Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mesa council introduces zoning case 24-00891 for 39-home Encanto infill; neighbors raise access and water concerns

2216582 · February 4, 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

Mesa City Council on Feb. 3, 2025 introduced zoning case 24-00891, a Blandford Homes plan for 39 homes adjacent to a church and Mountain View Park; council moved the item to a final hearing set for Feb. 24, 2025.

Mesa City Council on Feb. 3, 2025 introduced zoning case 24-00891, a Blandford Homes plan for 39 new residential lots adjacent to a church and Mountain View Park. The council voted to move the item forward for final consideration, with a motion by Councilmember Pillsbury and a second from Vice Mayor Summers. The introduction passed with no recorded opposition.

Residents who live on or near East Encanto Street told the council the project could worsen existing traffic and low water pressure in the neighborhood, and they asked for written terms requiring the church to allow construction vehicles to use the church’s access during building. "There's only one way to get in and out of that new development," said William Bodine, who lives at 2847 East Fountain Street. "Thirty-nine homes, 3 cars each potentially, that's a 117 more cars going up and down Encanto Street." Tim Meyer, 2860 East Encanto Street, said he has had measured water pressure near the city's minimum and asked the city and developer to guarantee the system will maintain service if the project proceeds.

Reese Anderson, whose property directly abuts the proposed site at 1005 North Alba, told the council he and about 17 neighbors submitted a petition of support to the planning and zoning board and that, on balance, he supports the project while still wanting engineering issues resolved. "I've dealt with the engineering department for decades now," Anderson said. "Those are engineering issues that need to be resolved."

Sean Lake, representing Blandford Homes, told the council the developer has met with city staff about water pressure and is "comfortable with that," and that the company will meet with the city and neighbors before the final hearing on Feb. 24 to discuss access and other concerns. "We're excited about this project," Lake said. "As far as the access issue ... we'd love to meet with the city between now and when this is final heard on the 24th."

City of Mesa planning staff described the site as a typical small infill development and said city engineers currently are not expressing concern that 39 homes will reduce system pressure below acceptable levels; staff also said the fire marshal is comfortable with the emergency access shown on the plan. Planning staff cautioned that creating a permanent new public road through a city water-retention basin and reconfiguring park parking would be a longer-term, higher-cost action requiring conveyance, design, and funding decisions. "Building a road through the city park ... is not something we can just say, 'oh, sure,'" a city planning official said.

Councilmembers discussed the trade-offs between neighborhood character, infrastructure costs and housing supply. After debating whether written construction-access agreements or new roadway connections should be required at introduction, the council voted to advance the zoning case to its final hearing; no final rezoning vote was taken on Feb. 3.

The council set no new conditions at introduction; staff and the applicant agreed to continue meetings with neighbors and to return with responses before the final hearing scheduled for Feb. 24, 2025.

Votes at a glance: Motion to introduce zoning case 24-00891 (rezoning and site plan review for a multiple-residence development) — Mover: Councilmember Pillsbury; Second: Vice Mayor Summers; Outcome: motion passed to introduce and advance to final hearing (no recorded opposing votes).