Attachment C - VPC Summary-Info Only - Z-37-19-2

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-37-19-2 
INFORMATION ONLY 
Date of VPC Meeting 
February 20, 2020 
Request From 
S-1 (156.96 acres)
Request To 
PUD (156.96 acres)
Proposed Use 
Single-family, multifamily, retail, office, and commerce 
park uses. 
Location 
Northeast corner of Central Avenue and Happy Valley 
Road 
VPC DISCUSSION:
1 speaker card was submitted in favor, wishing to speak.  
40 speaker cards were submitted in opposition, wishing to speak. 
3 speaker cards were submitted in opposition, not wishing to speak. 
A petition in opposition was submitted containing 76 signatures.  
Mr. David Cisiewski, with the Law Office of David Cisiewski, PLLC, representing 
the applicant, went over the history of the site and highlighted the history of the 
site. He explained his client’s proposal for the three-parcel development plan. He 
also went over where discussions have gone to date with stakeholders in the 
area. He explained that various chemicals had been used on the site directly 
related to historic uses on the site. He shared in his presentation several slides 
that the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has presented at 
a neighborhood meeting prior to this meeting. The slides were color coded and 
he explained each color-coded area depicted on the maps. He went over the 
water remediation facility and well system currently operating on the site to clean 
up a contaminated groundwater plume in the center portion of the site. He went 
over the ADEQ environmental remediation tactics required to date to include 
soils contamination remediation, groundwater pump and treat system and went 
over the Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction (DEUR) documents and 
their requirements and restrictions for the site.  
Mr. Cisiewski also talked about the land use request on the site. He went over 
the open space proposed, which is superior to ordinance standards, he went 
over lot sizes, which are quite small and went over amenity areas within the open 
Attachment C

Z-37-19-2 
Page 2 of 6 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
space proposed. He spoke about the proposed trail network internal to the site 
and connecting to the Sonoran Preserve to the east of the site. He went into a 
marginal level of detail about the monitoring well sites on the overall site and 
stated that they cannot be disturbed and that ADEQ was the regulatory agency 
overseeing the clean-up of the soil and aquifer. He highlighted the water and 
sewer infrastructure being extended as a result of this development. He went on 
to talk about the General Plan Amendment case as well and highlighted some of 
the plan goals he thinks relate to this request.  
 
Mr. Ricardo Romero asked if the developer had done a project of this scope in 
the past.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that yes, the developer has done many largescale projects 
like this one across the country. The development company is K-Hovnanian 
Homes. He did iterate that they only to residential large scape developments.  
 
Mr. Brandon Shipman asked how long the ADEQ monitoring wells will be 
required to stay on site.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that he did not have a definitive answer, but it could be 
between 5 years and 30 years.  
 
Public Comment:  
 
Mr. Robert Hanson had concerns about the citizen participation report not being 
submitted prior to the Village meeting being scheduled for this case for 
Information Only. He believes staff is undermining the process by letting the 
applicant go to a Village meeting prior to the citizen participation report is 
submitted.  
 
Mr. David Simmons, staff, explained in detail how the PUD process timeline 
works and highlighted when the citizen participation report is due to the city. He 
shared that the hearing dates for recommendation would not be set until the 
citizen participation report was submitted, among other legal requirements of the 
process are met as well. He iterated that this case is still in the very early stages 
of the process and staff was in no way breaking away from the process in any 
way and that the city follows stringent protocols.  
 
Mr. David Riley, member of the public, had 27 speaker cards submitted 
deferring time to him. Mr. Riley had staff load a power point presentation. He 
went over who they are as a community, shared that the community as a whole 
stands opposed to the PUD and GPA requests, went over the history of 
environmental degradation caused by UPCO et al, highlighted the proposed 
PUD’s impact on the community including dark skies concerns, trespassing 
concerns, character of the area being completely changes to a higher density 
residential character, traffic concerns, health and safety concerns, environmental 
destruction, and the developer not adhering to existing established plans and 
promises. He stated that he and his neighbors are opposed to the changes and 
recommends denial.

Z-37-19-2 
Page 3 of 6 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
 
Discussion:  
 
Ms. Ann O’Brien asked Mr. Riley where he obtained his traffic data in his 
presentation.  
 
Mr. Riley stated that he received the data from Maricopa County and the City of 
Phoenix.  
 
Vice Chair Trilese DiLeo asked how this proposed development was going to 
make his neighborhood less healthy.  
 
Mr. Riley stated that construction on the land would kick up contaminates and 
make them airborne. He is also concerned about onsite retention of water further 
contaminating the aquifer in which he and his neighbor’s wells tap into.  
 
Mr. Ozzie Virgil asked how many residents live north of the Desert Foothills 
PUD site.  
 
Mr. Riley shared that there are 156 homes north of the site, all of which are in 
Maricopa County jurisdiction and are all on well as they do not receive city 
services of any kind. He fears that contaminated ground water flows will move 
north.  
 
Mr. Russell Osborne asked if these were all S-1 lots.  
 
Mr. Riley shared that they are all S-1 lots.  
 
Mr. Ricardo Romero asked if there had been any discussion with UPCO when 
they were operating on the site.  
 
Mr. Riley shared that as a community, they were not aware of the contamination 
during UPCO’s operational years. Mr. Virgil asked what the neighbors would like 
to see built on the site.  
 
Mr. Riley stated that they would like to see the site developed with 1 acre lots, 
similar to their S-1 equivalent lots, but with a large buffer and trail between after 
the site has been completely remediated.  
 
Public Comment:  
 
Ms. Julie Bradfeldt stated that she opposes this request. She has concerns 
about the displacement of wild animals on the site as well as the degradation of 
native plants on the site. She expressed concerns about disturbing the hillside, 
the character of the are changing, the lack of connections with the proposed trails 
system, major concerns about drainage on the site and off site as a result of 
development, the buffer between the more rural county homes to the north, 
increase in traffic and lowered property values.

Z-37-19-2 
Page 4 of 6 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Discussion:  
 
Chairman Joseph Grossman asked if her well had been tested.  
 
Ms. Bradfeldt shared that her well had not been tested in the last 3-5 years to 
her knowledge but would appreciate ADEQ do further testing.  
 
Vice Cahir Trilese DiLeo asked if a drainage report will be required for the 
proposed development.  
 
Chairman Grossman shared that yes, drainage reports are required for every 
project in the City of Phoenix.  
 
Public Comment:  
 
Mr. Doug McCarthy has concerns about traffic, thru traffic, property values and 
blight in the neighborhood.  
 
Mr. Mark Boul shared concerns about an increase in traffic, ingress/egress 
issues into the neighborhood, lot sizes are too small, character of area changing 
to more high density residential rather than rural, and dark skies.  
 
Ms. Robbin McDermott shared concerns about traffic and safety issues, lack of 
emergency services in the area, cut thru traffic, trespassing and access to the 
reserve.  
 
Mr. Stewart Hamer is opposed to the proposed height, traffic and drainage.  
 
Mr. Ozzie Virgil, committee member, asked Mr. Hamer is he were opposed to 2-
story homes in the interior of the proposal.  
 
Mr. Hamer shared that he was opposed to any 2-story houses.  
 
Mr. Dan Schmerfeld has concerns about further contamination of well water. He 
shared that his well was tested 15 years ago and all that showed up in the results 
were silt. He shared that he recently had hi swell tested and it is full of 
contaminants from the UPCO testing site. He fears for his and his family’s life. He 
cried.  
 
Mr. Bill Levy, committee member, asked where Mr. Schmerfeld lives in relation 
to this site.  
 
Mr. Schmerfeld shared that he lives two blocks north of the site.  
 
Mr. Larry Clark shared that he has concerns about increases in crime, traffic 
increases, emergency response times increasing, trespassing with ATV’s, further 
contamination in the aquifer due to on site water retention, and traffic.

Z-37-19-2 
Page 5 of 6 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Chairman Joseph Grossman asked Mr. Clark if he was aware that he would be 
on a well when he purchased his home.  
 
Mr. Clark stated that he was aware but was unaware that his well would dry up 
and had to redrill a well that was deeper than the first.  
 
Mr. Bill Levy, committee member, asked Mr. Clark if he has had his water 
tested.  
 
Mr. Clark stated that he had not had his water tested.  
 
Ms. Ellen Clark shared concerns about contamination, disturbing the site will 
kick-up contaminates on the site and make them air-born, she equated this to the 
Erin Brockovich case and the cancer clusters in Maryvale. She asked the 
committee to consider the consequences of unsuspecting families buying into 
this subdivision and getting cancer. She stated that if this case were to be 
approved and cancer clusters occur years down the road from children playing in 
the dirt and drinking the water that this committee will have blood on their hands 
and anyone involved in eh approval process should be held responsible.  
 
Applicants Response:  
 
Mr. David Cisiewski explained the public hearing process and exclaimed that 
we are still at the very early stages of the process. He went over the drainage 
plan and drainage study requirements set by the City of Phoenix. He shared that 
ADEQ is the regulatory authority and UPCO is the responsible party for clean-up 
of the site. He shared that the traffic study has been submitted and is currently in 
review. He shared that the Streets department have come back with some 
preliminary comments. He shared that ADEQ has addressed the known 
contamination issues on the site, hence the restriction of residential on the 
central portion of the site. He went over the amount of open space proposed as 
this goes way beyond ordinance requirements for the proposal.  
 
Chairman Joseph Grossman asked if there were meeting minutes taken at the 
first neighborhood meeting.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that meeting minutes were taken at the first neighborhood 
meeting. He stated the second neighborhood meeting will be scheduled after the 
Information Only Village Planning Committee meeting. Minutes will also be taken 
at the second neighborhood meeting. The citizen participation report containing 
both neighborhood meeting minutes will be compiled and submitted to the City of 
Phoenix. 
 
Chairman Grossman asked Mr. Cisiewski to share the traffic study results.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that traffic engineers have concluded that current 
conditions aren’t good, but planned improvements will certainly help.

Z-37-19-2 
Page 6 of 6 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Chairman Grossman stated that a 50-foot buffer between the existing rural lots 
to the north are is not sufficient.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that they had started with a 25-foot buffer and shared that 
the actual distance from home to home is 125 feet.  
 
Mr. Ozzie Virgil asked about street lights.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski stated that all street improvements would meet city standards.  
 
Vice Chair Trilese DiLeo asked about street improvements that will cut through 
the entire site, creating further circulation opportunities for the area.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that there is a major wash that cutes through the site, 
which has made it cost prohibitive to build an internal street network 
infrastructure on the site.  
 
Vice Chair DiLeo asked if the developer would consider making the investment 
in an internal street network.  
 
Mr. Bill Levy asked if the developer was doing a plant inventory and salvage on 
the site.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski stated that they will follow city requirements for plant salvage.  
 
Ms. Ann O’Brien asked David Simmons if he could send the committee the 
presentations related to the Central Foothills PUD.  
 
Mr. David Simmons, staff, stated that he would email the power point 
presentations over to the committee.  
 
Ms. O’Brien asked if the developer would consider installing a gate across the 
county road that would prohibit through traffic.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski shared that this is not intended to be a gated community.  
 
Ms. O’Brien stated that she has issues with drainage on the site.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski stated that the drainage study is underway now.  
 
Mr. Levy asked if there is any way the VPC could be notified of the next 
neighborhood meeting.  
 
Mr. Cisiewski said yes, he would inform the VPC of the next neighborhood 
meeting.