Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Multifamily topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission recommends approval of 72‑unit multifamily plan on Northern at 80th, 4‑1 vote

5844700 · August 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City of Peoria Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 21 recommended City Council approval of a minor general plan amendment (GPA 24‑07) and a rezoning (Z24‑07) that would allow development of a 72‑unit multifamily complex on a roughly 5‑acre infill site at Northern Avenue and 80th Avenue.

The City of Peoria Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 21 recommended City Council approval of a minor general plan amendment (GPA 24‑07) and a rezoning (Z24‑07) that would allow development of a 72‑unit multifamily complex on a roughly 5‑acre infill site at Northern Avenue and 80th Avenue. The recommendation passed the commission 4‑1 for the general plan amendment and the rezoning recommendation carried by the same margin.

"The goal with this request is to develop a 72 unit multifamily residential complex," Senior Planner Sarah Dirks told the commission during the joint presentation of the two cases. Dirks said the applicant seeks to change the land‑use designation from Traditional Residential (2–5 dwelling units per acre) to Urban Residential (12+ du/ac) and to rezone the parcel from C‑1 (convenience commercial) to RM‑1 (multifamily residential). The applicant proposes 72 units (48 one‑bedroom, 24 two‑bedroom), two stories (about 34 feet), and 162 parking spaces (a mix of garages and surface stalls).

Staff and the applicant described the site as long and narrow (approximately 165 feet wide) with right‑of‑way dedications and land‑use buffers that reduce the developable area. The proposed design includes three driveway access points from 80th Avenue, a 15‑foot street frontage planting area, an east side buffer and screen wall facing Brighton Charter School, dog‑run and on‑site amenities, and two gated access points coordinated with the school for emergency and limited school egress.

Traffic engineering staff presented the study findings: "The proposed development would generate an estimated 36 vehicle trips, vehicles driving to and from the site during the busiest hour in the afternoon and an estimated 28 vehicle trips during the busiest hour in the morning," the city traffic engineer said. Staff said the vehicle trip counts are lower than would be expected from commercial development on the same parcel and that the development would include a new sidewalk to improve pedestrian safety for school children; staff also noted the city will evaluate signal warrants for the Northern/80th intersection in the current fiscal year.

Public comment included objections from nearby residents. Sandra Basulto, a Somerset Village resident whose backyard abuts the subject property, told commissioners: "I live in a cul de sac. It's been nice and peaceful," and raised concerns about increased traffic during school drop‑off, potential parking overflow into neighborhood streets, and perceived impacts on privacy and safety. Staff said they received two written letters of opposition and summarized citizen participation from an April neighborhood meeting; many concerns centered on traffic, density, and school safety.

Dirks told the commission staff found the urban residential designation and RM‑1 development standards compatible with surrounding uses, and the project was described as a transitional infill option between the arterial road and adjacent residential neighborhoods. The applicant’s architect, Peter Kolleopoulos of Circle West Architects, said the design team had coordinated with the school and emphasized a robust landscape buffer and security measures on the east property line facing the school.

Commissioners asked about school capacity, utilities and coordination with the school district; staff said school‑district comment is a separate review process and that the city did not receive formal comment from the district on this case. Commissioners also discussed the possibility of requiring future reporting or traffic mitigation; staff said utility and engineering reviews occur during subsequent site plan review and that traffic signal costs would generally be considered under the city’s capital program unless a development’s trip generation met a threshold that justified a developer proportional share. The commission then voted to forward both the general plan amendment and the rezoning to City Council with positive recommendations.

If City Council approves the requests, the project will proceed to the site plan review and permitting stages; staff noted the applicant’s site plan is in administrative review and that engineering and utility approvals will be required before building permits are issued.