Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors say Mesa approved residential care facility near Hermosa Vista Elementary without special-use permit
Summary
Residents told the Mesa City Council that a permit for a residential care facility at 2338 East Minton Street was approved without the special-use permit they say is required for transitional community residences in RS-15 zoning, and asked the city to explain.
Residents addressed the Mesa City Council on March 17 to object to the approval of a permit for a residential care facility at 2338 East Minton Street, saying the document that allows the use (PMT24-21631) was issued without a special-use permit.
Mike Steffen, who said he lives at 2626 North Chestnut Circle and identified neighbors who live adjacent to the property, told the council the house is two doors west of 2040/2044 Minton Street and backs to Hermosa Vista Elementary. He said the approved permit was for a residential care facility intended to provide rehabilitation for people with substance use disorders and co-occurring mental-health conditions.
Steffen said the City of Mesa zoning ordinance distinguishes between "family community residences," which the speaker said are permitted by right in RS zones, and "transitional community residences," which the speaker said are measured in weeks or months and require a special-use permit in RS-15 zoning. "This permit was issued without a special use permit," Steffen said in his remarks, and he asked the city to explain why the facility was approved without the special-use process and why community residences are regulated differently than other uses such as day care or home-based businesses.
He also noted the property's proximity to an elementary school and said neighbor concerns include potential risks such as discarded drug paraphernalia and general child-safety risks because children regularly walk and bike in the area.
City staff and next steps
Council members acknowledged the comment and indicated staff would follow up. Staff did not provide a substantive on-the-record explanation during the public comment segment; Steffen said he would expect the city to provide the presentation or materials that explain the permitting decision.
No council motion, vote or formal enforcement action was recorded in the March 17 meeting on this item; the remarks appeared during the citizens present/public comment portion of the meeting.
