The Town of Gilbert Redevelopment Commission on May 21 approved a conditional use permit for the South Anchor project that allows 31 ground‑floor residential units within a 175‑unit, mixed‑use development at the northwest corner of Gilbert and Elliot roads.

The permit, identified as UP25‑15, passed by a 4‑0 vote after staff and the applicant said the ground‑floor units had been anticipated in the project’s request-for-proposal (RFP) and memorialized in the development agreement. Kristen Devine, senior planner for the town of Gilbert, told commissioners the hearing before them was strictly for the use permit; the public will see a separate design‑review submittal next month.

The project site covers about 2.8 acres and includes two buildings — a residential structure wrapped around a parking garage and a separate commercial building — with a paseo linking the two. The development proposes 175 residential units in total, 31 of them on the ground floor (predominantly one‑bedroom units with some studios and a two‑bedroom), roughly 14,500 square feet of commercial space (about 5,500 square feet of retail and about 9,000 square feet of restaurant/bar use as stated by the applicant), and approximately 368 parking spaces across the site and garage. Staff noted about 10,860 square feet of indoor residential amenities located in part on the ground floor.

Alex Hayes, attorney representing Keeley Properties, said the ground‑floor residential element was contemplated in the RFP and development agreement and argued the units would strengthen the area’s walkable, mixed‑use character. "These bottom floor units really strengthen the walkable character of this area," Hayes said, adding that the units are sited away from major arterials and include stoops and brownstone‑style elements required by the development agreement for Ash Street elevations.

Residents who testified supported redevelopment of the site in principle but urged design changes and more neighborhood engagement. Mark Horn, who lives on Washington Street in the Heritage District, said he and neighbors want a project that "will blend in with the neighborhood" and be "an attractive development" consistent with the district. Dorelease Machado Liddell, a Heritage District and Lacey Tract resident, said she preferred a project that fits the neighborhood and asked for greater transparency about what the town agreed to in the development agreement. Liddell also questioned whether a traffic study had been completed, asked how alleys would be used and whether parking calculations accounted for employees and retail customers.

Commissioners who spoke said they expect to review a revised design at the next meeting. Commissioner Claussen, who moved approval, and Commissioner Raab, who seconded, both said they look forward to the applicant’s resubmittal and that previous study‑session comments about design will be addressed in design review. Commissioner Updike, participating virtually, said she had no concerns with the ground‑floor residential element as presented.

The commission’s action was limited to the conditional use permit; design review, architectural details and any changes to materials, massing or streetscape treatment will be considered at a later hearing. The staff recommendation, approved by the commission, included four findings of fact required for a CUP under the town’s Land Development Code.

Neighbors asked staff to confirm that the west elevation along Ash Street meets the development agreement’s brownstone requirement; one commenter asked the commission to remove language in the finding that references "row‑like attributes" and instead adhere to the brownstone standard in the development agreement. The applicant and staff said they have a resubmittal in process and will return with revised elevations to address the comments.

Outcome: Motion to approve UP25‑15 passed 4‑0. The commission closed the public hearing and will consider the project’s design review in a future meeting.