(GILBERT, AZ.) – It may not have been a record turnout, but when rezoning on a large scale comes up for a vote at a Gilbert town council meeting, residents show up. Despite the pleas of many residents against a new Target supercenter in south Gilbert, others were smitten to hear that rezoning was approved in support of the project.
A new Target, larger than surrounding locations, will be constructed at the site at Higley and Ocotillo.
Numbers is what the council saw on May 19 during the regular council meeting. Droves of residents came to voice their opinions on whether the council should vote to rezone the commercial lot at Higley and Ocotillo, the display revealing a very contentious divide between residents who would like a new Target and those who feel it isn’t the right choice for the area.
The meeting, lasting nearly five hours including a much-needed intermission, featured over a hundred residents who came to speak or to submit a card either in support or opposition of the new proposed Target, though some of those residents also spoke on other concerns.
Photo Credit: YouTube / Town of Gilbert | Half a view of a full house at May 19 Gilbert Town Council meeting
The general consensus of the masses was clear: while a Target would be ideal to some residents, most were largely opposed to the idea, citing concerns ranging from traffic congestion to challenging small businesses by taking away business and opportunity.
OpGov.News reached out to Gilbert representative Joanna Guzman, who provided a full statement on the matter in the following photo.
Photo Credit: Gmail / Teri Tracy
The statement from the town includes the recognition of concerns brought to the council’s attention by the many residents in attendance at the meeting, which, she says, the council asked for in order to consider the project’s full impact on the community.
According to the statement, the developer was asked by the council at a prior meeting on Apr. 7 to address all public concerns.
“Several design elements were incorporated in response to resident feedback, including a widened landscape buffer along the southern property line, an 8-foot screen wall along the eastern boundary requested by neighboring residents, roadway improvements intended to support traffic circulation, and lighting standards designed to reduce impacts near adjacent residential areas. Building heights also remain below the maximum allowance, and the architectural design was reviewed for compatibility with surrounding development,” read the statement.
A Facebook post by the account Living Gilbert, Arizona outlined a petition citing hundreds of signatures by May 11, urging, “Our voices matter and right now, we need every single one of them.”
Attorneys at law Pew & Lake, PLC, who represented SimCRE and GB Investments, Inc. in securing the council’s approval for the proposed Target, was represented itself by Reese Anderson.
Photo Credit: YouTube / Town of Gilbert
Anderson offered a lengthy presentation outlining the reason for the rezone proposal, strongly emphasizing that the rezone considers only that the lot would allow for a 75 thousand-square-foot user rather than referring to the size of the building itself or its parking lot.
The presentation included several graphics detailing the lot and its proposed components, a letter of support from the Basha family, and potential economic benefits.
David Basha spoke during the public comment section in further support of the project, stating, “The trade area is saturated and this will never be a regional site like Santan Mall or the Queen Creek marketplace. Everybody is in place. What I think is you have three users for the entire site. If this was a commercially developed grocery center, you would probably have 25 different users coming and going over time. You have a stable national retailer with a phenomenal reputation.”
Resident Kim Drogus spoke during public comment in support as well, praising the council for its transparency in what will be built at the site and for its purported economic benefit.
Many other residents shared similar sentiments, including gratefulness for an additional Target location, the store selection itself, aligning the project with growth and development goals, and other points.
Most residents, however, expressed that they were not pleased with the new Target location.
Well-known community advocate John Gherkin said he was informed just before the council meeting began that a petition that had been submitted to deny the approval of the project was not accepted, despite having followed all of the guidelines for doing so.
Though Gherkin brought his concern about the denial of the petition to the council, the development in the progress of the petition and his urgency to address the issue overshadowed his intended presentation, which he was unable to read due to the three-minute time constraint.
Resident Steve Forcier spoke his mind on the matter, stating, “'Stop building stuff! We have no room. We have no water. We have no sewer. We have too much traffic.” Another resident, Kristin Halterman, feared that increased traffic would bring forth safety issues within the community.
Public comment continued on for roughly an hour, followed by a staggering 75 cards submitted by residents who wished not to speak. According to Mayor Anderson, 43 of those cards were in favor, while 33 were opposed.
Video Credit: YouTube / Town of Gilbert | Public comment section on the proposed Target rezone at Higley and Ocotillo
Anderson answered remaining questions from the council, highlighting the history of the project and its subjective alignment with the character of the area, among other things.
Councilmember Buchli brought up her concern with removing parking, to which Anderson responded in part, “In the commercial setting right now, again, you've got planning staff, engineers inside and outside, and Target looking at this saying that it fits and there's actually an excess. And by the way, I'm happy to address why there's a target in Queen Creek and a target in Chandler and why one fits here, too, if you'd like, but please help us get some tax revenue here.”
Councilmember Buckland took time to express his gratitude to residents for showing up to present their voices, clearly but civilly, on the topic. He said, “I'm going to hear what you have to say to help me formulate a decision and then I'm also going to make that decision based on many of the other facets that should be going into this decision.”
Other council concerns were heard and answered by Anderson, but ultimately, the vote was put to a motion.
Councilmembers Bongiovanni, Torgesen, and Buchli voted in opposition, while councilmembers Buckland, Koprowski, Anderson, and Lyons voted in favor. The motion passed, and the topic of the meeting moved on to budget.
To add to or correct any information in this report, please contact me at tracy.t@lead4earth.org and leave a comment below.
0
0
Comments