The Apache Junction Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 on July 22 to recommend that City Council approve Case PD-25-4-PZ, a rezoning request by Skyline QOZB LLC to allow a two-story, 100-unit multifamily rental development on about 9.4 acres at the northwest corner of Winchester Road and Junction Street.

Planner Erica Hernandez, planning staff, said the application requests rezoning of three parcels (APNs 101-19-0220, 101-19-023B and 101-19-023C) from City Center B-3 and General Rural Low Density Single Family Detached Residential (RSGR) to High-Density Multiple-Family Residential Planned Development (RM-2 PD). Hernandez said the parcels are designated downtown mixed use in the city’s 2020 general plan and therefore did not require a general plan amendment. "This case will be heard by City Council during work session on Aug. 4 and for a public hearing on Sept. 2," Hernandez said.

Hernandez described the project as a gated community with the main entrance on Junction Street, an exit-only on Winchester, a six-foot perimeter wall, and 400 parking spaces combining garage, driveway, guest and ADA parking. The plan shows a two-story complex including triplex and five-plex building types with two- and three-bedroom units, a clubhouse with sand-finish stucco, a pool and spa, pickleball courts, a tot lot, green spaces and a dog park. Hernandez said the applicant agreed to Monterey-finish stucco for the residential units; staff revised condition of approval No. 4 to reflect that material choice.

Public comment included concerns about growth, traffic and water. Deborah Stone, who identified herself as a resident at 2137 South Tomahawk Road, said she moved to the area for rural character and opposed more development. Howard Stone, also of 2137 South Tomahawk Road, cited long-term residence and said water availability was a concern. Both speakers were part of the public hearing record but staff and the applicant told the commission the project had local outreach: notices mailed to property owners within 300 feet, a newspaper advertisement, and a neighborhood meeting on June 9 attended by two neighbors who were reported as supportive. Hernandez also said one Weaver's Needle resident emailed support while requesting setback reductions to accommodate decorative walls and covered patios.

Commission discussion touched on setbacks, walkability and housing supply. Hernandez clarified that the only intrusion into the setback would be covered patios reduced to five feet while the building face remains ten feet from the property line, and that sidewalks exist on Winchester and Junction. Commissioner Jesse (speaking by phone) said the rezoning fits the general plan, while other commissioners emphasized preserving historic and rural character even as they acknowledged growth.

Reese Anderson, attorney with the law firm Pew and Lake representing the applicant, said the applicant and owner Belle 4 Communities support the revised condition 4 and were not aware of formal opposition. "The staff did an excellent job summarizing it," Anderson told the commission.

Vice Chair Barker moved to recommend approval, and the motion was seconded. The roll call vote recorded Commissioner Callan voting no and Chairman Hanche, Vice Chair Barker, Commissioner Gage and Commissioner Mikelund voting yes; the tally was 4-1 in favor. The commission’s recommendation advances the application to City Council, which will consider it at a work session on Aug. 4 and hold a public hearing on Sept. 2.

Votes at a glance: Case PD-25-4-PZ — motion to recommend approval of rezoning from B-3 and RSGR to RM-2 PD to permit a two-story, 100-unit multifamily rental development on approximately 9.4 acres; mover: Vice Chair Barker; second: not specified on the record; vote: 4 yes, 1 no (Callan); outcome: recommendation to City Council for approval.

The record and staff report include proposed conditions of approval; staff highlighted the revised condition No. 4 specifying Monterey-finish stucco for residential units and sand-finish stucco for the clubhouse. City Council will take the matter up in a work session on Aug. 4 and a public hearing on Sept. 2; no council action was taken at the Planning and Zoning meeting.