Attachment C - VPC Summaries - Z-123-23-3.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2025-07-02)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 18935 characters
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-123-23-3
Date of VPC Meeting 
June 2, 2025 
Request From 
R1-14  
Request To 
PUD  
Proposal 
Single-family residential 
Location 
Northwest corner of 31st Street and Winchcomb Drive 
VPC Recommendation 
Approval, per the staff recommendation, with 
modifications 
VPC Vote 
14-0
VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS: 
One member of the public registered to speak on this item. 
Staff Presentation 
Matteo Moric, staff, introduced the case and provided background information about 
the PUD rezoning request including where the proposal was located, the site’s size, and 
what the request is. Mr. Moric followed by explaining the current general plan land use 
map designation and zoning and that of the surrounding properties. Mr. Moric shared an 
exhibit of the proposed site plan which included an 8-lot single-family subdivision. Mr. 
Moric stated the staff’s recommendation of approval, subject to stipulations and 
identified the three findings. Mr. Moric summarized the recommended stipulations by 
staff and noted the next steps of the PUD public hearing process. 
Applicant Presentation 
Trevor Barger introduced the applicant team with Espiritu Loci Incorporated and 
provided the builder’s background and information as an award-winning home builder 
locally from Arizona. Mr. Barger showed the context of the existing neighborhood and 
the neighbors desire for it to blend in with the context. Mr. Barger shared the timeline 
showing the work on the case since 2023. Mr. Barger explained it originally came in for 
R1-6 zoning, followed by the applicant proposing R1-8 standards and the neighbors 
with the desire of R1-10 development standards. Mr. Barger explained the City, in this 
instance, is not able to give a small increase in density without crafting a PUD and the 
proposal was for an 8-lot single-family subdivision. Mr. Barger mentioned the PUD 
requires a whole lot of technical requirements and the project received technical 
ATTACHMENT C

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 
Page 2 of 6 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
appeals for transportation, fire, and drainage items in which the project received all its 
blessings. Mr. Barger added for the PUD that they tried to match the base zoning as 
much as possible. 
 
Mr. Barger said his team have kept neighbors informed through neighborhood meetings 
and monthly updates, as they were going through the technical pieces of the project. 
Mr. Barger said this was the way the neighbors wanted to see the proposal. Also, Mr. 
Barger shared the special requests from the neighbors and identified how they had 
been responsive. Mr. Barger explained the project was not trying to skimp on tree shade 
as they were going to be expensive homes, and made mention of barriers in some 
locations. Mr. Barger then shared a slide showing the neighbors’ petition of support 
including 39 individuals in support with 25 of the properties within the neighborhood. 
 
Mr. Barger requested a recommendation and summarized the stipulations he requested 
to delete or amend. These included a deletion of a stipulation regarding shade; 
terminology of using text “with the neighborhood context” instead of “pedestrian 
environment” for landscape setbacks, as this was a desire of the neighbors; amend a 
stipulation to delete design guidelines; and delete another stipulation related to design 
guidelines. 
 
The applicant requested the following stipulations to be deleted and amended: 
- 
Delete 1.c. 
- 
Delete 1.g. 
- 
Amend 1.i. to, “Page 16, Design Guidelines, Modified Design Guidelines: Delete 
the following design guidelines: A.II.C.7.10.” 
- 
Delete 1.l 
 
Questions from the Committee 
 
None. 
 
Public Comments 
 
Pam Kufert, resident at 2920 East Crocus Drive, raised questions regarding 
maintenance of the landscaping and expressed concerns about rain and standing 
water.  
 
Applicant Response 
 
Mr. Barger responded to the resident’s questions explaining how there would be a 
Homeowner’s Association (HOA) which would take care of much of the landscaping and 
noted how drainage would work onsite. 
 
Floor/Public Discussion Closed: Motion, Discussion, and Vote.

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 
Page 3 of 6 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Committee Member Robert Gubser commended the applicant for all the work 
completed with the neighbors. 
 
MOTION 
Patrice Marcolla motioned to recommend approval of Z-123-23-3 per the staff 
recommendation with modifications presented by the applicant. Amber Sommer 
seconded the motion. 
 
VOTE:   
14-0; motion to recommend approval of Z-123-23-3 per the staff recommendation with 
modifications passes with Committee members Balderrama, Franks, Goodhue, Gubser, 
Hamra, Marcolla, Mazza, Petersen, Schmidt, Sepic, Soronson, Wise, Sommer, and 
Mortensen in favor. 
 
VPC Recommended Stipulations 
 
1. 
An updated Development Narrative for the 31st Street & Winchcomb Drive PUD 
reflecting the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the 
Planning and Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval 
of this request. The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the 
Development Narrative date stamped April 15, 2025, as modified by the following 
stipulations: 
 
 
 
a. 
Front Cover: Revise the submittal date information to add the following: 
City Council Adopted: [Add adoption date]. 
 
 
 
 
b. 
Front Cover: Replace “4th Submittal” with “Hearing Draft” and update the 
date to April 15, 2025. 
 
 
 
 
c. 
Page 11, Development Standards Table, Street Standards, Sidewalk 
Tree Shade Coverage: Replace “0%” with “50%”. 
 
 
 
 
d. 
Page 11, Development Standards Table, Auto Court Drive: Replace 
“Auto Court Drive” with “Street Standards (internal)”. 
 
 
 
 
e. 
Page 11, Development Standards, PUD Parking Standards: Replace 
“should” with “shall”. 
 
 
 
 
f. 
Page 12, Development Standards, Landscape Standards Table, 
Rear/Side Yard Landscape of Individual Lots: Replace “; live coverage 
area is limited to the minimum interior building setbacks area of each lot 
and excludes hardscape, pool, space, and turf areas” with “, planted 
within a 5-foot-wide landscape area along the side and rear property 
lines of each individual lot”.

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 
Page 4 of 6 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
 
g. 
Page 12, Development Standards, Landscape Standards Table, 
Landscaped Setback Landscape: Replace “with the neighborhood 
context” with “with a pedestrian environment”. 
 
 
 
 
h. 
Page 13, Development Standards, Fences/Walls: Delete “when 
mitigating noise from a school or neighboring property, particularly”. 
 
 
 
 
i. 
Pages 14 – 16, Design Guidelines, Modified Design Guidelines: Delete 
the following design guidelines: A.II.A.1.1, A.II.A.2.4, A.II.A.3.1.1, 
A.II.A.3.1.6, A.II.A.3.1.8, A.II.A.3.1.10, A.II.A.3.1.14, A.II.A.3.1.16, 
A.II.A.4, A.II.A.5, A.II.A.6, A.II.A.9, A.II.B, A.II.C.2.4, A.II.C.3, A.II.C.6.1, 
A.II.C.7.10, A.II.C.7.11, and A.II.C.8. 
 
 
 
 
j. 
Pages 14 – 17, Design Guidelines, Modified Design Guidelines and 
Elevated Design Guidelines: Delete “A.” before the section number for 
each section header of modified and elevated Section 507 Tab A design 
guidelines.  
 
 
 
 
k. 
Page 17, Design Guidelines, Additional Design Guidelines: Add the 
following after the first sentence: “The design review guidelines indicated 
with the markers (R), (R*), (P), (T), and (C) shall be applied and enforced 
in the same manner as indicated in Section 507. Items not indicated with 
an (R), (R*), (P), (T), and (C) shall be treated as (R).” 
 
 
 
 
l. 
Page 18, Design Guidelines, Additional Design Guidelines: Replace 
(C) with (T) for #10, replace “(C)” with “(R)” for #11-13, 15 -16, 
replace “should” with “shall” for #10-13, 15-16, add “, as approved 
or modified by the Planning and Development Department” at the 
end of the first sentence of #10, add “, as approved by the Planning 
and Development and Water Services departments” at the end of 
#11, add “as approved by the Planning and Development 
Department” at the end of #12, and add “as approved by the 
Planning and Development Department” at the end of the first 
sentence of #13. 
 
 
 
 
m. 
Page 21, Sustainability, Practices Enforceable By the City: Add the green 
stormwater infrastructure and water consumption measures (#10 – 16 of 
Additional Design Guidelines section) to the summary list of enforceable 
sustainability measures of the PUD. 
 
 
 
 
n. 
Page 48, Exhibits, Building Setbacks: Revise the setback labels for the 
east property line of Lot 3 and west property line of Lot 6 to differentiate 
the interior front and interior side setback.

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 
Page 5 of 6 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
2. 
A minimum of 25 feet of right-of-way shall be dedicated for the north side of 
Winchcomb Drive, adjacent to the development, as approved by the Planning 
and Development Department. 
 
 
3. 
A curved radius street connection between 31st Street and Winchcomb Drive 
shall be dedicated and constructed, as approved by the Street Transportation 
Department.  
 
 
4. 
The developer shall coordinate with the owner of the adjacent parcel to the east 
(APN 214-55-972) to dedicate sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the curved 
radius street connection at 31st Street and Winchcomb Drive, as approved by 
the Street Transportation Department. 
 
 
5. 
Unused driveways shall be replaced with sidewalk, curb and gutter. Also, any 
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets shall 
be replaced and all off-site improvements shall be upgraded to be in compliance 
with current ADA guidelines. 
 
 
6. 
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.  
 
 
7. 
In the event archeological 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 Archeologist, and allow time for the 
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials. 
 
 
8. 
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. 
 
STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS: 
 
Staff does not recommend the modifications to the stipulations as proposed by the 
applicant and recommended by the Village Planning Committee. As noted in Stipulation 
1.c, staff recommends a minimum of 50 percent shade. The Phoenix Zoning Ordinance 
requires pedestrian walkways and sidewalks to be shaded a minimum of 50 percent. 
The PUD proposes zero percent sidewalk shade, which is in conflict with plans and 
policies adopted by the City Council to address citywide shade and pedestrian comfort, 
including the Complete Streets Guiding Principles and the Shade Phoenix Plan. Staff 
does not recommend the stipulation be deleted.

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 
Page 6 of 6 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Staff does not recommend the deletion of Stipulation No. 1.g, which is a technical 
correction to the “Landscaped Setback Landscape” row in the Landscape Standards 
Table to replace “consistent with the neighborhood context” in the last paragraph with 
“consistent with a pedestrian environment”. This is the standard language used on all 
rezoning cases and ensures that pedestrian comfort is still addressed with the 
alternative design solution for shading. 
  
Staff does not recommend the modifications to Stipulation 1.i. other than deletion of 
design guideline A.II.A.5 (Trails / Paths) and A.II.A.9 (Hillside Development Guidelines) 
from the stipulation to remain listed as “not applicable” within the PUD Development 
Narrative, as there are no public multi-use trails or trailheads within or adjacent to the 
site, and the site is not a Hillside property. The remainder of this stipulation covers many 
design guidelines from the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance Section 507 Tab A that staff does 
not recommend modifications to due conflicts with rationale in the Phoenix Zoning 
Ordinance, conflicts with the intention for PUDs to provide superior standards that go 
above and beyond minimum Phoenix Zoning Ordinance standards, conflicts with City 
Council adopted plans and policies, and conflicts with the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance 
design guidelines applicability on a case-by-case basis.  
 
Staff does not recommend the deletion of Stipulation 1.l as it is related to green 
stormwater infrastructure (GSI) and water conservation requirements that the City 
Council directed City staff to apply as standard stipulations / requirements on all 
rezoning cases on a case by case basis, in relation to the Phoenix Climate Action Plan 
and the Conservation Measures for New Development policy that were adopted by the 
City Council.

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-123-23-3 
INFORMATION ONLY 
Date of VPC Meeting 
October 7, 2024 
Request From 
R1-14 
Request To 
PUD 
Proposal 
Single-family residential 
Location 
Approximately 330 feet north of the northwest corner of 
31st Street and Winchcomb Drive 
VPC DISCUSSION:
One member of the public registered to speak in favor of this item. 
Applicant Presentation: 
Jon Carlson, representative with Espiritu Loci, Inc., introduced himself and the 
development team and provided context of the site, including surrounding land uses, 
zoning, and context photos. Mr. Carlson discussed history of the project and iterations 
of the site plan based on neighborhood input. Mr. Carlson shared the revised site plan 
that addressed neighbor concerns and items that would need to be approved by the 
City to allow the plan. Mr. Carlson explained the reasoning for requesting a PUD and 
summarized the proposal. 
Questions from the Committee: 
Jennifer Hall asked if the City is okay with all the trash bins of the homes being taken 
out onto Winchcomb Drive. Ms. Hall expressed concerns with the distance some 
residents would have to walk to take their trash bin out. Mr. Carlson responded that this 
is part of the compromise with the neighbors and because the community will not have 
a public street, trash pickup will have to be on Winchcomb Drive. Ms. Hall asked for 
clarification if the City is okay with this. Mr. Carlson responded that they will be required 
to go through all the standard City processes to obtain City approval. Ms. Hall asked if 
Mr. Carlson has ever done this before with a previous project. Mr. Carlson responded 
affirmatively.  
Rob Gubser asked how many technical appeals are going to be requested. Mr. 
Carlson responded that there will be quite a few. Mr. Gubser asked if they have gone 
through the process at all to discuss the technical appeals with the City. Mr. Carlson 
responded that they cannot submit the technical appeals until the zoning is entitled. Mr.

Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Summary 
Z-123-23-3 Info Only 
Page 2 of 2 
 
 
 
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Gubser asked for clarification if they have discussed the design with the City to ensure 
this proposed design would work. Mr. Carlson responded that they have had a 
subdivision pre-application meeting with the City, but they are now on hold until the 
zoning is entitled. Mr. Gubser asked if the City will provide any comments regarding the 
technical appeals before this PUD goes through the public hearing process for approval. 
Mr. Carlson responded that their goal is to have the technical appeals submitted 
immediately following rezoning approval. Mr. Gubser stated that he likes the plan and 
likes that it is an infill project, but the technical appeals can always be tricky at the end. 
 
Mr. Wise asked how delivery trucks and garbage trucks would maneuver within the 
community without going onto a home’s private driveway. Mr. Carlson responded that 
the trash pickup would be located on Winchcomb Drive. Mr. Carlson added that other 
delivery truck drivers would have to make decisions on their own based on if their truck 
size would be able to maneuver within the community or if they would have to park on 
Winchcomb Drive and walk to the home. 
 
Regina Schmidt asked how on-street parking would work within the community. Mr. 
Carlson responded that guests would be able to park on the street and may also park 
on the driveways. 
 
Ms. Hall asked when the case will be coming back to the Committee for a 
recommendation. Mr. Carlson responded as soon as Mr. Zambrano will let them. 
 
Public Comments: 
Rick Parizek introduced himself as the neighbor to the north of the site, in favor of the 
project. Mr. Parizek stated that he is not officially speaking on behalf of all the 
neighbors, but he has been working with them. Mr. Parizek stated that he has lived in 
the neighborhood for a long time. Mr. Parizek stated that there is pride of ownership 
within the neighborhood. Mr. Parizek stated that the neighborhood is concerned with 
density, but it is a reasonable compromise. Mr. Parizek stated that the applicant has 
been good to work with. Mr. Parizek stated that he has to walk a far distance along his 
driveway to place his trash bin on the street. Mr. Parizek stated that the neighbors may 
have other concerns, but the project will ultimately blend into the neighborhood.  
 
Applicant Response: 
None. 
 
STAFF COMMENTS: 
 
None.