Attachment C - VPC Summary - Z-SP-3-25-6.pdf

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
 
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
 
 
 
Date of VPC Meeting 
August 20, 2025 
Request From 
R1-6 (Pending C-2), R-5 (Pending C-2) 
Request To 
C-2 SP 
Proposal 
Self-Service Storage Warehouse (facility) 
Location 
Northeast corner of 17th Street and Northern Avenue 
VPC Recommendation 
Approval, per the staff recommendation, with additional 
stipulations and direction 
VPC Vote 
12-1 
 
 
VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS: 
 
Item No. 6 (Z-72-25-6) and Item No. 7 (Z-SP-3-25-6) are companion cases and were 
heard together. 
 
15 members of the public registered in opposition to this item, with 8 members 
speaking and 7 members yielding their time to other speakers. 
 
STAFF PRESENTATION 
 
Robert Kuhfuss, staff, presented the proposal, directing the audience to the city’s 
website for the staff report and related addendum. Mr. Kuhfuss summarized the 
subject request and its companion case, clarifying that the Special Permit, if 
approved, would only allow a self-service storage warehouse without the other uses 
normally associated with C-2 zoning. Mr. Kuhfuss summarized the site conditions and 
surrounding uses, as well as the General Plan Land Use Map designation of the site 
and surrounding area. Mr. Kuhfuss highlighted the major features of the site plan 
adding that the proposed facility encompasses one story below ground and two 
stories above ground. Mr. Kuhfuss further stated that the proposed facility meets the 
development standards of the C-2 zoning district. Mr. Kuhfuss displayed an image of 
the elevations that were included in the packet stating that the applicant had provided 
revised elevations in response to discussions between members of the community 
and the applicant. Mr. Kuhfuss displayed the revised elevations noting the muted 
earth-tone colors. Mr. Kuhfuss summarized the community input received to-date and 
provided an overview of staff’s findings and recommended stipulations, stating that 
Stipulation No. 1 had been revised to reference the revised elevation. 
ATTACHMENT C

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 2 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
APPLICANT PRESENTATION 
 
Jason Morris, representing the applicant with Withey, Morris, Baugh, PLC, stated 
that he had a challenge with this subject case in that he has represented many self-
storage facilities and has found that very few local residents are overwhelmed with 
excitement with the idea that a new self-storage facility is being proposed in their 
neighborhood but noted that self-storage facilities, while not exciting, are necessary 
and are utilized by the people closest to the neighborhood, typically within a two-mile 
radius of the facility, because they are out of room. Mr. Morris noted the site’s 
proximity to Northern Avenue and State Route 51 and further noted that Northern 
Avenue is unique in that there is no signalization at the intersection leading from 
southbound State Route 51 to westbound Northern Avenue, which allows for the free 
flow of traffic and resulting higher speeds on Northern Avenue. Mr. Morris 
acknowledged neighborhood concerns regarding higher speeds and the volume of 
traffic and stated they saw that as positive in that short of a two-acre cemetery, there 
are few uses that generate less traffic than that proposed.  Mr. Morris noted that the 
office buildings located to the east and west of the subject site take access from 18th 
Street and 17th Street, respectively, and both take access from Northern Avenue. Mr. 
Morris noted the existing zoning of the site and the surrounding area and stated that 
without the proposed zoning, the site would likely develop as multifamily under its 
current zoning designation. Mr. Morris noted the prior use as a banquet hall that 
accommodated weddings and other large gatherings until the time that the facility was 
demolished. Mr. Morris outlined the surrounding land uses, which is what they used to 
draw from architecturally, while limiting the height of the building to two stories plus a 
basement level. Mr. Morris provided other imagery of the area and stated that the 
proposed self-storage facility would generate less traffic than any of the surrounding 
uses. Mr. Morris displayed an image of the site plan stating that the intent was to bring 
the building as close as possible to Northern Avenue while placing the parking lot on 
the north side of the site with a single shared access serving the property to the north. 
Mr. Morris displayed an image of the revised elevations noting the architectural 
features of the building and their desire to activate the various facades by providing 
visual interest on all four sides. Mr. Morris displayed an image of the building 
renderings and noted an outreach meeting which generated considerable feedback 
that included feedback regarding the elevations as well as the use and associated 
traffic, and reiterated the minimal traffic generated by the proposed use, stating there 
could not be a less intense use. Mr. Morris stated that they had agreed to use faux 
windows on the second floor of the north elevation, instead of using standard 
windows. Mr. Morris stated that the facility was internally accessed as opposed to the 
units being drive-up. Mr. Morris stated that they had agreed to implement changes to 
the building design and color palette, limitations on signage, and limitations on 
outdoor lighting. Mr. Morris reiterated that the proposed use was low intensity 
compared to the current R-5 zoning, which is the most intense residential zoning 
district.  Mr. Morris reiterated that self-storage would be the only use allowed on the 
site, with no chance of any increase in traffic or difference in the character of the 
building. Mr. Morris stated that the requested zoning is necessary and would obviate 
the development of the site as an apartment community.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 3 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE 
 
Committee Member Steve Pamperin asked staff if it would be possible for the 
applicant at some future date to remove the Special Permit thereby allowing all of the 
uses that would be allowed in C-2 zoning. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that it would require a 
legislative action that would come before the Committee, Planning Commission, and 
City Council. Committee Member Elizabeth Pérez-Pawloski asked for further 
clarification that this or a future owner could come back to remove the Special Permit 
thereby allowing the list of uses that are allowed under C-2 and asked what those 
uses are. Mr. Kuhfuss reiterated that it would require a legislative action and that the 
property owner would have the right to file that application. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that if 
that were to occur, all of the uses listed under C-2 would be available to the owner, 
noting that the list of allowed uses is lengthy. Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski 
stated that she had a follow up question as to why the other C-2 uses would not be 
allowed and realized that it was because the Special Permit was a zoning overlay. 
Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski asked if the zoning case involving the 
neighboring property that had been before the committee the month prior had been 
approved. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that he had been on vacation and was not sure of the 
disposition of that case. Vice Chair Joshua Matthews stated that the Planning 
Commission had recommended that case for approval. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that the 
reason that the Special Permit would only allow self-storage is because that is what 
the applicant asked for. Vice Chair Matthews provide clarification that this or another 
property owner could come back at any time in the future and request any of a litany 
of zoning districts on the site, including R-5 or the removal of the Special Permit, and 
that the process to do so would follow that of the current case, which involves the 
Village Planning Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council.  
 
Committee Member Arick O’Hara referenced slide number 77 and stated that this 
appeared to be a list of concessions agreed to during a past outreach meeting and 
asked if those concessions were reflected in any of the 19 stipulations of approval as 
currently written. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that the changes to the design and colors were 
reflected in the revised elevations referenced in revised Stipulation No. 1 and that he 
was not sure if the revised elevations called out the faux windows on the north facing 
elevations. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that signs and lighting were not addressed in the 
stipulations. Committee Member O’Hara stated that under the current R-5 zoning, 
the owner could construct a 48-foot-high apartment complex with no input from the 
neighbors. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that he would have to refer to the Zoning Ordinance 
regarding the building height but confirmed that no rezoning process would be 
required. 
 
Committee Member Massimo Sommacampagna asked if the final plat process as it 
pertains to the easement referenced in Stipulation No. 3 would require City Council 
approval or if it was administrative. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that it was his recollection that 
it was an administrative process. 
 
Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski asked for clarification regarding the nature of 
the Special Permit. Mr. Kuhfuss asked for clarification on the question. Committee

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 4 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Member Pérez-Pawloski clarified that it was her understanding that given the pending 
nature of the C-2 request, the property owner could come back to rezone the 
property. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that was correct. Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski 
stated that according to Google Maps, there are five other self-storage facilities in the 
area and asked the applicant why they chose to seek approval for another facility on 
the subject site. Mr. Morris stated that similar conversations are not had with respect 
to restaurants or convenience stores and that the applicant had done their research 
and would not be willing to invest millions of dollars if they were not certain there was 
a market for the service being provided. Mr. Morris stated that storage facilities have 
undergone a significant change over the last decade in that self-storage facilities used 
to consist of drive-up units with no air conditioning compared to contemporary 
facilities that include air conditioning where people are storing family heirlooms and 
other items that would not have been typically stored in an older facility. Mr. Morris 
stated that could not be ascertained through a simple Google search further stating 
that the proposed facility would be considered “high-end”, offering a variety of 
amenities. 
 
Committee Member O’Hara asked for clarification regarding the deceleration lane 
along Northern Avenue leading to 17th Street, stating that the decision to not include 
a deceleration lane at that location was based on the city’s Street Transportation 
Department, not the applicant. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that his conversation with the 
Street Transportation Department was that deceleration lanes were intended to get 
traffic out of the way, thereby not impeding the flow of traffic on the main travel lanes 
and that adding a deceleration lane at that location would have that effect, which is 
counter to the idea of slowing traffic down. Mr. Kuhfuss further explained that a 
deceleration lane would not solve the problem of westbound traffic that is coming off 
the freeway at high rate of speed. Committee Member O’Hara asked for confirmation 
that the city said no to a traffic signal in that area. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that a traffic 
signal must meet certain warrants and that based on his conversation with the city’s 
Street Transportation Department, the proposed use does not trigger those warrants.  
Committee Member O’Hara asked the applicant if he would be willing to include 
additional stipulations that address the neighborhood concerns expressed at the 
neighborhood meeting as previously discussed. Mr. Morris stated that he would be 
willing to do so as there is nothing on the list that they have not already agreed to do. 
Mr. Morris also pointed out that there was a large meeting followed by a lesser-
attended meeting that had been coordinated by one of the residents and did not want 
to imply that the neighborhood would be supportive of the request as a result of those 
concessions. Mr. Morris also stated that the proposed restrictions on outdoor lighting 
were consistent with the case to the north that was heard the month prior.  
 
Committee Member Patrick Edwards asked for confirmation that the city did not feel 
that a deceleration lane at that location was advantageous or warranted. Mr. Kuhfuss 
stated that his conversation with the Street Transportation Department was that a 
deceleration lane would exacerbate the problem as opposed to helping it. Committee 
Member Edwards stated that seemed counter-intuitive. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that he is 
not a traffic engineer or transportation planner and that he was simply relaying to the 
committee the information that was relayed to him by the Street Transportation

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 5 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Department. Vice Chair Matthews stated that his interpretation in the matter was that 
if a vehicle were to make a right turn onto 17th Street, the vehicle would need to slow 
down which would create a cascading effect thereby slowing traffic down on Northern 
Avenue, and that a deceleration lane would act in a manner similar to a bus pullout. 
Mr. Morris stated that adding a deceleration lane increases the width of the roadway 
which intern causes motorists to feel more comfortable with driving faster. Mr. Morris 
stated that they consulted with the Street Transportation Department regarding that 
issue and were told that a deceleration lane would not be supported. 
 
PUBLIC COMMENT 
 
Joann Itow and Jim Feldhan, on behalf of three other members of the public who 
wished to yield their time, provided a joint presentation outlining their concerns over 
the proposed project. Ms. Itow presented a slide depicting the area and stated there 
are only three C-O properties in the area adding that everything else in the 
neighborhood is residential. Ms. Itow stated it was their belief that the proposed C-2 
zoning would set a president for additional commercial zoning in the area, which is not 
conducive to the area. Ms. Itow stated that there are statistics available regarding self-
storage and stated that in 2024 the self-storage inventory was 11 million square feet 
which was 1.7 percent more than in 2024. Ms. Itow stated that in 2025 the supply was 
expected to increase by 161 percent, which will create a spillover in 2026. Ms. Itow 
stated they were vehemently opposed to the proposed C-2 zoning and did not support 
the Special Permit for self-storage. Ms. Itow stated there was no C-2 in the area while 
Cave Creek Road has a lot of C-2 properties and that Northern Avenue was not the 
same as Cave Creek Road. Ms. Itow stated no change would be preferable to the 
proposed zoning and that if the site was to be rezoned, C-O zoning would be 
preferable to C-2 since C-O zoning is located on either side of the site. Ms. Itow 
stated that the Southwest Gas facility was used for training purposes as opposed to 
corporate offices and that the traffic generated by that facility was very low. Ms. Itow 
stated that whoever builds on the site should be responsible for installing a traffic 
signal at 17th Street and Northern Avenue in order for people to access Northern 
Avenue to go either east or west. Mr. Feldhan stated that traffic on 17th Street was 
not the problem and that the issue was getting people in and out of the neighborhood. 
Mr. Feldhan stated there was not a traffic signal at either 17th Street or 18th Street 
and that the only option was the traffic signal at 16th Street. Mr. Feldhan stated that 
people cut through the Southwest Gas facility to gain access to 16th Street. Mr. 
Feldhan stated that he spoke with general council for Southwest Gas who stated that 
cut-through traffic was not acceptable due to the disruption of their operation and the 
associated liabilities, and that if it were to continue, they would consider gating off the 
facility. Mr. Feldhan stated that the only way for people to safely navigate the area 
was to take 18th Street north to Las Palmaritas Drive then west to 16th Street to gain 
access to the traffic signal at Northern Avenue. Mr. Feldhan stated that there was 
already a problem with cut-through traffic in the area and provided imagery depicting 
some of the restrictions caused by the narrow streets. Mr. Feldhan stated that he 
observed one individual having to drive on the sidewalk to avoid oncoming traffic. Mr. 
Feldhan stated that if the request is approved, there would be an increase in cut-
through traffic and similar illegal traffic maneuvers. Mr. Feldhan stated the proposal

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 6 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
includes 722 storage units and 38 parking spaces, and that he observed that in other 
storage facilities, there was traffic in and out of the facility all day long. Mr. Feldhan 
stated that another large storage facility is planned near Shea Boulevard and Tatum 
Road. Mr. Feldhan related another traffic conflict he experienced on 18th Street and 
stated that these types of conflicts would continue given the unimproved nature of the 
roads and that the self-storage use is inappropriate for the area. Mr. Feldhan 
reiterated that the C-2 zoning should not be approved and that in a few years, the 
property owners could sell the property and come back in an effort to obtain approval 
for some other obnoxious use including manufacturing that industrial zoning is not 
appropriate. 
 
Committee Member Pamperin asked if Ms. Itow, Mr. Feldhan, and the people they 
represent were supportive of the multifamily development that could occur under the 
existing zoning. Mr. Feldhan stated that if the current zoning allows that type of 
development then it would be ok, and stated that if the request were to be rezoned to 
C-O he would not object. Mr. Feldhan stated that he was concerned that the proposed 
self-storage building included one story that is below grade and would require 14 feet 
of excavation in hard rocky soil. Mr. Feldhan stated that once they determine that it is 
not cost effective to dig that deep they will seek relief from the height limitation 
through the Hearing Officer. Committee Member Pamperin stated that he lives in the 
area and is aware of the traffic issues and stated that if the site were to be developed 
as multifamily there would be even more traffic in the area. Committee Member 
Pamperin asked for clarification as to why the speakers would be comfortable with R-
5 zoning. Ms. Itow stated that R-2 and R-3 zoning would be compatible with that area 
and that a five-story apartment building is too intense. Mr. Feldhan stated that it would 
be difficult to build an apartment building at that location due to the traffic issues. 
 
Committee Member O’Hara asked for clarity in that concerns had been expressed 
regarding all of the possible uses allowed in C-2 zoning and whether the fact that the 
Special Permit only allows self-storage gave them any comfort. Committee Member 
O’Hara further asked if the fact that in order to remove the Special Permit or go back 
to R-5 zoning would require the same process gave them any comfort. Mr. Feldhan 
stated that the C-2 zoning is already in place, the list of allowed uses under C-2 is 
long, and that it would be a rubber stamp. Mr. Feldhan stated that if the storage facility 
did not work out they would try to repurpose the building and that it would be unlikely 
that a zoning request to facilitate that repurposing would be denied. Committee 
Member O’Hara stated that he thought that statement was presumptuous. Committee 
Member O’Hara stated that the presentation did a good job in explaining the traffic 
issues in the area and restated Committee Member Pamperin’s question by asking if 
they would be ok with a scenario where the requested zoning is denied and the 
developer opts to move forward with a 48-foot high apartment building consisting of 
50 to 70 dwelling units with 200 to 220 new residents generating 150 to 175 trips per 
day on a 24-hour basis with no public input compared to a facility that generates 
minimal traffic during business hours only. Mr. Feldhan stated that it was his 
understanding that the applicant did not yet own the property and that if the zoning 
was not approved, the purchase transaction would not likely be completed. Mr. 
Feldhan stated that the applicant builds storage facilities and is not going to build

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 7 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
apartments. Committee Member O’Hara asked the speaker, who was granted 
additional time to speak on behalf of a number of people, to clarify why they would be 
ok with a use that generates a high volume of traffic but not ok with a use that 
generates minimal traffic. Mr. Feldhan stated that if there was to be an apartment 
building, that would trigger the need for a traffic signal at 17th Street and Northern 
Avenue. Mr. Feldhan stated that on Camelback Road near 40th Street there are 
several traffic signals in close proximity to one another, which demonstrates that the 
city will install traffic signals when warranted. 
 
Committee Member Sommacampagna asked if the increase in the number of 
projected storage units that were cited were permitted or under construction. Mr. 
Feldhan stated that the 160 percent figure was for units that are under construction 
and coming online this year. Mr. Feldhan stated there were a number of units that had 
been rezoned but not permitted. 
 
Committee Member O’Hara referenced slide number 83 and stated that the 
applicant had already indicated their back-up plan is to construct a 14,000 square 
foot, 48-foot high, four-story, 88-unit apartment complex. Committee Member O’Hara 
stated that it sounded like the applicant was a developer, not a storage unit developer. 
Mr. Feldhan asked if the statement that the applicant was a family-owned business 
that has been building storage facilities for three generations is not true. Committee 
Member O’Hara stated that he was only going off the slide that the applicant provided. 
Mr. Feldhan stated that he was going off representations made by the applicant. 
Committee Member O’Hara asked if that was as concerning to them as the proposed 
project. Mr. Feldhan stated that he had a problem with the city allowing them to blast 
14 feet into bedrock to get the subterranean level they propose and that it will end up 
being a 40-foot tall building even if it is less traffic. Mr. Feldhan stated they were on a 
hill and that it is solid rock. 
 
Mike Taborn, on behalf of four other members of the public who wished to yield their 
time, provided a presentation outlining their concerns over the proposed project. Mr. 
Taborn stated that he intended to discuss the intersection of concern, how residents 
compensate using Northern Avenue, the new use case associated with the zoning 
request, and his recommendations. Mr. Taborn stated that he and his neighbors tend 
to use the traffic signal at 16th Street and Northern Avenue during those times when 
traffic on Northern Avenue is heavy. Mr. Taborn stated that if the requested zoning 
goes through, this will increase the problem. Mr. Taborn stated that during a meeting 
held the week prior, the city’s representative present at that meeting did not 
corroborate what Mr. Kuhfuss had stated earlier and had not studied the issue. Mr. 
Taborn stated that he did not understand how the city planner could now claim 
differently. Mr. Taborn presented a scenario of a 26-foot truck attempting to make a 
right-hand turn from Northern Avenue onto 17th Street, stating that the truck would 
have to slow to about two miles per hour in a lane that otherwise has fast moving 
traffic. Mr. Taborn stated that during times of heavy traffic, he would opt to pass 17th 
Street to access 16th Street in order to avoid having to slow down to make the turn 
onto 17th Street. Mr. Taborn stated that experienced drivers will know that but 
inexperienced drivers will not. Mr. Taborn discussed line of sight issues at 17th Street

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 8 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
looking east on Northern Avenue. Mr. Taborn stated that several obstructions, 
including an electrical transformer and a block wall, block visibility, and that motorist 
reaction times factor into the equation. Mr. Taborn stated that a deceleration lane 
would help and that more study is needed. Mr. Taborn stated that reaction times 
increase as additional drivers are factored in, which has a cumulative effect, and 
supports the idea of a deceleration lane. Mr. Taborn expressed concerns over left turn 
movements at Northern Avenue and stated there needs to be a “no left turn” sign at 
that intersection. 
 
Committee Member Matthew Knapp asked if Mr. Tabor knew what the speed limit 
was for Northern Avenue. Mr. Taborn stated that he believed it was 40 miles per 
hour. 
 
Doug Banfelder identified himself as representing the Stoney Mountain 
Neighborhood Association and stated that he was hopeful that if approved, the 
request would include the additional stipulations as previously discussed. Mr. 
Banfelder stated that the applicant has approximately 4,000 facilities across the 
country and apparently runs a credible operation. Mr. Banfelder stated that a 
deceleration lane is warranted and did not know that the city had already decided for 
them that a deceleration lane was not supportable, and that the Street Transportation 
Department was expecting motorists making the turn onto 17th Street to control the 
speed of the traffic behind them. Mr. Banfelder stated that Northern Avenue is signed 
at 40 miles per hour and that it is not uncommon for motorists to travel at 45 or 50 
miles per hour and sometimes 55 miles per hour, which is highway speed. Mr. 
Banfelder stated that 17th Street was a narrow residential street and that it was 
asking a lot for the vehicles turning right into 17th Street to be the mechanism that 
slows down the traffic. Mr. Banfelder stated that while a wider thoroughfare might 
encourage higher speeds, traffic is already traveling at high speeds. Mr. Banfelder 
stated that it would be difficult for a truck, perhaps pulling a trailer, to slow down 
enough to make a right turn onto 17th Street and not get rear ended. Mr. Banfelder 
expressed concerns over the possibility that traffic will not slow down enough to 
negotiate that turn and will overshoot the turn and hit the obstructions located on the 
west side of 17th Street. Mr. Banfelder stated that they would like to support the 
request but are concerned about safety and would like a deceleration lane and 
signage to restrict left turns at 17th Street as well as a “no right turn” sign coming out 
of the facility to keep people from using the local street to gain access to 18th Street. 
Charles Chapman stated that his home is located directly behind the proposed 
facility. Mr. Chapman stated that he had looked at a couple of Cube Smart facilities 
and they are not much to look at and except for the lack of barbed wire, they look like 
correctional facilities. Mr. Chapman expressed concerns over having a 30-foot-tall box 
directly behind his house. Mr. Chapman expressed concerns regarding two lanes of 
freeway traffic exiting onto Northern Avenue while maintaining freeway speeds with 
no traffic signals until 16th Street. Mr. Chapman stated that making either a right or 
left turn onto Northern Avenue is a risky proposition. Mr. Chapman expressed his 
appreciation of the rural character of the neighborhood, and that the addition of the 
proposed non-descript structure will aggravate traffic concerns and diminish the 
quality of life in the neighborhood.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 9 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
 
Glenn Osborne stated that he is not opposed to the site being developed and had 
offered support for the request involving the neighboring property to the north 
because a 15-foot-tall building fit into the neighborhood. Mr. Osborne stated that the 
subject request involves a 30-foot-tall, 230-foot-long storage facility that will be close 
to his property line and home. Mr. Osborne expressed concerns regarding outdoor 
lighting shining onto his property. Mr. Osborne stated that traffic was a concern due to 
the speed of the traffic on Northern Avenue and the lack of a deceleration lane. Mr. 
Osborne stated that it was a blind curve east of the intersection at 17th Street. Mr. 
Osborne stated that the proposed facility did not fit into the neighborhood and that the 
area between State Route 51 and 16th Street consisted of homes, offices, and 
apartments with no self-storage facilities. Mr. Osborne stated there were already four 
or five existing storage facilities within a five-minute drive and there is no stated need 
for an additional facility. Mr. Osborne expressed concerns with the bedrock and the 
length of time needed to construct the facility. 
 
Art Anderson stated that it is not possible to appreciate the traffic issues at 17th 
Street and Northern Avenue unless you drive it due to the blind curve and high 
speeds. Mr. Anderson stated that large trucks will have no chance of making a left 
turn onto Northern Avenue at 17th Street, and that a deceleration lane that is 
occupied by a large truck will block the view of oncoming traffic from the left. Mr. 
Anderson stated that comparing a contemporary facility to an older one is putting 
lipstick on a pig. Mr. Anderson stated that it was unfair to ask if someone would rather 
have this facility or an apartment complex since they were here to talk about the self-
storage and apartments are another issue. 
 
Ruth Truman stated that she is a real estate land development attorney and is 
opposed to the project. Ms. Truman stated that she felt there were a number of red 
herrings and strawmen being presented. Ms. Truman argued against Mr. Morris’ 
assertion that the property needs to be developed because it is vacant. Ms. Truman 
further argued against Mr. Morris’ assertion that the neighborhood needs the 
proposed facility stating there are five storage facilities in the immediate area that are 
not at capacity. Ms. Truman stated that the threat of a 48-foot-tall multifamily building 
happening if the developer does not get his way is a strawman argument and used 
the analogy of a prosecutor stating that a defendant better take a plea or face a larger 
sentence. Ms. Truman stated that assuming the broker was not a bad broker, the 
reason the property had not attracted a multifamily developer is because the site is 
not suited for multifamily development and that it was not appropriate to state that 
they are just going to make the neighborhood worse by building a multifamily 
development if their request for a storage facility is not approved. Ms. Truman stated 
that she was in favor of a deceleration lane and that on August 18th Jorge Rivera 
from the Street Transportation Department met with a number of residents in the area 
and stated they were open to the idea of a deceleration lane. Ms. Truman stated that 
it was ludicrous for anyone to state that a deceleration lane is off the table and that it 
was not off the table since it had not even been studied.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 10 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
APPLICANT RESPONSE 
 
Mr. Morris thanked the members of the public for coming out and stated that he 
understood this is an adversarial process. Mr. Moris stated that he appreciated Ms. 
Truman’s comment that not every site needs to be developed. Mr. Morris stated that 
the Village Planning Committee sees zoning applications every month and that the 
site could remain vacant forever but that is unlikely since it is a desirable location 
adjacent to an arterial street with 50,000 cars per day. Mr. Morris stated that much of 
the conversation was over traffic yet there is not a less intensive use than that 
proposed. Mr. Morris stated that every alternative use that was presented by the 
opposition would generate three to five times the amount of traffic than would be the 
case under the current proposal. Mr. Morris compared the vision of what might 
happen to a movie trailer for Mission Impossible 6 in that motorists, when trying to 
turn, would crash into gas lines, trees, etc. Mr. Morris stated that he recognized there 
would be fast traffic and experienced the situation firsthand but stated that it is 
possible to make a right-hand turn safely. Mr. Morris pointed out that there is an office 
building located on either side of the subject site with access to Northern Avenue and 
that one of the buildings was served by 88 parking spaces while the other was served 
by 200 parking spaces and that all of these people manage to get into those parking 
spaces every day. Mr. Morris stated that the proposed facility has 22 parking spaces. 
Mr. Morris stated the only use that generates less traffic is a vacant site and that he 
did not believe the site would remain vacant. Mr. Morris stated that what had been 
demolished on the site was a banquet hall that generated considerably more traffic 
than what is being proposed and the idea of placing a use on the property that 
generates the least amount of traffic makes sense. Mr. Morris stated that the applicant 
is a developer and understands the value of R-5 zoning and will be closing escrow on 
the property knowing they have the ability to move forward with an R-5 development. 
Mr. Morris stated there is multifamily in the area and that the site would support about 
56 dwelling units with parking but that type of development is not what the applicant 
wishes to do even though it is a backup plan. Mr. Morris stated that going with 
multifamily is not a threat because if that was their intent they would not be seeking to 
rezone. Mr. Morris reiterated that self-storage is the lowest intensity use that can be 
placed on the site and that it is the only use allowed under the Special Permit. Mr. 
Morris stated that SP zoning is not an overlay but is a zoning district and that while 
there must be an underlying district, the only use allowed is self-storage. Mr. Morris 
stated that there was a lot of conversation regarding the idea that C-2 zoning would 
exist thereby paving the way for more intense development later should the self-
storage fail and added that would be required to go through the same process. Mr. 
Morris stated that conceivably he could request A-1 zoning or a small nuclear power 
plant but it has to go through a process that is the same as that required for the 
current proposal. Mr. Morris stated that he found it ironic that the opposition did not 
show images of the intersection of 17th Street and Northern Avenue and that one of 
the reasons this is an appropriate site is because it has arterial access. Mr. Morris 
stated they had already agreed to no left turns. Mr. Morris stated they had asked the 
city numerous times about a deceleration lane and were told that was not an option 
but were happy to have a solution that works for the neighbors. Mr. Morris stated that 
he found it ironic that more than a couple of residents stated that they have a storage

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 11 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
unit. Mr. Morris stated that self-storage is part of the neighborhood fabric and are a 
low intensity use but are under constant pressure and they would not be seeking 
approval if they did not feel they would get staff support, address traffic restrictions in 
the area, and deliver an appropriate project that benefits the area. Mr. Morris stated 
that not every site needs to be developed and that his impression was there was an 
expectation that if the request is not approved the site would remain vacant. Mr. 
Morris stated this was akin to whack-a-mole theory and that he did not believe there 
was great appreciation for the fact that the site will be developed and that keeping the 
site vacant is a temporary situation. Mr. Morris stated that if the request were to not be 
approved, his guess is that the next development proposal will avoid the process by 
using the existing zoning and involve a use that will exacerbate every one of the 
concerns expressed by the neighborhood. 
 
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE 
 
Vice Chair Matthews asked Mr. Morris if in his experience, would a multifamily 
development occurring under the existing zoning necessitate additional improvements 
such as a traffic signal. Mr. Morris stated that it would not warrant a traffic signal and 
that the background traffic on Northern Avenue is 50,000 trips per day but that the 
cross-traffic is limited and there is no way that warrants would be met. Mr. Morris 
stated that he was at the city the day prior to discuss the possibility of a traffic signal 
at 18th Street and Northern Avenue and that the Council Member has some ability to 
bring in a signal at that location. Mr. Morris stated there was discussion about the city 
adding illuminated speed signs with flashing lights along the stretch of Northern 
Avenue between the freeway and 18th Street and that if the city was to decide that a 
traffic signal was viable for 18th Street, the applicant would be willing to fund a portion 
of that signal, it if could be moved up in the Capital Improvement Program. 
 
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 
 
Vice Chair Matthews, in an effort to focus the discussion, summarized the main 
points of the discussion so far stating that the site was zoned R-5 and that the request 
was for C-2 with a Special Permit to allow a self-storage warehouse only. Vice Chair 
Matthews stated that if the subject request is approved, and this or any future owner 
wished to change that zoning, they would need to come back though the same 
process. Vice Chair Matthews stated that it appeared that the residents of the 
neighborhood understand that the site is zoned R-5 and that by-right there could be 
multifamily housing. Vice Chair Matthews stated that he believed that everyone would 
agree that multifamily development will produce more traffic than a self-storage 
facility. Vice Chair Matthews stated that the committee could recommend additional 
stipulations and provide direction. Vice Chair Matthews further stated that any new 
stipulations must be the burden of the applicant and be supported by both the 
applicant and staff. Vice Chair Matthews stated that the deceleration lane will require 
additional study.  
 
Committee Member Joshua Carmona stated that Vice Chair Matthews did a good 
job summarizing the discussion and that he understood that the neighborhood is

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 12 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
against the Special Permit but less hesitant regarding the R-5 zoning. Committee 
Member Carmona stated that a “no” vote could result in the site being developed as 
R-5. 
 
Committee Member Pamperin stated that it was not within the committee’s purview 
to discuss whether or not the site should develop as multifamily. Committee Member 
Pamperin stated that he counted ten self-storage facilities within a 4.5-mile radius of 
the site and that in a wealthier neighborhood, there would not be a self-storage facility 
every two miles. Committee Member Pamperin stated that because this is a lower 
income neighborhood, there is an overabundance of storage facilities. Committee 
Member Pamperin stated that he did not believe that a storage facility would add 
value to the neighborhood or increase property values. Committee Member Pamperin 
stated that the area has a high volume of traffic and that if the request were to be 
approved, he would be in favor of a stipulation that requires a deeper look into the 
traffic situation. 
 
Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski asked if there were comment cards where the 
individual indicated they were in support of the request. Vice Chair Matthews stated 
that he did not have any comment cards that indicated support and deferred to staff 
regarding any letters of support that may have been received. Mr. Kuhfuss stated 
that all letters regarding this request were in the packet or handed out. Committee 
Member Pérez-Pawloski stated that she wanted to know where the members of the 
audience lived relative to the site. Vice Chair Matthews stated there were individuals 
who live on 17th Street, Griswold Road, and the neighborhood. Committee Member 
Pérez-Pawloski stated that she understood the neighbor’s concerns and felt that it 
was inappropriate for the residents to be asked if they would rather have the existing 
zoning. Committee Member Pérez-Pawloski stated that she was prepared to make a 
motion. 
 
Following the first motion on Z-72-25-6, Committee Member Barraza asked if a 
motion to deny failed would it automatically default to an approval of the request. Vice 
Chair Matthews stated that it would not and that the committee would need to vote in 
the affirmative on something. 
 
Committee Member Edwards stated that he would not support a motion to deny. 
Committee Member Edwards stated that the committee should remain objective 
regarding the request and be clear on the issues, and that it was not a zoning issue or 
storage issue but a traffic issue that cannot be solved with the subject case. 
Committee Member Edwards stated that the question having to do with whether or not 
the proposed facility is warranted is not within the purview of the committee and that 
the committee would not be asking that question if the request involved a restaurant 
or other type of business. Committee Member Edwards stated that he was pro-
development and that a property owner has the right to develop their property within 
certain guidelines. Committee Member Edwards stated that he did not believe the 
business was inappropriate for the area and that the traffic issue needs to be 
addressed independently.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 13 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Vice Chair Matthews clarified that a “yes” vote on a motion to deny would have the 
effect of denying the request and that a “no” vote would bring the committee back into 
discussion. 
 
Following the first vote on Z-72-25-6, Committee Member Arick O’Hara stated that 
he was ready to make a motion but requested a point of privilege. Committee Member 
O’Hara stated that he had been on the committee for nearly ten years and that in his 
experience, Mr. Kuhfuss was one of the best planners to serve the committee. 
Committee Member O’Hara stated that if Mr. Kuhfuss does not have the answer to a 
question he will state so and find the answer. Committee Member O’Hara stated that 
he did not believe that anyone meant to be rude or offensive and stated that he takes 
exception to numerous speakers who questioned Mr. Kuhfuss’ integrity regarding 
whether he spoke to someone in a very large department of a very large city. 
Committee Member O’Hara stated that if Mr. Kuhfuss said that he spoke to someone, 
he spoke to someone. Committee Member O’Hara stated that he heard the residents 
loud and clear and was going to include in his motion additional stipulations including 
a thorough traffic evaluation to assess the need for a traffic signal and a deceleration 
lane, since Mr. Tabor raised valid points during his presentation. Committee Member 
O’Hara referenced Ms. Truman’s statement that she had spoken with the Street 
Transportation Department on August 18th and received a different answer and that 
the matter needs to be clarified before any dirt is turned.  
 
Vice Chair Matthews asked staff if it was true that stipulations are typically the 
burden of the applicant to fulfill. Mr. Kuhfuss stated that was the case. Vice Chair 
Matthews suggested that the motion include direction for the applicant to seek clarity 
from the Street Transportation Department regarding the traffic signal and 
deceleration lane and that clarity be obtained prior to Planning Commission. Vice 
Chair Matthews stated that he assumed that the applicant would be willing to obtain 
that clarity. Mr. Morris stated that was acceptable. Vice Chair Matthews asked staff if 
the additional stipulations needed to be read into the record for both cases. Mr. 
Kuhfuss stated that each case needed to be taken independently and that staff would 
work with the applicant regarding specific language, and that for consistency, the 
stipulation language should ultimately apply to both cases. 
 
MOTION: 
Committee Member Arick O’Hara motioned to recommend approval of Z-SP-3-25-6 
per the staff recommendation, with additional stipulations and direction. Additional 
stipulations are to 1) reduce the number and locations of building wall signs, 2) reduce 
the size of the monument sign on Northern Avenue, 3) limit outdoor lighting to low-
profile shielded fixtures not exceeding a height of 15 feet including lamp, pole and 
base, and not exceeding 2,700 Kelvin, and no more than one foot-candle at the 
property line, and 4) to not allow any north-facing windows above the 1st floor. The 
direction is for the applicant to seek final determination from the Street Transportation 
Department regarding the traffic signal and deceleration lane prior to Planning 
Commission. Committee Member Fred Hepperle seconded the motion.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 14 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
VOTE:  
12-1, motion to recommend approval of Z-SP-3-25-6 per the staff recommendation, 
with additional stipulations and direction passes with Committee Members Barraza, 
Carmona, Edwards, Harris, Hepperle, Jaramillo, Knapp, Larson, O’Hara, 
Sommacampagna, and Matthews in favor and Committee Members Pamperin and 
Pérez-Pawloski opposed. 
 
 
 
VPC RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS 
 
 
1. 
The development shall be in general conformance with the site plan and 
elevations date stamped May 27, 2025, AND THE ELEVATIONS DATE 
STAMPED AUGUST 18, 2025, WITH SPECIFIC REGARD TO THE COLOR 
PALETTE, as modified by the following stipulations and approved by the 
Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
2. 
Where pedestrian walkways cross a vehicular path, the pathway shall be 
constructed of decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or other 
pavement treatments that visually contrast parking and drive aisle surfaces, as 
approved by the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
3. 
At the time of final plat, a minimum 14-foot-wide vehicular access easement, 
providing for future shared access with the adjacent northern property to 17th 
Street, shall be recorded. 
 
 
4. 
The existing sidewalk Northern Avenue shall be removed and reconstructed 
with a minimum 6-foot-wide detached sidewalk separated by a minimum 10-
foot-wide landscape strip located between the back of curb and sidewalk on the 
north side of, adjacent to the development, and shall comply with the following 
standards, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
 
a. Minimum 2-inch caliper, single-trunk, large canopy, drought-tolerant, shade 
trees, planted 20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings on both sides of 
the sidewalk to achieve a minimum of 75% shade. 
 
 
 
b. A minimum of five 5-gallon drought-tolerant shrubs per tree and a mixture 
of drought-tolerant shrubs, accents, and vegetative groundcovers, 
maintained to a maximum height of two feet, evenly distributed throughout 
the landscape areas to achieve a minimum of 75% live coverage. 
 
 
 
Where utility conflicts exist, the developer shall work with the Planning and 
Development Department on an alternative design solution consistent with a 
pedestrian environment. 
 
 
5. 
All mitigation improvements shall be constructed and/or funded as identified in 
the accepted Traffic Impact Analysis dated May 8, 2025.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 15 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
6. 
Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb and gutter. Also, replace any 
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and 
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA 
guidelines. 
 
 
7. 
All streets within and adjacent to the development shall be constructed with 
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, 
landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by the Planning and 
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA 
accessibility standards. 
 
 
8. 
A minimum of 5% of the required parking spaces shall include EV Installed 
infrastructure. 
 
 
9. 
A minimum of two bicycle parking spaces shall be provided through Inverted U 
and/or artistic racks located near building entrances and installed per the 
requirements of Section 1307.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, as 
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Artistic racks shall 
adhere to the City of Phoenix Preferred Designs in Appendix K of the 
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan. 
 
 
10. 
A minimum of one of the bicycle parking spaces shall include an electrical 
receptacle for electric bicycle charging capabilities, as approved by the 
Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
11. 
All bicycle parking spaces and pedestrian pathways, including sidewalks, shall 
be shaded by a structure, landscaping, or a combination of the two to provide a 
minimum of 75% shade, as approved by the Planning and Development 
Department.  
 
 
12. 
Natural turf shall only be utilized for required retention areas (bottom of basin, 
and only allowed on slopes if required for slope stabilization), as approved by 
the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
13. 
A minimum of 25% of the surface parking areas shall be shaded, as approved 
by the Planning and Development Department. Shade may be achieved by 
structures or by minimum 2-inch caliper, drought tolerant, shade trees, or a 
combination thereof. 
 
 
14. 
Prior to final site plan approval, documentation shall be provided that 
demonstrates a commitment to participate in the Phoenix Water Efficiency 
Checkup program for a minimum of 10 years, or as approved by the Planning 
and Development Department 
 
 
15. 
A minimum of two green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for 
stormwater management shall be implemented, as approved or modified by the 
Planning and Development and/or Street Transportation departments. This

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 16 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
includes but is not limited to stormwater harvesting basins, bioswales, 
permeable pavement, etc., per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green Infrastructure 
and Low Impact Development Details for Alternative Stormwater Management.   
 
 
16. 
If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall 
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the 
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to 
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval. 
 
 
17. 
If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the 
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified 
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the 
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations. 
 
 
18. 
In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the 
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the 
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials. 
 
 
19. 
Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207 
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County 
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning 
application file for record. 
 
 
20. 
THERE SHALL BE NO WALL SIGNS LOCATED ON THE NORTH-FACING 
OR EAST-FACING ELEVATIONS. 
 
 
21. 
WALL SIGNS LOCATED ON THE WEST-FACING AND SOUTH-FACING 
ELEVATIONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO NOT MORE THAN 170 SQUARE 
FEET IN THE AGGREGATE. 
 
 
22. 
GROUND SIGNS LOCATED ALONG NORTHERN AVENUE SHALL BE 
LIMITED TO NOT MORE THAN FIVE FEET IN HEIGHT. 
 
 
23. 
WINDOWS LOCATED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR ON THE NORTH 
FACING ELEVATIONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO FAUX WINDOW ONLY. 
 
 
24. 
THE FOLLOWING LIGHTING STANDARDS SHALL APPLY ON-SITE, AS 
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT: 
 
 
 
A. 
ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED TO PREVENT DIRECT 
VISIBILITY OF THE LIGHT SOURCE FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY. 
 
 
 
B. 
LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED WITH CUT-OFF FIXTURES AND 
DEFLECTORS TO DIRECT LIGHT DOWNWARD AND LIMIT ON-SITE 
LIGHTING LEVELS TO A MAXIMUM OF 1 FOOT CANDLE AT THE 
PROPERTY LINE.

North Mountain Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-SP-3-25-6 
Page 17 of 17 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
 
 
 
C. 
ANY LIGHTING SHALL NOT EXCEED A MAXIMUM OF 15 FEET IN 
HEIGHT INCLUDING LAMP, POLE, AND BASE. 
 
 
 
 
D. 
THE COLOR TEMPERATURE OF ANY OUTDOOR LIGHTING SHALL 
BE LIMITED TO 2,700 KELVIN. 
 
 
STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS: 
 
None