Attachment E - VPC Summary- May 12, 2020 - Z-49-19-8

City of Phoenix — Formal (2020-09-02)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 10457 characters
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary 
Z-49-19-8
Date of VPC Meeting 
May 12, 2020 (Continuance) 
April 14, 2020 (Canceled) 
Request From 
PSC 
Request To 
C-2 HGT/WVR DNS/WVR
Proposed Use 
Multifamily
Location 
Approximately 175 feet north of the northwest corner of 
19th Avenue and Southern Avenue 
VPC Recommendation 
Continuance to June 9, 2020 
VPC Vote 
13-0-0 Motion passes; with members Aguilar, Alvarez,
Brooks, Brownell, Daniels, Holmerud, Kotake, Larios,
Shepard, M. Smith, S. Smith, Busching, and Trites in
favor; none in dissent or abstention.
VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS: 
Four email messages were received, two from individuals supportive of the case 
and two from individuals in opposition, and wishing to speak. 
Member Said left the meeting bringing the quorum to 13 members. 
Chairwoman Trittes announced that member Muriel Smith was recusing herself. 
She asked staff to read her written statement in regards to this case. 
Mr. Bojorquez, staff, read the statement by Ms. Smith then provided a 
presentation on the proposed rezoning case. Staff recommends approval, 
subject to stipulations. He then invited the applicant to present their information 
presentation with the committee. 
Mr. Russell Condas, of Dominium Inc., went over a presentation on the 
Dominium company then going over the proposed project. An overview of the 
site plan was provided, followed by a discussion on public outreach, including 
partnerships that were made or are underway. The development strengths were 
indicated in addition to how public concerns were addressed. It was explained 
that the property was zoned commercial, but this was never developed after 
many decades of sitting vacant. The area amenities were listed and an 
Attachment E

explanation of the economic impact of this project was given. Crime and traffic 
concerns were addressed, in addition to the affordability of this project at 60-
percent area medium income. An amended site plan was shown and explained, 
then the presentation ended. 
 
Chairwoman Trittes asked for comments from the committee. 
 
Mr. Aguilar asked whether property was going to be gated and whether there 
are any other proposed modifications besides the site plan. 
 
Mr. Condas responded that yes, the property was to be gated due to security 
reasons and that the amended site plan proposed shows that the height of 
Building 7 is being lowered to two stories along the western property line. 
 
Mr. Aguilar asked whether the project was intending on renting to former 
incarcerated people and if the applicant was willing to contact the Tiger Mountain 
Foundation. 
 
Mr. Condas responded that yes, under certain conditions they would rent to 
formerly incarcerated people. He added that yes, he was also willing to reach out 
to the Tiger Mountain Foundation. 
 
Ms. Alvarez asked the applicant to describe the site security. 
 
Mr. Condas explained that each resident would use a “key fob” to access the 
property and that security cameras plus security personnel were to be used. 
 
Mr. Brooks asked the applicant to explain their connection with Tiger Mountain 
Foundation and if he had read the Phoenix Food Action Plan. 
 
Mr. Condas mentioned that he had not yet read the Phoenix Food Action Plan 
and that his conversations with the Tiger Mountain Foundation revolved around 
having a community garden, incorporating edible landscaping and ways of 
hosting a farmers market. 
 
Mr. Brownell expressed support for 60-percent area median income target of 
this project and felt that this type of development was needed in this community. 
 
Ms. Daniels shared her support for this project given the amenities, proposed 
rent and connection to transportation. 
 
Mr. Gene Holmerud asked Mr. Brooks to share how the Food Action Plan could 
be implemented in this project. 
 
Mr. Brooks provided an overview of the previous comments made.

Mr. Monge asked the applicant for clarification on the number of affordable units 
and whether housing vouchers would be accepted. 
 
Mr. Condas mentioned that the property was going to be deed restricted to 
affordability levels for at least 30 years and that they would accept housing 
vouchers. 
 
Mr. Monge asked whether the applicant had received any feedback from 
neighbors on the new site plan proposed. 
 
Mr. Condas answered that yes, they had received some feedback on the 
modified site plan. 
 
Mr. Larios asked the applicant whether he had reached out to organizations 
involved in the incarceration of individuals. 
 
Mr. Condas responded that yes, his team had reached out to some of those 
organizations but that no response had been received. 
 
Mr. Larios stated that the model proposed, crime prevention through 
environmental design, has historically been problematic. 
 
Mr. Shelly Smith provided comments pertaining to the height of the project and 
viability of phasing it. 
 
Ms. Busching mentioned that she could not support the project due to the level 
of security proposed, including concerns with the fencing of the project. 
 
Chairwoman Trittes repeated her previous comment that there is a need for 
thousands of housing units in the City of Phoenix. She then asked the applicant if 
more buildings could be changed to two stories. 
 
Mr. Condas stated that the was willing to lower the height to two stories on the 
western half of Building 8 along the western property line. 
 
Chairwoman Trites opened the public comment portion of the meeting. 
 
Ms. Audria Nunley, member of the public, shared her concerns with the 
proposed building height and traffic. She supports the site remaining commercial 
and that the community did not need any more crime or traffic. 
 
Mr. Alvis Fletcher, member of the public, shared his concerns on increased 
traffic, crime and noise pollution. He added that another location should be 
explored by this project.

Mr. Bojorquez, staff, attempted to connect Mr. Brad Umansky and Mr. Kris 
Gangadean, who had sent emails requesting to speak in favor of this item, but 
these members were no longer connected to the virtual meeting. 
 
Ms. Smith rejoined the virtual meeting to inform staff that other members of the 
public were on the line and wishing to speak. 
 
Chairwoman Trittes indicated that she would allow other members of the public 
to provide comments. 
 
Mr. Fred Jones, member of the public, expressed opposition to the case due to 
the proposed height, traffic and site access. He added that the area was a food 
desert and could use commercial uses. 
 
Mr. Condas provided an explanation of how the project addressed the public 
concerns that related to height, traffic and others elements. 
 
Mr. Gary Todd, of Todd & Associates, provided an overview of the design 
features of this project. 
 
Chairwoman Trittes asked for other comments from the committee. 
 
Mr. Aguilar expressed support for the applicant’s willingness to work with former 
incarcerated people, but did have concerns with the gates proposed by this 
community. 
 
Mr. Condas responded that the gates were in place due to potential safety 
issues. 
 
Mr. Brooks stated that he echoes Mr. Aguilar’s comments. 
 
Mr. Brownell stated that he has no objection to the project and supports the 
request given that the existing zoning entitlement supports for buildings to be 
allowed there anyways. 
 
Ms. Daniels stated that commercial zoning needs homes to establish and that 
she supports more affordable housing. 
 
Mr. Holmerud stated that he supports view fencing. 
 
Mr. Larios stated that he would support a continuance of the case to allow for 
additional engagement. 
 
Mr. Shelly Smith stated that he has concerns with the level of community 
engagement conducted.

Ms. Busching stated that she has concerns with the lack of public access across 
the site. She asked the applicant to consider creative ways to design the site 
without gates. 
 
Ms. Daniels stated that she understands the need for security features due to 
liability. 
 
 
Mr. Aguilar expressed that he shares the concerns from Ms. Busching. 
 
Mr. Condas stated that he is willing to consider options, but would still need to 
keep that component of security. 
 
Ms. Alvarez asked the applicant to consider using the public alley along the west 
of the property for a possible connection and to help invite the adjacent 
community. 
 
Mr. Condas provided an overview of the site connectivity to the adjacent school 
site and future convenience store. 
 
Mr. Aguilar asked the applicant if he was willing to continue this item to establish 
further connections with other organizations. 
 
Mr. Condas stated that he was open to a continuance of the case but noted that 
he would still keep the gate on the site. 
 
Chairwoman Trittes asked the applicant to consider the following items: 
• Add garden outside of the community for public access; 
• Provide alley access from the west to the site; 
• Conduct additional outreach with organizations mentioned; 
 
Mr. Larios expressed concerns with the level of outreach conducted by this 
project. 
 
Ms. Busching made a motion to deny. 
 
Ms. Daniels seconded the motion. 
 
Ms. Busching and Ms. Daniels withdrew their motions of denial on this item. 
 
Mr. Aguilar asked the committee to consider a thirty day continuance to allow the 
applicant to contact organizations such as Mass Liberation Arizona, Tiger Mountain 
Foundation and address the concerns of other committee members including 
removing the gates to the community. 
 
Mr. Brooks asked the applicant to formalize the interactions with the Tiger 
Mountain Foundation.

Mr. Condas agreed to the address the requests. 
 
MOTION 
Ms. Busching made a motion to continue the item. Ms. Daniels seconded the 
motion. 
 
VOTE:  
13-0 Motion passes; with Ms. Muriel Smith rejoining the virtual meeting to vote on 
this item. 
 
Mr. Larios left the meeting at 10:15pm after voting on this item. 
 
MOTION 
Ms. Shepard made a motion to approve the item with the recommended 
stipulations per the Addendum A staff report. Ms. Busching seconded the motion. 
 
VOTE:  
 
Marcia Busching motioned to continue the case to June 9, 2020. Tamala 
Daniels seconded the motion. Members Aguilar, Alvarez, Brooks, Brownell, 
Daniels, Holmerud, Kotake, Larios, Shepard, M. Smith, S. Smith, Busching, and 
Trites in favor; none in dissent or abstention. 
 
STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS: 
 
None.