Carefree Truth
Issue #589, September 3, 2017
Larry Gabriele brought architect Doug Whitney Bell to the podium. Mr. Whitney Bell said there has been no downgrade in quality between this project and Mr. Lewis' condominium project, and he is delighted by the significant change in the face of this building. The second floor pool was designed to break up the elevation facing Easy Street. It substantially recesses back in, and the building undulates, so there in not a big flat surface on any side. A ground floor garden terrace repeats this recess at the front of the building. (The outline of the building, looking from above, is shown in the video starting at 4 minutes and 50 seconds.) He rated the project as being in an A to A+ category. Multi-family buildings are his company's niche in the Southwest. These apartment units are larger than most. The parking is underground, which is more secure, and provides 2 covered parking spaces per unit, with close access to the living spaces. He felt this building has a great potential to fit into the community.
Mr. Gabriele explained that the 1, 2, 3 markings on the slide referred to the number of bedrooms per unit. The preliminary plan shows 10% of the apartments with 1 bedroom, but they will probably reduce that number, and increase the 35% with 3 bedrooms. Councilman Jim Van Allen said the Mayor had told him there would not be any 1 bedroom apartments. Mr. Gabriele replied that their market study showed a demographic that wanted a large 1 bedroom apartment, so they added a sprinkling of them.
Mr. Van Allen said Carefree is looking for year round residents for the restaurants and shops. Mr. Gabriele replied that people will be renting these apartments for a long term period, usually at least 12 months, but like most people, will probably leave for a couple of months in the summer. These are not the type of apartments that rent for a month at a time. Mr. Van Allen said, "We were terribly pleased that it was going to be luxury apartments". He kept looking for a minimum leasing period in the documents, but the Mayor told him it was a financing issue. Mr. Gabriele confirmed that if they start putting restrictions in the documents it can restrict their ability to obtain financing. This is a major development that will cost many millions of dollars. The financing is tremendous. With restrictions like that, they could lose the ability to do the project. Mr. Van Allen asked if it would still be financially attractive to them if the height were reduced. Mr. Gabriele replied that it would not be. Mr. Van Allen said he appreciated Mr. Gabriele's honesty.
Councilman Mike Farrar asked if he was correct that there are 6 floors. Mr. Gabriele replied that there is a 4 story residential building and 2 stories of parking. Mr. Farrar asked what could be seen from grade. Mr. Gabriele said at average grade, about 1/2 of the second level parking area would be seen; at the lowest grade, the residential building would be almost at grade. Mr. Farrar again asked how many stories there would be. Mr. Gabriele confirmed that there would be a 4 story residential building and 2 stories of parking, one totally underground and one partially underground, so a total of 6, but with some underground.
Mr. Farrar expressed the Council's fear of a mass wall in the middle of town, with no line of sight relief, that looks like a big radiator sitting in the middle of town. He was not happy with Ed Lewis' design. "This is our one shot. The responsibility falls here, even though Carefree has a Development Review Board (DRB)". He was concerned that the Council would have no further ability for input. "We are taking you on your word." Mr. Farrar was pleased with the architectural aspects within the building and the terraced gardens. "Whitney Bell has a wonderful reputation." He hoped this project would be characteristic of their products, and he hoped not to see too much opposition moving forward.
Mayor Les Peterson asked Mr. Gabriele to clarify the height of this building in relation to the adjacent Lutheran Retreat. Mr. Gabriele stated that the Retreat's grade is much higher. He said at his first meeting with the Mayor and Gary Neiss, everyone had the same concept; they wanted the building to look like it belonged there. This was especially stressed by the Mayor, and it was the first criteria told to the architect.
Mr. Gabriele wants to see the elevations as much as the Town does, but they have to know where they are going before elevations can be drawn. In all of the disciplines, everything has to be a step by step process, and one of the key elements is knowing if the Town will approve the massing to do what needs to be done. The financing agents must know you can do what you say you can do before they even start to do their due diligence work. He hoped that between the presentation and sharing their thoughts, he and his associates were at least setting the Council members minds at somewhat ease that they are going to do this.
Councilman Mike Krahe noted that there will actually be a flow up to the Retreat when looking at this building, so there would be some continuity from the front view. He thought it would flow very nicely. At the first meeting in which he participated, Dr. Krahe felt the applicants were very much interested in having that flow and the screening greenery so it would fit in nicely. They were very responsive to Carefree's concerns. "I like what I see. I think it's going to be beautiful. I think it will fit in. I think it answers a lot of the needs that we have to bring more people into the town core, which will generate more interest." He felt this could encourage someone to open a restaurant or store, or come to shop and stay. "That's what we need." Carefree would get the benefit of the one time construction sales tax, but will also have the long term rental tax, going forward, to fill the coffers.
Mr. Farrar believed that everyone understood the economic opportunity of this project, and agreed the town needs that. Height is an issue, as is the architectural style. It should look like it blends in to our community and doesn't look like a white elephant. He hoped that will be kept in mind with something of this magnitude. "Everyone's going to have their own thoughts."
Mr. Van Allen asked Mayor Peterson and Mr. Neiss if, for those sitting on the fence, they could accept further review by the Council, in addition to the DRB. Mayor Peterson responded that Mr. Gabriele was agreeable to that but the Town backed off of it because they didn't want to politicize it. Also, developers shouldn't have to get "down the pike", only to have a lot of people then saying, "I want this; I want that". "We do our job looking at the strategic elements. Is this the kind of a development we want in the downtown area? Are these the people we are confident can do the best job, A to A+? That's what we're after. We want this to be something that fits in and is quality. Of the people I have talked with and met, I believe this group represents that. So, I was comfortable taking out the Town Council."
Mr. Neiss explained that typically the DRB has the authority to review this. Although this is obviously a project that is quite important to the Council, there is a limited amount of latitude with design related issues. It is very subjective. Everyone has their own idea of what architecture defines and is consistent with the town center. The DRB is not a political entity. Municipalities typically assign design review to a body outside of the Council to avoid politicization of the process. But it could come back to the Council again if that addresses your objections.
Mr. Gabriele said they discussed that option at length and found that going before the Council again will create a financing issue because they will not be able to get a sign-off of Town approval after the DRB review, and will have to "stop dead in their tracks". The financial community is used to dealing with Scottsdale and everyone else. The Council approves the overall concept. The DRB maybe requires a few changes. The changes are made and it goes through. The financial community looks at design review as a committee that looks at it, says "this may not, this may not, fix it". They look at Councils for rulings. There is a big difference. If it needs to go back to the Council again for design approval, it makes it very, very difficult. Mr. Van Allen said, "You have to understand, everybody up here wants what you are trying to do. We want a luxury apartment complex on that site, and we want it right now."
Mr. Farrar thought the Mayor had stated earlier that Mr. Gabriele was amenable to it coming back to the Council. Mr. Gabriele replied that was prior to going out to the financial community. They don't have the ability to compromise because they are dealing with third parties.
Mayor Peterson declared,"We have excellent people who work on the staff and on our committees. If we look over their shoulders and say, 'Thanks, you made this decision, but I'm going to change it now', what are we saying to them?" "There are good people besides ourselves here. We get into this discussion on marketing all the time. We approve the budget. We don't have to approve the specific item that's within the budget."
Mr. Van Allen said the Council approves everything that goes before the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) all the time. Mr. Neiss explained that design review is an administrative process that is typically approved by the DRB. Those items forwarded to the Council are recommendations by the P&Z about modifying zoning ordinances, which are legislative acts, so are different.
Mr. Farrar asked if there are any communities where the DRB decisions go back to the Councils for approval. Mr. Neiss replied that he knew of none. There is an appeal process that is built into Carefree's ordinance as well. If an applicant feels aggrieved by the decision of the DRB, it can go before the Council again, and if not resolved, the applicant can seek a special action of the Superior Court. That is the typical process with administrative acts.
Mayor Peterson said he was persuaded by Mr. Gabriele's discussion. "If we approve it, it now says there's a building of this size and these general characteristics that's been approved. Work it out with Design Review, but it's been approved. If we do it the other way, we have a second bite at the apple." "We can say we don't agree with anything and they are going to be hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars down the pike by that time." Mr. Van Allen said, "Why would we do that? That's ridiculous!"
Mr. Farrar pointed out that the same could happen if it's not approved by the DRB. Although everyone wants this project, some were disappointed when the previous project was just a block. The Council is sincere. It is an important element that will be a monument in this community and a legacy of this Council. "We're just hoping this will have architecture that doesn't look like what we are afraid it may look like, and that is a block mass."
Dr. Krahe remarked, "If we go down this path, it's for all the wrong reasons. We don't belong in their way. We never have done that to the DRB. I served on that; I came from there to Council. And we thought long and hard about every decision we tried to make. And I can tell you, if I was still on that committee, and I knew that Council was going to have another bite at this apple, I might say, 'What am I doing? You know, what am I about?' The other issue is this. We may jeopardize the financing for this. And then we lose it. So, why don't we follow what we normally do and have faith in the people that we normally deal with all the time, and let the process we trust handle itself?"
Mr. Farrar was disappointed in what came out of the design review with the previous project. He was hoping for another opportunity to review something of this magnitude, not taking away anything from the DRB or trying to impede the developer's financing. "But just again, the Council, we are going to be the ones tarred and feathered if this thing doesn't pan out like what we're being told."
Councilman Gene Orrico said the view looking at it from above looked great, but he asked if there were any other drawings to see. Mr. Gabriele said the only other drawing showed the lower level parking. Mr. Orrico asked if there was anything showing at least the front of the building. Mr. Gabriele said they have discussed this with the architect but haven't put it to pen and pencil for a lot of reasons. They need to know the height of the building before they can start working on elevations. Again, it is a chicken and egg situation, and he was trying his best to convey their vision. Mr. Orrico said they were disappointed with what the previous project ended up being, and he wanted to see some renderings. Mr. Gabriele said he could have the architect draw some lines, but they would be meaningless at this level, "and that's not me". He will share renderings as they are completed. Once the design is approved and the financing is obtained, he will supply renderings of the exact building they will build, 3D and in color, to everyone on the Council.
Mayor Peterson asked the Town attorney if the Council was precluded from offering opinions to the DRB as they see renderings. He was told they may not. Vice Mayor John Crane added that the Council members may talk to the staff. Mr. Neiss suggested a happy medium. Individual Council members can share their thoughts with him and he can pass them on to Mr. Gabriele as they fine tune the application. Mr. Van Allen said, "Sounds like polling to me." Mr. Neiss explained that it's not polling because the Council has no say in the decision, which ultimately rests with the DRB, but it would address the concerns being expressed by some of the Council members. Dr. Krahe noted that would give them input into what they see.
Vice Mayor Crane, who previously served on the DRB, explained that if the DRB dislikes what is presented, they can send the applicant back home and have them do it over. "They have the power to do that." Mr. Neiss pointed to some successes of previous DRBs. Some of the first designs reviewed by Carefree's DRB, the Lowe's and CVS buildings, won multiple awards. These did not go in front of the Council. The system does work and is very successful. "These are citizens of the community and they have a vested interest in doing what is right. They have opinions just like you. They want something of quality that we would all be proud of, so I think we are all speaking from the same sheet of music, including the development team here."
https://vimeo.com/231903253
(This is part 2 of 3.)
Lyn Hitchon
Prepared by Carefree Truth
Visit our website at www.carefreetruth2.com If you know anyone who would like to be added to the Carefree Truth email list, please have them contact me. Feel free to share Carefree Truth with others on your list.
Visit www.carefreeazbusinesses.com to see more info about businesses in Carefree. Please support our merchants.
Issue #589, September 3, 2017
Larry Gabriele brought architect Doug Whitney Bell to the podium. Mr. Whitney Bell said there has been no downgrade in quality between this project and Mr. Lewis' condominium project, and he is delighted by the significant change in the face of this building. The second floor pool was designed to break up the elevation facing Easy Street. It substantially recesses back in, and the building undulates, so there in not a big flat surface on any side. A ground floor garden terrace repeats this recess at the front of the building. (The outline of the building, looking from above, is shown in the video starting at 4 minutes and 50 seconds.) He rated the project as being in an A to A+ category. Multi-family buildings are his company's niche in the Southwest. These apartment units are larger than most. The parking is underground, which is more secure, and provides 2 covered parking spaces per unit, with close access to the living spaces. He felt this building has a great potential to fit into the community.
Mr. Gabriele explained that the 1, 2, 3 markings on the slide referred to the number of bedrooms per unit. The preliminary plan shows 10% of the apartments with 1 bedroom, but they will probably reduce that number, and increase the 35% with 3 bedrooms. Councilman Jim Van Allen said the Mayor had told him there would not be any 1 bedroom apartments. Mr. Gabriele replied that their market study showed a demographic that wanted a large 1 bedroom apartment, so they added a sprinkling of them.
Mr. Van Allen said Carefree is looking for year round residents for the restaurants and shops. Mr. Gabriele replied that people will be renting these apartments for a long term period, usually at least 12 months, but like most people, will probably leave for a couple of months in the summer. These are not the type of apartments that rent for a month at a time. Mr. Van Allen said, "We were terribly pleased that it was going to be luxury apartments". He kept looking for a minimum leasing period in the documents, but the Mayor told him it was a financing issue. Mr. Gabriele confirmed that if they start putting restrictions in the documents it can restrict their ability to obtain financing. This is a major development that will cost many millions of dollars. The financing is tremendous. With restrictions like that, they could lose the ability to do the project. Mr. Van Allen asked if it would still be financially attractive to them if the height were reduced. Mr. Gabriele replied that it would not be. Mr. Van Allen said he appreciated Mr. Gabriele's honesty.
Councilman Mike Farrar asked if he was correct that there are 6 floors. Mr. Gabriele replied that there is a 4 story residential building and 2 stories of parking. Mr. Farrar asked what could be seen from grade. Mr. Gabriele said at average grade, about 1/2 of the second level parking area would be seen; at the lowest grade, the residential building would be almost at grade. Mr. Farrar again asked how many stories there would be. Mr. Gabriele confirmed that there would be a 4 story residential building and 2 stories of parking, one totally underground and one partially underground, so a total of 6, but with some underground.
Mr. Farrar expressed the Council's fear of a mass wall in the middle of town, with no line of sight relief, that looks like a big radiator sitting in the middle of town. He was not happy with Ed Lewis' design. "This is our one shot. The responsibility falls here, even though Carefree has a Development Review Board (DRB)". He was concerned that the Council would have no further ability for input. "We are taking you on your word." Mr. Farrar was pleased with the architectural aspects within the building and the terraced gardens. "Whitney Bell has a wonderful reputation." He hoped this project would be characteristic of their products, and he hoped not to see too much opposition moving forward.
Mayor Les Peterson asked Mr. Gabriele to clarify the height of this building in relation to the adjacent Lutheran Retreat. Mr. Gabriele stated that the Retreat's grade is much higher. He said at his first meeting with the Mayor and Gary Neiss, everyone had the same concept; they wanted the building to look like it belonged there. This was especially stressed by the Mayor, and it was the first criteria told to the architect.
Mr. Gabriele wants to see the elevations as much as the Town does, but they have to know where they are going before elevations can be drawn. In all of the disciplines, everything has to be a step by step process, and one of the key elements is knowing if the Town will approve the massing to do what needs to be done. The financing agents must know you can do what you say you can do before they even start to do their due diligence work. He hoped that between the presentation and sharing their thoughts, he and his associates were at least setting the Council members minds at somewhat ease that they are going to do this.
Councilman Mike Krahe noted that there will actually be a flow up to the Retreat when looking at this building, so there would be some continuity from the front view. He thought it would flow very nicely. At the first meeting in which he participated, Dr. Krahe felt the applicants were very much interested in having that flow and the screening greenery so it would fit in nicely. They were very responsive to Carefree's concerns. "I like what I see. I think it's going to be beautiful. I think it will fit in. I think it answers a lot of the needs that we have to bring more people into the town core, which will generate more interest." He felt this could encourage someone to open a restaurant or store, or come to shop and stay. "That's what we need." Carefree would get the benefit of the one time construction sales tax, but will also have the long term rental tax, going forward, to fill the coffers.
Mr. Farrar believed that everyone understood the economic opportunity of this project, and agreed the town needs that. Height is an issue, as is the architectural style. It should look like it blends in to our community and doesn't look like a white elephant. He hoped that will be kept in mind with something of this magnitude. "Everyone's going to have their own thoughts."
Mr. Van Allen asked Mayor Peterson and Mr. Neiss if, for those sitting on the fence, they could accept further review by the Council, in addition to the DRB. Mayor Peterson responded that Mr. Gabriele was agreeable to that but the Town backed off of it because they didn't want to politicize it. Also, developers shouldn't have to get "down the pike", only to have a lot of people then saying, "I want this; I want that". "We do our job looking at the strategic elements. Is this the kind of a development we want in the downtown area? Are these the people we are confident can do the best job, A to A+? That's what we're after. We want this to be something that fits in and is quality. Of the people I have talked with and met, I believe this group represents that. So, I was comfortable taking out the Town Council."
Mr. Neiss explained that typically the DRB has the authority to review this. Although this is obviously a project that is quite important to the Council, there is a limited amount of latitude with design related issues. It is very subjective. Everyone has their own idea of what architecture defines and is consistent with the town center. The DRB is not a political entity. Municipalities typically assign design review to a body outside of the Council to avoid politicization of the process. But it could come back to the Council again if that addresses your objections.
Mr. Gabriele said they discussed that option at length and found that going before the Council again will create a financing issue because they will not be able to get a sign-off of Town approval after the DRB review, and will have to "stop dead in their tracks". The financial community is used to dealing with Scottsdale and everyone else. The Council approves the overall concept. The DRB maybe requires a few changes. The changes are made and it goes through. The financial community looks at design review as a committee that looks at it, says "this may not, this may not, fix it". They look at Councils for rulings. There is a big difference. If it needs to go back to the Council again for design approval, it makes it very, very difficult. Mr. Van Allen said, "You have to understand, everybody up here wants what you are trying to do. We want a luxury apartment complex on that site, and we want it right now."
Mr. Farrar thought the Mayor had stated earlier that Mr. Gabriele was amenable to it coming back to the Council. Mr. Gabriele replied that was prior to going out to the financial community. They don't have the ability to compromise because they are dealing with third parties.
Mayor Peterson declared,"We have excellent people who work on the staff and on our committees. If we look over their shoulders and say, 'Thanks, you made this decision, but I'm going to change it now', what are we saying to them?" "There are good people besides ourselves here. We get into this discussion on marketing all the time. We approve the budget. We don't have to approve the specific item that's within the budget."
Mr. Van Allen said the Council approves everything that goes before the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) all the time. Mr. Neiss explained that design review is an administrative process that is typically approved by the DRB. Those items forwarded to the Council are recommendations by the P&Z about modifying zoning ordinances, which are legislative acts, so are different.
Mr. Farrar asked if there are any communities where the DRB decisions go back to the Councils for approval. Mr. Neiss replied that he knew of none. There is an appeal process that is built into Carefree's ordinance as well. If an applicant feels aggrieved by the decision of the DRB, it can go before the Council again, and if not resolved, the applicant can seek a special action of the Superior Court. That is the typical process with administrative acts.
Mayor Peterson said he was persuaded by Mr. Gabriele's discussion. "If we approve it, it now says there's a building of this size and these general characteristics that's been approved. Work it out with Design Review, but it's been approved. If we do it the other way, we have a second bite at the apple." "We can say we don't agree with anything and they are going to be hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars down the pike by that time." Mr. Van Allen said, "Why would we do that? That's ridiculous!"
Mr. Farrar pointed out that the same could happen if it's not approved by the DRB. Although everyone wants this project, some were disappointed when the previous project was just a block. The Council is sincere. It is an important element that will be a monument in this community and a legacy of this Council. "We're just hoping this will have architecture that doesn't look like what we are afraid it may look like, and that is a block mass."
Dr. Krahe remarked, "If we go down this path, it's for all the wrong reasons. We don't belong in their way. We never have done that to the DRB. I served on that; I came from there to Council. And we thought long and hard about every decision we tried to make. And I can tell you, if I was still on that committee, and I knew that Council was going to have another bite at this apple, I might say, 'What am I doing? You know, what am I about?' The other issue is this. We may jeopardize the financing for this. And then we lose it. So, why don't we follow what we normally do and have faith in the people that we normally deal with all the time, and let the process we trust handle itself?"
Mr. Farrar was disappointed in what came out of the design review with the previous project. He was hoping for another opportunity to review something of this magnitude, not taking away anything from the DRB or trying to impede the developer's financing. "But just again, the Council, we are going to be the ones tarred and feathered if this thing doesn't pan out like what we're being told."
Councilman Gene Orrico said the view looking at it from above looked great, but he asked if there were any other drawings to see. Mr. Gabriele said the only other drawing showed the lower level parking. Mr. Orrico asked if there was anything showing at least the front of the building. Mr. Gabriele said they have discussed this with the architect but haven't put it to pen and pencil for a lot of reasons. They need to know the height of the building before they can start working on elevations. Again, it is a chicken and egg situation, and he was trying his best to convey their vision. Mr. Orrico said they were disappointed with what the previous project ended up being, and he wanted to see some renderings. Mr. Gabriele said he could have the architect draw some lines, but they would be meaningless at this level, "and that's not me". He will share renderings as they are completed. Once the design is approved and the financing is obtained, he will supply renderings of the exact building they will build, 3D and in color, to everyone on the Council.
Mayor Peterson asked the Town attorney if the Council was precluded from offering opinions to the DRB as they see renderings. He was told they may not. Vice Mayor John Crane added that the Council members may talk to the staff. Mr. Neiss suggested a happy medium. Individual Council members can share their thoughts with him and he can pass them on to Mr. Gabriele as they fine tune the application. Mr. Van Allen said, "Sounds like polling to me." Mr. Neiss explained that it's not polling because the Council has no say in the decision, which ultimately rests with the DRB, but it would address the concerns being expressed by some of the Council members. Dr. Krahe noted that would give them input into what they see.
Vice Mayor Crane, who previously served on the DRB, explained that if the DRB dislikes what is presented, they can send the applicant back home and have them do it over. "They have the power to do that." Mr. Neiss pointed to some successes of previous DRBs. Some of the first designs reviewed by Carefree's DRB, the Lowe's and CVS buildings, won multiple awards. These did not go in front of the Council. The system does work and is very successful. "These are citizens of the community and they have a vested interest in doing what is right. They have opinions just like you. They want something of quality that we would all be proud of, so I think we are all speaking from the same sheet of music, including the development team here."
https://vimeo.com/231903253
(This is part 2 of 3.)
Lyn Hitchon
Prepared by Carefree Truth
Visit our website at www.carefreetruth2.com If you know anyone who would like to be added to the Carefree Truth email list, please have them contact me. Feel free to share Carefree Truth with others on your list.
Visit www.carefreeazbusinesses.com to see more info about businesses in Carefree. Please support our merchants.