Log in
Government

Gilbert council to revisit Harvest Grove vote amid potential reconsideration

Posted

Gilbert Town Council on Tuesday is poised to decide whether to reopen debate on the Harvest Grove development, a large-scale proposal the council rejected just two weeks ago after months of public hearings and revisions.

The issue returns to the agenda through a procedural motion to reconsider the council’s Jan. 20 decision, when the project failed on a 4-3 vote.

Council meets at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday at Gilbert Town Hall, 50 E. Civic Center Drive, Gilbert. It is preceded by a 6 p.m. study session on at-risk grading permits.

If council agrees to reconsider on Harvest Grove, the proposal would be placed back before members for further discussion, modification, continuation to a later date or another denial. If the motion fails, the earlier rejection would stand as final.

The reconsideration was formally requested by Councilmember Jim Torgeson, who voted against the project in January. Torgeson said his request followed renewed outreach from the developer after the vote.

“They came to my office the day after it lost and said, ‘We will do this, we’ll do that,’” Torgeson said. “I told them, you got to start with no apartments in the San Tan character area. That’s a non-starter for a lot of us.”

Torgeson said he also told the developer that any revised plan would need to bring overall residential density down to 3.5 units per acre in areas governed by the San Tan character area policies, adding that previous versions did not meet that standard.

“You have to honor that district,” he said. “You didn’t do it. I kept telling you you didn’t do it, and you thought you could get away with it.”

According to Torgeson, the developer indicated a willingness to remove apartments from the San Tan character area, reduce density and commit funding toward future infrastructure improvements. Those discussions, he said, prompted him to allow the possibility of reconsideration so the council could decide whether to hear one more revised proposal.

“My only guarantee was to listen,” Torgeson said. “I’m not a guaranteed vote by any stretch.”

Tuesday’s agenda item is limited initially to whether the council should reconsider its earlier action. Under the council’s rules of procedure, only a councilmember who voted with the prevailing side may request reconsideration, and the motion must be approved for the project to return for substantive debate.

If reconsideration passes, the council would then reopen the public hearing on the Harvest Grove general plan amendment and rezoning. The proposal covers roughly 311 acres near Val Vista Drive, Germann Road and Queen Creek Road and would allow a mixed-use master-planned community with residential and commercial components.

The project has drawn sustained opposition from nearby residents concerned about density, traffic and compatibility with the San Tan character area, which is intended to reflect Gilbert’s rural and agricultural roots through lower-density development.

While the Planning Commission recommended approval in September, the council ultimately rejected the plan after continuing it multiple times for revisions and additional public input.

Torgeson acknowledged that even if the council agrees to reconsider, the developer is unlikely to be ready with a fully revised plan Tuesday and may seek a continuance.

“It’s one last pitch,” he said. “If it’s still a no, it’s still a no. There are no guarantees.”

Please submit comments at yourvalley.net/letters or email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines. Tom Blodgett can be reached by email at tblodgett@iniusa.org or follow him @sp_blodgett on X.

Gilbert Town Council, Harvest Grove development, Santan Character Area, Gilbert zoning, general plan amendment, Lennar Homes, residential density, Val Vista Drive, Gilbert development vote

Share with others


Have an opinion on this story? Click here to send a letter to our editors.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here