Paradise Valley Legistar Banner
File #: 19-107    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Study Session Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 3/7/2019 In control: Planning Commission
On agenda: 3/19/2019 Final action: 3/19/2019
Title: Discussion of Major Special Use Permit Amendment (SUP-18-12) 10555 N Tatum Boulevard - Mountain View Medical Center
Attachments: 1. A. Application, 2. B. Vicinity Map & Related Maps, 3. C.1. Narrative, 4. C.2 Site Plans, 5. C.3. Landscape, 6. C.4 Elevations, 7. C.5 Open Space Criteria, 8. C.6 Signage, 9. C.7. Lighting, 10. C.8. Drainage & Utility, 11. C.9. Parking & Traffic Updated 2, 12. D. SUP Guidelines, VSC & Code Provisions, 13. E. General Plan Policies, 14. F. Background & SUP History, 15. G. SUP Existing - Proposed Comparison (03-05-19), 16. H. SOD, 17. I. Compliance to SOD, 18. J. Comments (Updated) 03-12-19

TO:                                             Chair and Planning Commission 

 

FROM:                      Dawn-Marie Buckland, Deputy Town Manager                                            

Jeremy Knapp, Community Development Director

Paul Michaud, Senior Planner

                                            

DATE:                      March 19, 2019

 

CONTACT:

Staff Contact

Paul Michaud, Senior Planner, 480-348-3574

End

 

AGENDA TITLE:

Title

Discussion of Major Special Use Permit Amendment (SUP-18-12)

10555 N Tatum Boulevard - Mountain View Medical Center

 

Request

REQUEST

Mountain View Medical Center L.L.C., the property owner of the Mountain View Medical Center, is seeking redevelopment of the existing 9.8-acre medical plaza located at 10535, 10555, 10565, 10575, 10595, and 10599 North Tatum Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 168-07-001C). The property owner is requesting a major amendment to the site’s existing Special Use Permit - Medical Office zoning. The request includes a phased demolition of all existing structures. The present site has 6 single-story medical buildings that will be replaced with 4 one-story and 2 two-story medical buildings in approximately the same locations as the existing buildings. Refer to Attachments C.1 through C.9 for more information.    

 

Background

MEETING PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this work session is for the Planning Commission to continue their review of the application request focusing on landscaping and on the proposed architectural design. The applicant will also be available to provide an update from their first of two neighborhood meetings held on March 14th. There are no new plans or other documentation from what has already been provided. The applicant is expected to bring more information on building materials at this work session. Also, the applicant will be able to provide feedback from their March 14th neighborhood meeting at the March 19th work session.

 

BACKGROUND

Update from Prior Meeting(s)

The Planning Commission discussed this application at the March 5, 2019; February 19, 2019; January 22, 2019; January 9, 2019; December 18, 2018; and December 4, 2018 work sessions.

 

 

The applicant provided an update on several additional traffic points requested by the Planning Commission. The main takeaways from the traffic update was that the applicant and Town Engineer will work with the City of Phoenix to increase the northbound left turn lane timing onto westbound Shea Boulevard understanding that the City of Phoenix is unlikely to modify the overall 150 second time cycling. Regarding U-turns at Beryl Avenue from the Fry’s center traffic, the City of Phoenix will be adding a signalized light at the center’s western Shea Boulevard entrance due to the traffic warrants for redevelopment near the Trader Joes’ commercial plaza. It was noted that no warrants were found to add bus pull outs, deceleration lanes or a signalized light at Beryl Avenue. However, the existing wide pavement on Tatum Boulevard can accommodate a striped right turn lane onto Beryl Avenue that the City of Phoenix is willing to consider. The applicant’s traffic engineer stated that available data does not show cut-through traffic or parking to be a problem within the Firebrand Ranch neighborhood. A lot of time was taken discussing the pros and cons over gating or removing the Beryl Avenue driveway into the medical center. Commissioner Anton clarified his point on gating is more of a courtesy to the adjoining neighborhood in mitigating potential nuisances with afterhours access than addressing cut through traffic. Draft stipulations and the Town Code addresses limitations on noise, construction, and related items. The applicant noted that the increased number of vehicles from the proposed project represents less than one percent of the total number of vehicle capacity of Tatum Boulevard and Shea Boulevard.

 

Regarding exterior lighting, both the existing and proposed light fixtures comply with the Special Use Permit guidelines. Staff noted that the proposed lighting may have a different feel than the existing lighting. The building lighting will be predominately wall sconces instead of soffit fixtures and the proposed parking lot/walkway lighting will include bollard lights and 16’ tall pole lights per the guidelines. The applicant noted that the proposed lighting seeks to improve the current tenant complaints related to the low level of lighting and lack of a sense of security.  The Planning Commission directed the applicant to use bollard lighting instead of the pole lighting in the areas between the proposed buildings and the Firebrand Ranch neighborhood. The emphasis was that any pole light fixtures may be considered in locations not perceived from the adjoining residential homeowners, such as along Tatum Boulevard and Shea Boulevard.

 

Council Statement of Direction

The Town Council issued a Statement of Direction (SOD) on November 15, 2018. Attachment H is the SOD.

 

Background

Background information on the history and conditions on the subject property, its General Plan and Zoning, and enforcement are available in Attachment F.

Body

 

DISCUSSION/FACTS

The attached SOD covers a variety of aspects the Council would like the Planning Commission to focus their review for this request. Please refer to the SOD for a complete list of items.

 

Attachment I describe how the redevelopment meets the SOD. This document will be completed as the Planning Commission reviews the application request. Any updates will be shown in track change format.

 

Some possible points for the Planning Commission to consider for the upcoming work session are as follows:

 

Revised Landscaping. The existing and proposed landscape setback along Tatum Boulevard, Shea Boulevard and Firebrand Ranch do not meet the Special Use Permit guidelines for a 50’ wide landscape setback along public streets and 40’ landscape setback along residential lots. The existing landscape material of turf and many non-desert plants also does not fully meet the original landscape plan of stone hardscape with desert plant material or the 2018 adopted Visually Significant Corridor (VSC) plant palette of mesquite, palo verde, saguaro and ironwood. The proposed landscape plant material meets the Town’s Landscape Guidelines and Visually Significant Corridor plant palette. If desired, some turf would be consistent along Tatum Boulevard as the subject property along Tatum Boulevard lies within the Rural Elegance Zone of the Visually Significant Corridor plan.

 

Some points for the Planning Commission to review may include the following:

 

                     Width of the landscape setbacks along Tatum Boulevard, Shea Boulevard and Firebrand Ranch, along with any direction to the applicant whether the proposed landscape setback widths are adequate or require changes. Due to the triangular property shape, existing interior circulation and desire of the owner to replace the existing buildings in a similar location; their proposed plan keeps the rear interior drive aisle setback 25’ from the property line to Firebrand Ranch instead of the present Special Use Permit guideline of a 60’ setback. Prior Commission discussion and neighborhood input indicated a preference to meet Special Use Permit guidelines. With a major amendment request for the property, how the project can or cannot meet Town guidelines are evaluated.    

 

                     Direction regarding whether the proposed landscaping/hardscaping meets the “special” test as this site is an entry into the Town and along the Visually Significant Corridor of Tatum Boulevard. This includes how the plan meets the Visually Significant Corridor guideline on use of hardscape/site walls, split rail, stone veneer and rustic pavers and other “best” options. Items to consider includes:

o                     A calculation of one tree every 50 to 100 lineal feet. The proposed landscape plan has 28 trees along Tatum Boulevard (1 existing), which is more than the VSC guideline of 10 to 19 trees. The proposed landscape plan has 41 trees along Shea Boulevard (15 existing), which is more than the Town Code requirement of 30 trees. The minimum suggested number of shrubs averages about 50 per street frontage using the various guideline standards. The proposed number of shrubs per street frontage is in the couple hundred range or more.

o                     The area between the property line along the street and the front of the buildings have 55% live coverage. Live coverage is well over 55%. Except for driveways, this entire area is landscaped.  

o                     The best option suggests the use of saguaros and ocotillo. The proposed landscape plan includes 15 saguaros and 8 ocotillos along Tatum Boulevard. The saguaros are generally back of sidewalk. Whereas, the ocotillos are nearest the buildings.

o                     The best option suggests incorporating wayfinding lighting. The medical plaza walkways include path lighting. No wayfinding lighting is suggested along the public streets or along Firebrand Ranch in the rear yard to meet the Statement of Direction in discouraging loitering. The street lights along Tatum Boulevard and Shea Boulevard will illuminate the sidewalk.   

o                     The applicant will provide more information at the upcoming work session on how the use of weathered steel split rail, accent stone and desert motifs from the VSC guideline may be incorporated.  

 

                     Find out from the applicant additional neighborhood input regarding tree type along Firebrand Ranch and wall height at 8’ tall. Resident input to date favors raising the wall to 8’ tall.

 

                     Get feedback on whether the proposed landscape plan sufficiently discourages loitering in strategic locations through spiny plants and/or other design elements. The landscape material on the street side of the parking lot screen walls is bird of paradise that is generally spiny to discourage sitting on these walls. The proposed landscaping along Firebrand Ranch is not necessarily spiny, but it is heavy planted.      

 

Architecture. There are no specific guidelines or Statement of Direction on architectural design. However, based on Planning Commission’s interest of this site’s prominence as an entry point into the Town and some resident comments regarding the architecture, opportunity will be reserved at the upcoming work session to discuss the proposed architecture.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT & NOTICING

Mailing notification will be done in advance of the Planning Commission and Council scheduled hearing to all property owners within a radius of 1,500 feet, along with a newspaper advertisement and property posting. Noticing of the Citizen Review Meeting will be mailed to all property owners within a radius of 1,500 feet at least 10 days prior to that meeting. The applicant is voluntarily doing an extra neighborhood meeting. Attachment J includes all written comments given to staff up to the week prior to the Planning Commission meeting.

 

NEXT STEPS

The revised SOD provides the Planning Commission until April 16, 2019 to make a recommendation on this application request. It is anticipated there will be another work session on this application at the April 2nd Planning Commission meeting. If there is a desire for another continuance for Commission to make a recommendation, this should be directed to staff at the March 14th work session to provide adequate time to place the request on the Commission and Council agendas. 

 

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment A - Application

Attachment B - Vicinity Map & Related Maps

Attachment C.1 - Narrative

Attachment C.2 - Site Plans

Attachment C.3 - Landscape

Attachment C.4 - Elevations

Attachment C.5 - Open Space Criteria

Attachment C.6 - Signage

Attachment C.7 - Lighting

Attachment C.8 - Drainage & Utility

Attachment C.9 - Parking & Traffic

Attachment D - SUP Guidelines & VSC

Attachment E - General Plan Policies

Attachment F - Background & SUP History

Attachment G - Existing- Proposed Comparison

Attachment H - SOD

Attachment I - Compliance to SOD

Attachment J - Comments

 

 C:                      - Applicant

                                - Case File