overhead doors open during that time. The restaurant has been operating since July 2022 and received a non-compliance notice in May 2023 for having a DJ without a permit, which prompted this application. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions, including limiting outdoor broadcasts to ambient music after midnight and closing overhead doors during live performances. The applicant argued that the volume would not change and that they have a lease agreement with the landlord (Atmosphere building) to manage noise. Commissioners discussed concerns about enforcement, precedent, and the definition of live entertainment. Staff clarified that the use permit covers all live entertainment (bands, DJs, etc.). Commissioner Spears proposed an amendment to define live entertainment as DJ only, eliminate conditions 9, 10, and 11, and require an administrative review in six months. Key Outcomes - Motion to Approve with Amendments: The commission voted unanimously to approve the use permit for Rusty Taco with the following modifications: - Condition 4 amended to define live entertainment as DJ only. - Conditions 9, 10, and 11 eliminated. - A condition added requiring an administrative review of compliance within six months. - The permit allows DJ-hosted music until 1:55 AM daily, subject to the city's noise ordinance (Chapter 20).

The Development Review Commission (DRC) of Tempe, Arizona, met on March 26, 2024, at 2:15 PM (and into the evening) to conduct a public hearing and deliberations on land use applications. The meeting covered a consent agenda of routine approvals, detailed reviews of three residential projects, and included public testimony, staff reports, and commission votes. The commission approved all items, with some conditions and one split vote.