CAVE CREEK – After a majority of the public rejected the general plan during the Aug. 20, 2016 election, there was an expectation that those who voted against the plan would show up at the Feb. 16 well-publicized planning commission meeting to provide input as to the areas they felt needed to be modified.
However, such was not the case.
With commissioners Ted Bryda, Susan Demmitt and Paul Elkema absent, the four-member quorum was met by only three members of the public at large, Katya Kincel, Bruce Arlen and Suzanne Deffenbaugh plus Councilwoman Eileen Wright, who was attending as a private citizen to provide input.
Councilwoman Susan Clancy and Councilman Thomas McGuire were also present as observers.
Planning Commission Chair Bob Voris noted the next meeting will be on March 16 to continue with the general plan process.
Planning Director Ian Cordwell said there will also be a case on the March agenda for a commercial project at the corner of School House and Cave Creek roads.
Outlining the general plan process, Voris explained the 2016 General Plan was not ratified by the voters and it will ultimately be decided by council if it will submit the same plan or a modified plan to voters in 2018.
He said they will be using the 2016 failed plan as a starting point.
Voris introduced former Planning Commissioner Dan Baxley, who worked on updating the 2016 General Plan, to facilitate the input session as the planning commission left the dais to sit in the audience.
Baxley had the titles of each element of the plan posted on the walls around the room and planned to go through the elements, one by one, to solicit comments. He would then summarize the comments on a large pad of paper.
At the onset Kincel said she was concerned with the statement made by Voris about council deciding if it will resubmit the 2016 plan or a modified plan to voters.
Baxley said, “We’re basically a year away from when council will make that decision.”
Cordwell stated this was just the starting point.
Kincel objected and stated repeatedly that she was an engineer.
Baxley asked Voris to settle the matter so they could continue.
Voris stated the town attorney provided a letter approving the process and said, “We have a legal opinion from the town attorney.”
Kincel persisted with her objections and, once again, said she was an engineer.
Voris cut her off and said, “I’m glad you’re an engineer and not an attorney. We have an opinion from an attorney and we’re going to proceed.”
Baxley began with the first element: “Vision” and asked if anyone had any comments. No one commented.
Baxley wrote “No Comments” on the page for “Vision,” which he tore off and Clancy taped it to the wall under the heading.
There were no comments for “Intro” or “Public Involvement.”
Baxley and Clancy repeated the process.
Arlen got up to speak during “Context.”
However, he didn’t have a comment about that element and stated he wasn’t up to speed on the general plan.
He was provided a copy of the general plan.
When they got to “Land Use Elements,” Wright claimed the “Land Use Elements” is “flawed” in both the 2005 and 2016 General Plan documents because the land use map only says Desert Rural and not the four subcategories of Desert Rural zoning.
Wright then asked to be excused because she had grandchildren visiting.
Kincel said she agreed 100 percent with what Wright said and stated, “I happen to live in DR-190” and was concerned about the categories not being designated.
She claimed Carefree’s land use map is the same as its zoning map so she didn’t see the impediment in making them match.
However, a cursory glance at Carefree’s land use map and zoning map indicates Kincel is wrong in her assessment.
Under the “Water Resource” element, Kincel stated it should be relegated to the Water Advisory Committee “because they have the knowledge.”
There were no comments for “Environmental Planning.”
Kincel stated the “Open Space” element should be referred to the newly formed Open Space Committee.”
Arlen asked Baxley to explain what the “Circulation” element meant.
Baxley said it had to do with roads, trails, bicycle paths, etc. – How people get from one place to another.
Arlen commented that they needed to have more people commenting.
Kincel said she recalled there being issues with the descriptions of which roads are considered major and minor collectors and where the general plan indicated the potential for all-weather crossings, she stated the populous doesn’t want that.
She said there needed to be a paper trail for changes to the general plan.
Baxley indicated there is one.
And so the meeting continued with Kincel pretty much the lone commenter.
