Uh so welcome to the uh development review board public meeting. The purpose of the development review board is to maintain the quality of development in the in Scottsdale by re reviewing all of the design aspects of a proposed
development and the relationship of its design components to the surrounding environment and community. The board also reviews all preliminary plots for subdivisions to assure conformance to policies and ordinance requirements.
The agenda consists of the roll call, public comment, non for non-aggendaized items, administrative report, minutes approval for the prior meeting and action items. A roll call vote will be taken after each item's motion. The
liaison will call each board member's name to indicate their desired vote for that item. After the vote has been counted, the lison may read out the final vote. Citizens wishing to speak during public comment time or to speak
specifically on an agenda item may fill out a blue uh request to speak card uh and give to the staff at the table before the agenda item is to be discussed. Citizens interested in submitting a written comment on any item
can submit the yellow written comments card. When called, please come to the podium, state your name and address, and then begin speaking. Groups wishing to speak should elect a spokesperson to represent the views of the group. To
facilitate the meeting, your comments will be limited to three minutes for individual speakers with one additional minute for each additional individual present at the meeting who has contributed their time to the representative speaker or up to 10
minutes. I remind our audience that the board's review relates to design matters and does not include consideration of existing zoning district designations, zoning entitlements or the allowed uses within the zoning districts. The board's
motion may be to approve to approve with modified steps or stipulations or to deny the request or continue a case. Thank you for your interest in time and now we'll begin with the roll call. Councilwoman Whitehead
>> here. >> Vice Chair Brand >> here. >> Commissioner Reid >> here. >> Board member Paser >> here. >> Board member Fee. Board member Mason >> here. >> Board member Robinson. Five present. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay. So, um let's see. I don't see any public comment, right? Okay. So, we're good on public comment. Um, how about an administrative report? >> Yes. Uh, good afternoon, Councilwoman Whitehead, members of the board. Thank you for joining us. It's been a little
while, but we're all happy to have you here um as we go over a few uh administrative items today, as well as some uh the Chad and Tree plan that we have um in the works. Um we are probably anticipating this being the only item uh
ahead of you for the next month as we continue to restructure the DRB to meet the state uh legislative requirements. Um, but we're hopeful that we'll have a fuller docket for the DRB in not too distant future. Um, but yeah, uh, upcoming meetings will likely just be
for this item probably about a month out from now. So hopefully we can see you there. And that concludes my administrative report. Thank you. >> Okay, great. Okay, so uh, the first order of business is to approve the minutes of December 11th. Do
I hear a motion? I'd make a motion to approve >> second >> minutes of the December 11th, 2025 development review board regular meeting. >> Okay, so >> I'll second that. >> Okay, we got a couple seconds. Great. So, let's do a roll call vote.
>> Councilwoman Whitehead, >> here. Yes. >> I'm here too. >> Vice Chair Brand, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reid, >> yes. >> Board member Peaser, >> yes. >> Board member Mason, >> yes. >> Motion passes. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. So, let's go on to the
consent agenda item, which is um the 2025 development review board annual report. Um does anybody have any comments or do we want to just vote on that? >> I'll make a motion. I'm going to make a motion to approve consent agenda item
number three in the 2025 development review board annual report as >> second. >> Okay. So, let's do a roll call on that. Councilwoman Whitehead, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Brand, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reid, >> yes. >> Board member Peaser,
>> yes. >> Board member Mason, >> yes. >> Motion passes. Thank you. Okay, now we can move to our one item, which is the um it's a non-action item 11DR 2025, the shade and tree plan for the built
environment. >> Okay, it looks like we have Taylor up here for the presentation. Thank you very much, uh, Councilwoman Whitehead. Taylor Reynolds, principal planner with Long Range Planning. Here to bring, uh, forward the initial draft of, uh,
potentially Scottsdale's shade and tree plan for the built environment. It's been a long time coming. I believe staff was in front of you in December of 2024 to initiate this, although things were already underway in terms of from a council standpoint and and having our um consultant who's actually here in the
audience this uh this afternoon with the design lab uh doing a lot of that public outreach and we'll get to that at a later slide, but to bring it back around today for uh your initial feedback. So, thank you again. This slide presents kind of a road map
as to how we review uh development for the city. So on the lefth hand side of the screen you can see from a city-wide standpoint uh highle policy standpoint we have our general plan for certain areas of the community we have more specific policy and that would be our uh
area uh character area plans. So on the slide you see the Oldtown Scottsdale and our greater air park area. And really where those this policy manifests itself in more of the design aspect of the community is within the citywide or citywide or area guidelines on towards
the right uh middle right hand side of the screen with uh we have specific guidelines for certain uses such as self- storage facilities or guidelines for certain areas of our community like our urban design and architectural guidelines for Oldtown Scottsdale. Then
further to the right on on this road map is a little bit more of our regulatory or standards that we follow for design. So we have uh we have design standards that are built into our zoning ordinance and are the regulatory side of things and then we have the design standards
and policy manual or the DSMP. So where where would this shade and tree plan fit within all this design or regulatory guidance? They would be design guidelines or citywide design guidelines. uh for the provision of shade as infrastructure and they'd be
closely tied to DSNPM. We do have an existing city framework for how uh the provision of shade or how how trees the provision of trees citywide. So we have the zoning ordinance does establish minimum landscape standards within the landscape
section of the ordinance. We do have the DSMP which provides design guidelines or technical standards. So there are bits and pieces of how we uh we provide shade citywide but not a a real centralized location that this could this plan could provide. Further we have the development
review process where trees are evaluated in their placement in site plan or landscape plan review and those approved plans then would inform or be referenced over time. Let's say if a tree needs to be replaced and what was previously stipulated perhaps by the board. So
that's the existing framework. what this plan is and is not. It is a designoriented framework to maintain and expand shade infrastructure. So it would be utilized when reviewing landscape or site plans moving forward and where
trees or shade is placed. So it would be a resource uh that would guide uh selecting, placing and integrating shade infrastructure citywide. It can also inform refinements to city code over time if we were to open up that landscape section that this could inform
that further implementation and it's a tool that will be uh applied incrementally. So site by site uh that's how this will be implemented. What it is not it is not the zoning ordinance. So it's not regulatory at this point. Um it's not a specific streetcape or
construction plan. So it's not going to say this tree needs to go there. it's just going to inform how we select the tree and where we place it. Um, it is not a strategic implementation plan. So, it doesn't have we don't have citywide targets or timelines or outcomes. Again, it's incrementally over time and it's
not a guarantee of any sort of city funding or installation or maintenance. So, how did the plan uh get developed? It first and foremost it was developed to implement our general plan to address community heat mitigation by expanding
our tree canopy. In the past uh Scottsdale partnered with ASU on cooler Scottsdale study which it highlighted the need for uh more shade throughout the community. To that end we did contract with the design lab to produce the plan. They had
robust amount of outreach in 2024. They did existing conditions analysis where they looked at tree canopy distribution versus where our surface heat patterns are and that really developed the impetus of the plan and the guidance within it to maintain, expand and coordinate shade infrastructure
citywide. So on the right hand side of the screen you can see some of that um existing conditions analysis where we have the highest surface heat within the city. Some of which align with some of those character areas. So you can see in the circle on the north side of the screen is the air park and the one on
the south side the smaller circle is our old town area. Now when that is highlighted against where we have shade citywide those happen to be the areas with the least amount of shade. So really what came out of these studies was you know shade is good and it can
miticate heat. In terms of the plan itself it does have some overarching goals that the guidelines feed into. So the overarching plan goals are very simple. Maintain our shade, increase our shade, and collaborate on shade so we could be
foster partnerships so that it's a shared responsibility. I stated that there was a lot of public outreach in 2024. By and large, what we heard is we want shade and we feel that it is it is infrastructure. It should be treated as an asset. So in terms of how
this these guidelines treat that asset is shade infrastructure is an interconnected system of trees, water harvesting practices and shade structures that can improve outdoor comfort and heat protection across Scottsdale. So the first component of
that is trees which is very central to these guidelines how they're placed that that they're able to provide that natural shade and that natural cooling. So in terms of the shade or the tree section of the guidelines and the guidance provided there it's able to
provide guidance on tree selection planting establishment. So the whole gamut of the trees life from selection to putting in the ground and maintaining it over time. It does focus there's a tree selection guide. So it focuses on desert appropriate trees so that they're
cityw consistent citywide expectations. It's organized into the seven topics on this slide. On the right hand side of the screen is a typical page from that section of the guidelines that you can have uh specific guidance and have figures along with it to follow if
you're a a landscape designer trying to put together a plan to apply to the city. The next component of the guidelines is water harvesting and and treating water as a resource so that when rain comes down from the sky, we slow it down. it
percolates and is able to water these trees before it moves onto our storm water systems. To that end, we have the water harvesting guidelines that treats water again as a resource providing guidance for uh green storm water infrastructure
or gsi and helping to integrate that into site design again from designing, locating and maintaining these systems over time. Uh just wanted to highlight this that we did work with Scottsdale water on this. This this plant does not promote graywater system. So nothing going down the drain, it's everything
from the sky so that it can percolate on on a site. Last component of the guidelines is shade infrastructure. So although trees are important and you know those the probably the number one priority here in some instances you might have a tight
site and and we do need shade or or we have an area of the city like uh civic center where we want year-round shade that's just permanently there and we have these shade structures. So the guidelines provide guidance again for designing, locating, and maintaining
these structures to respond to Scottsdale's climate again to complement trees with immediate durable shade. And um it's organized into three topics on the left hand side of the screen. And again on the right side, another typical uh figure you'd see in the plan. This
one is specific to sunpath orientation, where to place these structures to take full advantage of that throughout the year. Finally, uh you might have noticed again I highlighted it early in the slide deck. Oldtown Scottsdale was one of our more hot uh surface areas. Um this
section of the guidelines, although it would still fall within those citywide guidance, this has a specific tree pallet for Oldtown. So, it's more designoriented and provides a specific tree pallet for five roadways. We call them major streets uh within the plan.
So Camelback, Indian School Road, Scottsdale Road, and then the couplets. So those areas that traverse and go through Oldtown and are very important to the look and feel of our Oldtown area. This provides a specific pallet for those roadways.
terms of how this gets implemented over time. First and foremost, we would be looking to adopt an amendment to the DSMPM to reference the have this as a reference document so that they're more interconnected and there's a little bit more teeth there when staff provides
comments to a private applicant on their landscape plan. Um, and also it would inform future city capital projects or future streetscape plans. We'd be looking that at this plan uh internally as well to inform how decisions are made
there. Further implementation could occur through more specific planning efforts. I know alluded to it early in the slide deck, but perhaps a future uh city code update specific to our uh landscape section to tie them closely together and those things that are uh
need to be more regulatory would be placed there as well. And then finally, uh, a fa a second phase to this process would be a residential idea book. We do have other idea books we've produced for our single family neighborhoods. As you may all know, we can't regulate uh
design in single family districts, but we can provide them some of the same tools that we're utilizing so that they can uh have um be able to produce similar shade on their own single family lots. Today is more of the opening of the uh
public outreach effort for this plan now that the draft is out there in front of the public. Just wanted to be able to get your initial feedback on the plan that was delivered to you in your packet. But we will then be going to several other commissions uh that we went to in the past when we opened up
this process to get their feedback and be able to deliver it to the board at a future date. uh if uh when we're looking for possible approval from the review board. Finally, uh we do have the plan up online to collect comments there as well and a couple of openhouse
opportunities later this uh month again to collect that feedback. All feedback collected will be delivered to the development review board possibly in May of this year where we would review and possibly adopt this uh document. Again, staff is here happy to collect any of
your initial feedback uh today. But that concludes my presentation. So, thank you. >> Great presentation. Okay. Does anybody have any comments or questions? >> I have I have one quick question. So,
regarding the conversation earlier about um the shift into regulatory language of of some of the city's guidelines, how does this from an implementation standpoint? Is this is this more used as a
as a I guess a supplemental? Um is it is it a a guideline that serves to assist development entities or is it something that the city is trying to regulate? So, I'm just kind of I'm kind of curious. I know it's it's being you said that it's
being referenced by the DSNPM, but how does that is there anything in here that's regulatory or is this suggestive across the board? >> Thank you, Vice Chair Bran, Councilwoman Whitehead. Right. At this point, it would not be regulatory. Uh they would
work operate as any other guideline that we have today. And when we started working on this, 2447 wasn't in front of us. So, this was produced very much similar to any other guideline uh document that we've used in the past and
we would be looking to use in the future. Now, with some of the future potential ordinance updates, I think we would look to maybe fit some of these into that process at that time, but for now, it would be uh just guidance. >> Okay. Okay. So, for now, it's being used
in the traditional format of a of a city of Scottsdale design guideline, I guess you would say. >> That's correct. >> But it could possibly be transitioned into regulatory language either within this document or informing the DSNPM or or the zoning ordinance of some sort.
>> Uh, Vice Chair Bran, I think it would inform some of those regulatory updates. >> Are you done, Jeff? >> Okay. Yeah. Uh, you know, I'm going to take a minute to brag a little bit about the last council back in 22 to 24. Uh,
we looked at those heat islands and we changed the Oldtown character area plan and negotiated a lot of open space and trees in both Oldtown and the Air Park. Jeff, do you do you know offhand how
many trees will be part of the park? No, a lot. >> Don't don't worry about getting off. >> But it's >> we're gonna have the lawyers a lot of trees. The lawyer's going to get after us for getting off topic. >> Yeah. The point is is that we um so a
number of projects including many that Jeff is involved in have both open space and uh larger uh a more robust landscaping plan and larger tree requirements sizewise for the tree
stipulations. So I'm really excited about seeing those projects come to fruition. Okay. So I have a couple questions. Do we have um in looking at this shade tree plan is there um some sort of metric where we
compare the best of from around the valley? I mean, I suppose that's what I don't know if the uh if the consultants want to speak to this, but did we compare what is out there with other cities and kind of try to tap into
what's what's best and strongest? >> Uh yeah, thank you, uh, Councilwoman Whitehead. As I understand it, we did do a valleywide look at what was out there. I know Phoenix has their own shade plan that they've worked on in the past, but you know, I think we tried to work with the consultant to make it pretty this
pretty specific to Scottsdale. >> Yeah. Specific, but I just wonder, for instance, I know that Gilbert's tree size requirements are different than ours and they do regulate people cutting them down and such. So, I just wonder because we've been a tree
city for how many years? 40. A lot of years. And so I just would like to take it to the next level. So I just I guess I would that would be my comment is what are other cities doing if there's an easy way to get the best of all the
cities tree plants in the desert and try to make sure that we're you know number one or at least taking advantage of some of Yeah. Why don't you guys come up and speak? Thank you. It's a great question, Councilman
Whitehead. Uh, my name is Justin Azdo with the design laboratory, uh, the lead consultant for the project. Uh, we did complete a benchmarking study of our sister cities, uh, the sister cities program within Phoenix metro. Uh, it's a working group uh, with the, uh, Arizona
State University. Uh so we did a comparison contrast with pretty much every set of regulations that may have to do with shade um trees implementation measurements goals etc etc. We met with many of them as well um to help influence it and try to create something
that was quite uniquely Scottsdale um meeting quite a high bar. >> Great. Stay there. I'm not done. Um okay. So um Taylor mentioned that we did not set any targets in this plan. However, I believe
we could. Could we not? >> We do have some identified uh target ranges for particular types of uh development opportunities uh within Scottsdale. So I believe that's on page
25 of the draft document. Um, it outlines particular types of spaces where we should be looking at increased levels of shade uh instead of going with some of these larger uh and what we'd consider some lofty goals that were set by some other municipalities within the the Phoenix metropolitan region uh which
are maybe not necessarily uh the easiest way to go about ensuring that shade is infrastructure is thought of uh and continued out in a way that feels appropriate within the community. Um but what we did there was we identified particular types of places like playgrounds should have a really high
level of shade. Uh places like bus stops um large gathering spaces for people uh places where people walk frequently and there's a large list of places with different levels of shade. That would be uh kind of some target goals for those types of areas without setting an overall city target.
>> You know that makes total sense. I will say the overall targets easier for you know like elected leaders to say hey we're going to get but this what you just explained makes a lot more sense and hopefully will also make it easier for us to achieve those goals rather than just set them. Yes.
>> So I like that. Um there was I had another question. Um, oh, we had talked again years ago about two more questions about trying to um,
uh, keep track of the number of trees that we have. This is probably a staff question. Uh, somehow catalog the trees that are in the city. Did we ever make any progress on that? Uh so we did go through uh a number of
different processes for identifying the potential number of trees that exist within Scottell. It's a little bit of a hard metric compared to some places where uh a lot of our trees like to masquerade as shrubs and shrubs like to masquerade as trees within desert environments. Um but the estimate was somewhere around uh I believe 830,000
trees give or take within uh the larger metropolitan of Scottsdale. Um that being said that number fluctuates a little bit. That's based off of a a nationally adopted system called itri. Uh we also completed a number of other
uh methodologies for trying to establish what's the level of shade. uh Scottdale we went out and we documented I believe it was around 18,000 trees in person to ensure we are understanding what is the health species locations etc etc and a
number of different neighborhoods uh across Scottsdale as a whole from top to bottom east to west uh to really get an understanding of what's working not working and to start to track those things and I believe parks and wreck is also in process of tracking essentially all the trees within the public facilities
>> okay great so finally The um argument that I always hear is uh about trees, oh well trees take water, but this even in the presentation Taylor just gave us trees collect water as well. So it would be helpful and I
haven't dug deep but I you know now that I have Adam's copy um do we have any kind of data that shows the uh yes trees take water mature trees take less water. So when our um mature trees get cut
down, that is a huge problem. But some kind of data showing the benefits um of having trees to the temperature then the loss of evaporation of water elsewhere. You know, there just a a host of counterpoints to the trees take water
argument. >> We do have a number of those calculations available. I do not believe they made it into this version of the draft. Um but we do have it. Um, >> feel free to send it to me. >> You've created so far. Yes. >> Okay. So, maybe you can provide that to
staff and staff can provide that to me because that is that is something we'll hear, you know, it's a concern we'll hear at the council level and so we I I'd like to be prepared to respond to that. Um, finally for staff, I swear this one's for you guys. I would say the
next time this comes to us, what I would like to know is the steps that it will take to go from this should it get approved to regulator, you know, regulatory um you know with Yeah. the all the steps
it would take and approximately how long it would take until we have something uh in our code that actually can enforce this. I think that's all I have. Anybody else? Oh yeah, go for it. >> I have a question directly related to
the regulatory issue that you raised. Question I have is if you look at the the report has seen I've read all 155 pages and very well done. Congratulations on a great report. My question is related to hers is in the
guidelines that you set out is there any kind of priority order in which you think those should be converted to regulations and what the schedule for doing so is and if some should be made regulatory now. >> Yeah. Thank you uh board member Mason uh
Councilwoman Whitehead. I don't think we've really tagged which one should and which one should not. I think that's more of a discussion of when we open up the ordinance and we're looking at various areas that excuse me that aren't just related to the shade and tree plan as I understand it. There might be other
design aspects we're opening up the the ordinance for but I think at that time we'd be looking at what's in this plan and what could be implemented from a regulatory standpoint. >> Okay. So you would then envision that this process would come with a
recommendation that these are the step this is what should be be made regulatory and this is kind of the order this should be done so that the council could have some idea yes we need to do this now or we can wait a year or whatever it is. >> Yeah. Councilwoman Whitehead, board
member Mason, I think there's going to be a step in the near future where staff is going to prioritize the the different areas of the code that we need to transition to regulatory u from the current guidelines uh status. And we'll certainly look at some of those things
that were need to be prioritized more more quickly or sooner in that process and maybe shade uh and the tree components works to the top. But we're going to get all those things together that we feel like are going to need to make that transition. come in front of the board to have that discussion so
that we can understand what um the board and maybe even the council eventually wants to have as a priority to make that transition first versus some that are maybe could happen a little bit later. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any other for me? >> I I have one other question and it's
it's more a little bit more inquisitory because I I don't know the answer here. Um I know that when we this is this is a shade and tree plan for the built environment. Are there Is there information in because I haven't reviewed the document yet. Is there information in here regarding soil prep
expectations for for the tree plantings according to the planner? Is just is this document solely based on from a planning perspective where and and when and frequency and location? >> Uh yes uh vice chair brand we do have I
could we have a section on soil volume and quality. So there's a section that speaks to that within the draft plan. >> It just feels like from a commercial development standpoint, there's a lot of trees that are planted. How those trees thrive, survive weather, survive weather
events and how they essentially grow into what they should is seems like it's fully dependent on belowrade conditions that there doesn't seem like there's a lot of maybe regulation or or or enforcement on that. Um, and maybe that's something that it feels like
plans can be great, but like you said, if someone doesn't plant a tree, right, it's going to get blown over in the first storm or as soon as the canopy matures, it's just going to crack and and it's just it doesn't it doesn't promote mature trees. Um, which I think is is is really important to have
lasting mature trees. But um again, this is really kind of shooting maybe it's off on a DSNPM supplement about below grade conditions that Scottsdale requires for planting trees um in new developments, but that was just a question I didn't know. I I see that it's part of this, which is
which is great. So, appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other questions or comments? None. I will say I agree that below grade and we talked about this in our staff meeting. The lonely Lowe's trees is what I call them. They're in, you
know, in a little triangle in a hot parking lot with nobody to talk to and not enough coolness. So that below grade is huge. So um Okay. Well, um thank you. I'm really thrilled to have this plan
moving forward. It's so important uh as we're in whatever March and it's way hot. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Well, we'll move on to the next item which appears to be the election of a vice chair.
I don't feel like I'm up to that task. >> Yes. Council Council Whitehead, I'll just uh step in real quick. Yeah. The we have three um members today that can vote on that. That would be the the the councilwoman and and commissioner cannot vote for and nominate or vote for the
vice chair. So it would have to be just the three uh open uh seats for the board that can do that. And so we would need a nomination first and then uh to vote on that nomination, >> you know. Okay, that's fine. So okay,
you three guys go for it. I think what I would do is I would nominate our current vice chair, Jeff Bran, to continue as the vice chair for the next year, I think, until at least
till the end of the year. So, >> do we need a second for that? >> Yes, please. >> I will second that. >> Great. Let's have a roll call. >> I would like to point out that my term here ends though. Brad, you probably know that. I think it's in de middle of
December of 2026. Is that correct? >> You are correct, Vice Chair. Yes. >> That's a ways off. >> Roll call. Vice Chair Brand. >> Sure. >> Board member Peaser. >> Yes. >> Board member Mason. >> Yes.
>> Motion passes. Thank you. >> Congratulations. All right. Um I think that's it. I will now uh take a motion for adjournment. >> So moved. >> Second. All those in favor? I.
>> All right. Thanks everybody. Good to be back.