Attachment B - Staff Report - PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8).pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2024-03-06)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 80605 characters

Staff Report: PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
APPLICATION #:
PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
LOCATION:
Approximately 275 feet south of the southwest corner of
32nd Street and Baseline Road
EXISTING ZONING:
MUA BAOD
ACREAGE:
4.6
REQUEST:
1) Request to modify Stipulation 1.a regarding general
conformance with the site plan dated August 27, 2001.
2) Request to modify Stipulation 1.b regarding a detached
sidewalk.
3) Request to delete Stipulation 1.c regarding commercial
building height.
4) Request to modify Stipulation 1.d regarding a
Homeowners Association.
5) Request to modify Stipulation 1.f regarding interior
perimeter walls.
6) Request to delete Stipulation 1.g regarding parking stalls.
7) Request to delete Stipulation 2.1a regarding commercial
building elevations.
8) Request to modify Stipulation 2.2a regarding one-story
houses.
9) Request to modify Stipulation 2.2b regarding floor plans.
10) Request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding Streets and
Rights-of-Way.
11) Request to modify Stipulation 4.a regarding a 25-foot
easement on the west side of 32nd Street.
12) Technical corrections to Stipulation 4.b.
13) Request to modify Stipulation 5.a regarding South
Mountain Village Planning Committee notification.
14) Request to delete Stipulation 5.b regarding construction
commencement.
Attachment B

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 2 of 11

APPLICANT:

Baseline & 32nd, LLC/CG6, LLC

OWNER:

Baseline & 32nd, LLC/CG6, LLC

REPRESENTATIVE:
William F. Allison, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Denial as filed, approval with modifications and additional stipulations, as recommended
by the Planning Hearing Officer (PHO).

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The Planning Hearing Officer heard the request on December 20, 2023, and
recommended denial as filed, approval with modifications and additional stipulations.

VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The South Mountain Village Planning Committee (VPC) reviewed the request on
December 12, 2023. The VPC recommended approval with a modification and
additional stipulations by a vote of 11-0.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS

The subject site consists of 4.6 gross acres located approximately 275 feet south of the
southwest corner of 32nd Street and Baseline Road and is zoned MUA BAOD (Mixed
Use Agricultural District, Baseline Area Overlay District). A 10-lot single-family
residential subdivision is proposed on the site. The applicant is requesting the following
modifications:

• Modification of Stipulation 1.a regarding general conformance with the site plan
dated August 27, 2001. Commercial development was proposed on the subject
site on the originally stipulated site plan. The applicant’s narrative (Exhibit B)
notes that the modification would continue to support the stipulated open space
requirements and some open space elements are not applicable to this case.

• Modification of Stipulation 1.b regarding a detached sidewalk. The modification
would provide a detached sidewalk on one side of the private streets. The
applicant’s narrative (Exhibit B) notes that the size and shape of the parcel limits
the ability to provide detached sidewalks on both sides of the private street and
all homes will have easy access to the proposed detached sidewalk.

• Deletion of Stipulation 1.c regarding commercial building height. The narrative
(Exhibit B) notes that the stipulation is not applicable to the parcel.

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 3 of 11

• Modification of Stipulation 1.d regarding a Homeowners Association. The
narrative (Exhibit B) notes the Homeowners Association will maintain all common
areas for the development.

• Modification of Stipulation 1.f regarding interior perimeter walls. The applicant’s
narrative (Exhibit B) notes the modification is tailored to the subject parcel and
removes items that are not applicable.

• Deletion of Stipulation 1.g regarding parking stalls. The applicant’s narrative
(Exhibit B) notes the stipulation is not applicable top the parcel.

• Deletion of Stipulation 2.1a regarding commercial building elevations. The
applicant’s narrative (Exhibit B) notes the stipulation is not applicable top the
parcel.

• Modification of Stipulation 2.2a regarding one-story houses. The applicant’s
narrative (Exhibit B) notes the stipulation addressed the now built neighborhood
on the east side of 32nd Street. The proposed development will be subject to the
revised stipulation and design guidelines of the MUA and BAOD Districts. The
narrative states elevations will be presented to the VPC for review before
preliminary site plan approval.

• Modification of Stipulation 2.2b regarding floor plans. The applicant’s narrative
(Exhibit B) notes the stipulation addressed the now built neighborhood on the
east side of 32nd Street. The proposed development will be subject to the
revised stipulation and design guidelines of the MUA and BAOD districts. The
narrative states elevations will be presented to the VPC for review before
preliminary site plan approval.

• Deletion of Stipulation 3 regarding Streets and Rights-of-Way. The applicant’s
narrative (Exhibit B) notes the stipulation is not applicable top the parcel.

• Modification of Stipulation 4.a regarding a 25-foot easement on the west side of
32nd Street. The applicant’s narrative (Exhibit B) notes the modification removes
“Baseline Road” from the stipulation, as the subject parcel has no Baseline Road
frontage.

• Technical Correction for Stipulation 4.b to correct a department name.

• Modification of Stipulation 5.a regarding VPC notification. The applicant’s
narrative (Exhibit B) notes the variance process is quasi-judicial and not available
for VPC review or comment.

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 4 of 11

• Deletion of Stipulation 5.b regarding construction commencement. The
applicant’s narrative (Exhibit B) notes the development of the neighborhood on
the east side of 32nd Street satisfied Stipulation 5.b.

On December 21, 2023 the PHO recommendation was appealed by a community
member, Trent Marchuk (Exhibit A). The appellant requested that Stipulation 8,
recommended at the December 12, 2023 VPC meeting (Exhibit H), be reinstated. He
argues that precedence exists for making specific presumptions listed in Section 649 of
the Zoning Ordinance as stipulated requirements. He argues if stipulation language
must be altered, it shall retain the intention of preserving the aesthetics and character of
the MUA District.

PREVIOUS HISTORY

On October 31, 2001, the Phoenix City Council approved Rezoning Case No. Z-73-01-
8, a request to rezone approximately 30.2 acres located on the southeast corner of
32nd Street and Baseline Road (Exhibit E). The request was to rezone 30.2 acres from
S-1 BAOD (Ranch or Farm Residence, Baseline Area Overlay District) to MUA BAOD
(Mixed Use Agricultural District, Baseline Area Overlay District) (Exhibit F), subject to
stipulations (Exhibit E).

The proposed development was intended to provide a mix of single-family residential,
retail, restaurant, office, and commercial space. Per the proposed conceptual site plan
(Exhibit I), the minimum building setbacks for the site were 50 feet along Baseline Road,
20 feet (single-family residential) and 30 feet (commercial) along the east side of the
development, and 20 feet (single-family residential) along the south side of the
development. The landscape setback for the site was 30 feet along 32nd Street. The
proposed maximum number of dwelling units was 41. The 41 lots were developed within
the residential subdivision on the east side of 32nd Street. The proposed maximum
building height was 30 feet. Proposed design guidelines included requirements for
agricultural design, common open space, pedestrian focused walkways, bike paths, and
horse trails. The project design was intended to be consistent with the goals in the
Baseline Area Master Plan.

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS

Public Correspondence
• No public correspondence was received for this case.

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION

Mixed Use Agricultural

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 5 of 11

CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING LAND USE

Zoning

Land Use

On-site:

MUA BAOD

Vacant land

North:

MUA BAOD

Vacant land
(Adjacent)

(proposed commercial
development)

East:

MUA BAOD

Single-Family Residential
(Across 32nd Street)

South:

R1-14 BAOD

Single-Family Residential
(Across Harwell Road)

West:

R1-10 BAOD

Single-Family Residential
(Adjacent)

R1-14 BAOD

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER FINDINGS

1) The request for modification of Stipulation 1.A regarding general conformance to
a conceptual site plan is recommended to be approved with a modification. The
request for review and approval of conceptual site plan per Stipulation 1 has been
complied with and text was eliminated that pertained to the previously approved
plan. The recommendation is therefore to approve the plan and modify the existing
Stipulation 1 to replace the existing language with a standard language general
conformance stipulation to the site plan. At the request of the South Mountain
Village Planning Committee, the PHO has also added general conformance to the
landscape plan. The site plan and landscape plan are date stamped November 1,
2023. The reason for the addition of the landscape plan is in response to the
Committee’s concerns that the high quality landscaping shown at the hearing
would not be submitted during the site pan review.

2) The request to Modify 1.B is approved with a modification. This stipulation is now
written with updated language and location specificity. The small size and irregular
shape of the subject parcel limits the ability to provide, and need for, detached
sidewalks on both sides of the private street. All homes will have easy access to
the detached sidewalk proposed for the east portion of the project to access the
open space area and to exit the neighborhood to 32nd Street.

3) The request to delete Stipulation 1.c regarding the height of commercial buildings
is approved. This Stipulation is no longer pertinent considering the new Site Plan
and residential nature of the project.

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 6 of 11

4) The request to modify Stipulation 1.d is approved. An HOA will be responsible to
maintain all common areas on site, which are different than those installed in the
neighborhood across 32nd Street and listed in stipulation 1.a.

5) The request to modify Stipulation 1.f is approved with a modification. This
modification specifies the location of solid walls as it pertains to this request. The
modification also removes the language referencing the previous zoning case.

6) The request to modify Stipulation 1.g regarding parking stalls is actually a request
to delete the stipulation in its entirety. This request is approved due to the fact that
the specific number of parking stalls is a leftover from the previous zoning case.

7) The request to delete Stipulation 2.1a regarding commercial building elevations is
approved as it is not applicable to this proposal.

8) The request to modify Stipulation 2.2a regarding one-story houses is approved.
The intent of the stipulation was to prepare for the neighborhood being built to the
south by staggering the height of the houses, however, the neighborhood is
already built.

9) The homes will be subject to the proposed, revised stipulation and to design
guidelines of the MUA and BAO districts. The owners will not develop elevations
for the project until this application is concluded and the applicant agrees the
Village Planning Committee needs the opportunity to review the elevations before
preliminary site plan approval.

10) The request to delete all of Stipulation 3 is denied as filed. Staff recommends the
Stipulation 3.f. remain as written due to it being a standard stipulation for all
rezones requiring all streets within and adjacent to a development, both public and
private, be constructed to City of Phoenix and ADA standards. The stipulation still
applies to this site as it requires all streets needing to be built with this development
to be constructed to City of Phoenix standards. Stipulation 3.f will become 3.a.

11) The request to modify Stipulation 4.a regarding a 25-foot easement on the west
side of 32nd Street is approved. The location of the easement has been specified
to the current project.

12) The technical correction to remove the Library Department from the stipulation has
been approved.

13) The request to modify Stipulation 5.a regarding South Mountain Village Planning
Committee notification is approved.

14) The request to delete Stipulation 5.b regarding construction commencement is
approved.

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 7 of 11

15) An additional Stipulation was added at the request of the South Mountain Village
Planning Committee to provide pedestrian access to the development to the north.
This is intended to connect the two developments.

16) The site is identified as archaeologically sensitive and three additional stipulations
are recommended to be included to address requirements for archaeological
survey and testing.

17) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to the
Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an application
requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to require the applicant to
record this form and deliver it to the City to be included in the rezoning application
file for record.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS

1.
Site Planning:

a.
That The development shall be in general conformance with the site
plan and landscape plan dated STAMPED NOVEMBER 1, 2023
August 27, 2001, AS APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE
FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. with specific
regard to areas to be counted towards approximation of the 50%
open space requirements in the MUA as may be approved by DSD,
and represented by:

• A circular open space tract in the residential area.

• Linear pedestrian tracts in the east and south connecting to
adjacent properties.

• A pedestrian link from the residential to the commercial areas
in the north and crossing 32nd Street.

b.
A DETACHED SIDEWALK, SEPARATED FROM THE CURB BY
landscaped tree lined strips that run SHALL BE PLACED along both
sides ONE SIDE of all local THE PRIVATE STREETS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT in the residential area. This landscaped strip shall
include a meandering sidewalk as shown on the site plan.

c.
That the height for commercial buildings be limited to one story along
Baseline Road, as specified on the site plan.

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 8 of 11

d.
c.
That A Homeowners Association (HOA) be created to maintain all
COMMON areas specified in 1.a).

e.
d.
That A design for the gated entry for the residential area shall be
provided to the PHO for review prior to Preliminary Site Plan
approval.

f.
e.
That Solid walls SHALL be allowed on the interior perimeter walls
BUT (east and south) not the walls along 32nd Street. or Baseline
Road. These solid walls must incorporate controlled gates where
they intersect the linear pedestrian tracts in the east and south that
connect to adjacent properties so pedestrian connections with future
adjacent developments is allowed.

g.
That 81 parking stalls between the residential and commercial use
shall be built with an alternative paving material.

2.
Building Design:

2.1 Commercial Buildings

a.
That the applicant shall submit detailed elevations of the commercial
buildings detailing the open areas between the buildings. These
connections shall be made through “transparent” type of architectural
elements working as shading devices. These elements may include
arcades, ramadas, isolated-decorative walls, columns, and other
elements that help define and support a shaded pedestrian
environment but allow the flow of vistas. This information shall be
submitted for review to the Planning Hearing Officer at the time of
Preliminary Site Plan approval.

2.2
2.1 Residential Buildings

a.
That only one-story houses shall be built on the south property line
and 30% of overall units shall be at one story.

b.
The DESIGN OF THE HOMES SHALL floor plans shall be consistent
with the elevations that reflect a rural design AND SHALL BE
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SOUTH MOUNTAIN
VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE BEFORE PRELIMINARY SITE
PLAN APPROVAL based on the “Tuscan Architecture” style
illustrated by the applicant.

3.
Streets and Rights-of-Way:

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 9 of 11

a.
That a right-of-way totaling 60 feet shall be dedicated for the south
half of Baseline Road.

b.
That right-of-way for 32nd Street realignment shall be dedicated as
per plans approved by the City of Phoenix. The future intersection for
32nd Street at Baseline Road shall be flared to the minimum extent
necessary and tapered in the shortest reasonable distance to
function with the existing improvements on the north side of Baseline
and with the future 40 foot of pavement within the 60 foot of right-of-
way planned for 32nd Street on the south side of Baseline. Additional
improvements may be required to accommodate left turn access to
the proposed driveways.

c.
That a 21 foot by 21 foot right-of-way triangle shall be dedicated at
the southeast and southwest corners of 32nd Street and Baseline
Road.

d.
That sufficient right-of-way shall be dedicated to accommodate a bus
bay (Detail P-1256) on Baseline Road east of 32nd Street (new
realignment).

e.
That rights-of-way dedications and street alignments for local streets
within the subdivision will be determined by DSD at the time of
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Review.

f.
a.
That The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to
the development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps,
streetlights, median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per
plans approved by the City. All improvements shall comply with all
ADA accessibility standards.

g.
The applicant shall complete and submit the Developer Project
Information form for the MAG Transportation Improvement Program
to the Street Transportation Department (602-262-6193). This form is
a requirement of the EPA to meet clean air quality requirements.

h.
That sufficient right-of-way must be provided for a underground
tunnel crossing Baseline Road running on the west side of the 32nd
Street (realignment) as may be approved by the Parks, Recreation
and Library Department and Street Transportation Department. This
right-of-way should be approximately 100 feet by 50 feet from the
right-of-way of Baseline Road, at the southwest corner of Baseline
Road and 32nd Street (realignment).

4.
ARCHAEOLOGY:

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 10 of 11

a.
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.

b.
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.

c.
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.

4.
5.
Trails:

a.
That a 25 foot easement shall be provided on the west side of 32nd
Street and along Baseline Road to incorporate a multi-use trail as
indicated on the South Mountain Village/Laveen Village Trail System
map. Plans must be submitted to the Parks, Recreation and Library
Department for final approval.

b.
That the developer shall provide an alternative paving material where
the entrance driveway crosses the equestrian trail. The alternative
paving material shall be as wide as the equestrian trail and must be
used across the entire width of the street or driveway. The alternative
paving material and the material used at the street/trail interface shall
be acceptable to the Parks, AND Recreation and Library Department
and Street Transportation Department.

5.
6.
Other Issues:

Staff Report PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
February 1, 2024 Planning Commission
Page 11 of 11

a.
That upon approval of this request by City Council, the South
Mountain Village Planning Committee will be notified of any
subsequent modifications and/or deletions of stipulations and/or
variances.

b.
PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE
LANDOWNER SHALL EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER
OF CLAIMS IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE. 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.

b.
That the development shall commence construction with 24 months
of the rezoning request approval by City Council.

Exhibits:
A- Appeal Document (8 pages)
B- Applicant’s Narrative date stamped November 1, 2023 (24 pages)
C- Aerial Map (1 page)
D- Zoning Map (1 Page)
E- Approval Letter from Rezoning Case No. Z-73-01-8 (3 pages)
F- Sketch Map from Rezoning Case No. Z-73-01-8 (1 page)
G- South Mountain VPC Summary from December 12, 2023 (10 pages)
H- PHO Summary for PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8) from December 20, 2023 (9 pages)
I- Stipulated Site Plan dated August 27, 2001 (1 page)
J- Proposed Site Plan date stamped November 1, 2023 (2 pages)

EXHIBIT A
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

EXHIBIT B
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

EXHIBIT A

APN 301-23-119A
EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT B

EXHIBIT B
Rezoning Case Z-73-01
Boundary
Site

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT C – Part 1/2
Rezoning Case Z-73-01
Approved Site Plan
(Subject Site Highlighted)

EXHIBIT C – Part 2/2

EXHIBIT D

EXHIBIT E

PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPE
IRONWOOD
OLNEYA TESOTA
2" CALIP., 5'T,3.5'W
5 GALLON
SMOOTH AGAVE
AGAVE DESMETTIANA
5 GALLON
BOUGAINVILLEA
BOUGAINVILLEA 'BARBARA KARST'
5 GALLON
DESERT SPOON
DASYLIRION WHEELERII
5 GALLON
RED YUCCA
HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA
5 GALLON
'DESERT CARPET' tm
ACACIA REDOLENS
1 GALLON
1 GALLON
'GOLD MOUND'
LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS
5 GALLON
MEXICAN BIRD OF PARADISE
CAESALPINIA MEXICANA
5 GALLON
'GREEN CLOUD'
LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS
1.5" CALIP., 6'T, 3.5'W
HYBRID THORNLESS MESQUITE
PROSOPIS 'RIO-SALADO'
2" CALIP., 6.5'T, 4.5'W
DESERT MUSEUM PALO VERDE
CERCIDIUM 'HYBRID'
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
TRAILING PURPLE
LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS
2" CALIP., 6.5'T, 4'W
RED PUSH PISTACHE
PISTACIA X 'RED-PUSH'
5 GALLON
GREEN HOP BUSH
DODONEA VISCOSA
5 GALLON
YELLOW YUCCA
HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA
5 GALLON
BUSH MORNING GLORY
CONVOVULUS CNEORUM
2" DEPTH IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS
DECOMPOSED GRANITE
1/2" SCREENED ROCK PROS CARMEL
1.5" CALIP.(MULTI) 4'T, 3.5'W
CASCALOTE
CAESALPINIA CACALACO
60'
30'
15'
0'
SCALE: 1"=30'-00"
KIVA NO:
PAPP NO:
SDEV NO:
LSPL NO:
Q-S NO:
CHECKED BY:
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
ISSUE DATE:
NUMBER
REVISION
DATE
SHEET TITLE:
SHEET:
P.(602)265-0320
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
10450 N. 74th Street, Suite 120
SITE PLANNING
URBAN DESIGN
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
T.J. McQUEEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
EMAIL: timmcqueen@tjmla.net
CONSENT FROM TJMLA.
T.J. McQUEEN & ASSOC., INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
OBTAINING THE EXPRESSED WRITTEN PERMISSION &
THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT
COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE
THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR
(TJMLA) EXPRESSLY RESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT
& OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE PLANS.
COPIED IN
FIRST
E
R
E
T
S
I
G
E
R
T
.
O
N
E
T
A
C
I
F
I
T
R
E
C
..
.
..
.
.
..
..
.
..
.
d
e
n
g
i
S
e
t
a
D
McQUEEN
TIMOTHY J.
27166
D
a
t
e
S
i
g
n
e
d
.
..
.
..
..
.
.
..
.
..
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
D
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
A
R
I
Z
O
N
A
U
.
S
.
A.
E
I
P
X
E
R
S
6
2
0
2
/
0
3
/
6
0
08.07.23
La.01
08.07.23
LANDSCAPE
23228
TJMCQ
STAFF
NEW SUB-DIVISION
32ND STREET AND BASELINE
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
LANDSCAPE PLAN
EXHIBIT E

EXHIBIT F

Open Space: 33,205 sq.ft.
Open Space: 33,100 sq.ft.
Exhibit F
Open Space Comparison

EXHIBIT C
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

E CONSTANCE WAY
S 30TH
TER
E BRANHAM LN
E DONNER DR
S 30TH PL
S 31ST
WAY
S 31ST PL
PRIVATE
S 32ND
TER
E HARWELL RD
S 30TH WAY
E VALENCIA DR
S 32ND PL
E BEVERLY RD
S 32ND WAY
E FAWN DR
S 32ND RUN
S 31ST TER
E MOUNTAIN
VILLAGE CIR
S 31ST PL
E BASELINE RD
S 31ST WY
S 32ND ST
E BEAUTIFUL LN
E HARWELL RD
E CONSTANCE
WAY
E BRANHAM LN
E VALENCIA DR
E BEAUTIFUL LN
E BRANHAM LN
S 31ST TER
S 31ST PL
PRIVATE
MUA*
MUA*
MUA*
S-1
C-1*
PUD*
R1-6*
S-1
R1-14
PUD*
R-3*
R1-10*
R1-14
mapservices@phoenix.gov
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
Property Location: Approximately 275 feet south of the southwest corner of 32nd Street
and Baseline Road
0
250
500
125
Feet ´

EXHIBIT D
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

E CONSTANCE
WAY
S 31ST
WAY
PRIVATE
E BRANHAM LN
PRIVATE
S 32ND
TER
E HARWELL RD
E DONNER DR
S 30TH WAY
E VALENCIA DR
S 32ND PL
S 32ND WAY
E MELODY DR
E BEVERLY RD
E FAWN DR
S 32ND RUN
PRIVATE
S 32ND ST
S 31ST TER
E MOUNTAIN
VILLAGE CIR
E BASELINE RD
S 31ST PL
S 31ST WY
E BEAUTIFUL LN
E HARWELL RD
E CONSTANCE
WAY
E BRANHAM LN
E VALENCIA DR
E BEAUTIFUL LN
E BRANHAM LN
E MELODY DR
S 31ST TER
S 31ST PL
MUA*
MUA*
MUA*
S-1
C-1*
PUD*
R1-6*
S-1
R1-14
PUD*
R-3*
R1-10*
R1-14
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
Property Location: Approximately 275 feet south of the southwest corner of 32nd Street
and Baseline Road
0
250
500
125
Feet ´

EXHIBIT E
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

I
,)
City of Phoenix
l!lAN_NING:oepARTMENT
N,oye_r:nbet J ,. 2001
Village People Limite·d Partnerslii.p
1820 West Drake; Drive,. #108
Tempe, AZ 8528_3'
Dear Village People Limited Partnership:
RE: Z-73-01-8
Please_ be,~dvised tharthe Phoenix City Goun·cil, in-accordanceiwith the provisions of
Section 506.B.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, hfJs on Qdqber $1., ·2001,
concurred in the recornm_endation of the Planning Comr.nission ,and has approved, with
m_oqlfied. stipulations a_ppljcatioq Z-73-,01-8 for MUA, for ~pproxlmately·3D.2 acres located
on the· southeast corn~er of 32nd Stre·et ·and· Baseline· Road.
.
~ .
.
STIPULATION
1.
Site Planning:
a)
b)
c}
d)
e)
That Jhe development shall be in general conformance with the site plan
dated August 27, 2001, with specific regard to areas to be counted towards
approximation of the 50% open space requirements in the MUA, as may be
approved by DSD, and Tepresented by:
•
A circular open space:tract in the residential area
•
Linear pedestrian tract$ in the east and south connecting to adjacent
properti!3.S
_
•
A pedestrian !ink from the residential to the commercial areas._in the n·orth
and cross.ing 3_2nd Street
•
Landscaped-tree line9 strips·,that run along both i;;ipes-of a.I.I loc~I street~ in
the residential area·. This landscaped strip ·shall include, a meandering
sidewalk aKshown .on the site plan.
That.the height for commer,cial b,µildings be limited to one. story along
Bas~Jine R¢ad, as specified on thEtsite plan.
_
_
That·.a Homeowners Association (HOA) be created to maintain.all areas
spe9ified in t ... a).;
_
Jha,t:0; desjgn.forathe.,gat~d entry f9(!h~-reside1:1tial ·area shall.be proViaeclto
the PHO for'reviewprior toPreliminary'Site Plan approv·a1.
20QWest Wa_s~i,ngton Str1?et • Phoeniic, Arlzona'.85003 • 602"-262°i131 • FAX: 602,495-3793
RqcydedPaper
A
Mod
Del
Mod
Mod

f)
g)
Th.~t solid wans pe allowed .on .the. interior perim?ter walls (east and s·outh)
not the w~lls alqng 32nd 'Street.or Baseline 'Road .. These solid walls must
incorporate. controll~.9 gaJes where they intersect the H11ear pedestrian tracts
in·the e:iast and_south that connectlo adjacent properties so·pedestrian
connections with (uture a_djacent qevelopments: is allowed.
That 81 pafkii1g'stalls.·betweer:rthe1resi_oe1Jtjal ahd commercial use shall be
bµilt .wjth an alternative paving material..
2.
B'uildrng Design:
2.1 Commercial Buildings
a)
_That the appliG~nt sha!I subniit·detailed elevations of the comr11erci~I
buildings detailing the opena_reas between the b_uildings_. Th~~e
connections s_hall be made through "transparent" type of architecturc;:1I
elenieilts Working.as shading devi_ces. Jhes·e elements may inclucte
a·rcades·, ramadas, isolated-decorative walls, c·o1umns, and·other elements
that help define c:1nd support a.:shaded pedestrian environment l:>Ut a_llow the_
flow of vistas. This information shall b~ submitted for review to the Planning
Hearing Officer at the time of Preliminary Site Plan Approval.
2.2 Residential B~iJdings
a)
.b)
T_hat only one-stpry houses shall be built on th~ sou_tb pr.qperty line-and 30%
of.overall units ~t,all be atione story.
.
The floor plans sh~II be- consistent:With, the eleva_tions that reflect a rural
design;"based on the "Tt,Jscan Architecture" sty!~. illustratecj by the·.applicant.
3.
_Streets and rights:..of,.way-:-,
a)
b)
c)
d}
e)
f)
That a rigt)t~of-way totaling 60 feet shall- be.dedicated for the south half of
Baseline Road.
.
•
That right-of.;way for 32"c1 Stre_et realignment shall be dedicated a_s per plans
approved by the City of Phoenix. The. future intersection for 32nd Street at
Baseline Road shall be fl.a red to the minimum extent nece_ssary and tapered
in the shortest reasonable distance to function with the existing
in:,prql{ements on the north .s_id~ .of Baseline and with the future 40 foot of
pavell}ent Within the 60 foot of Right-of-Way planned for 32nd' Street on the
~Quth sige c;>f Bas·eline. Additional-impr_overnerits may ~e required to
a_ccommodat¢ left turn access to the pr9p0sed drivE;.vvays.
"(hat a.21 foot py'21 foot.right.c>fway.t~iangle. shall be dedicated at the
·southeast and southwest'corners .of 32nd Street and Baseline Road.
ThatsuffiGient righ~"'9f~way shallbe d.~dic:at~g tc;i ac_comrri9date a busbay
(Detail P~ 1256) on Baseline road.e.ast of32" Street (new. rea_litjnment).
That.rights,'"of-way dedications and street alignments· for l9cal-streets within
the sl!lb_division•will b(?. determ_ihed by DSD at the· time- of Preliminary
Subdivision Plat Review.
That the,developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent tq the_
development with paving, .curb, gutter,. ~idewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
medic!n islands, .larfdscaping and othewin~identals as per plans approved by
the city. AIUmprovehients shall comply with .all ADA .;3ccessioility standards.
Mod
Del
Del
Mod
Mod
Del
Del
Del
Del
Del
Del

g)
h)
:a)
b.
The:appl,i,cantsha.l_l_comple.(ei~1nd submi~ th~ Qeveloper Project lnfoo:na\ipn_
forrri: for' the. MAG Trat1sport~tipn.·.1 mpr9yerr1ent Progra_m to the Str~et;
Transportation Depa·rtm·enti(602-262.;EH93)., This1 form is a requirem~nt.:of
the •E.PA:t<j ·iiieet clean air quality requit~ments.
_
Th*?~~ffl~jef!tf~!Qlit~offw~tn_:i~st,~~'P_f<?~_ided:fpr_? u11d_ergr.oJJnd tl:1nnel
cro.§~_1r:1g E3a_s_e!m~ ~9c,1d rurm,_1)9 .q_n tJie _west srde oMhe,.32° Stre_et
(realig@m~nt) i;IS ·rrti;iY:.l;>_e,;~pproy~d. py-Vj~, pa"rl<'s_, Recre·ation and Library
-D.~p_;:frtr:r,ent ~nd ·_SJf~_et'. tr~-IJ~pqrt~tion,Qep~r:lf!l_etj,( Ttji$-riglit-:6f.way~~l:16uld- - --
b~fapp~Q.Xlrna.t~ly t'0_(;) fe,e_r by 50,f_~~tfrornJti~••rig·hf~of:.w.ay ·of'Ba~el_i,:,e- B9~g ;·
arth'e SW€:.of'.BaselineJ~Oij_CLan.d 32ndt$tr.~~t re~lignme(jt}:
Ti}i;3J~?. 2~· foot ¢i;is~m!3:hrshall be pr'oVlcied ·on the West side of32nd Street-
and J1lpr!Q.:a?l~~l!D1?.: Rq;:id to ;incqrp_qr?teic;_t m.v11i-:'~s~·trc;1iJ .a$' iradicated,ori,the:
South Mou.ntain Villc3ge/laveen Vil_lag~'Trail System map. Pl~ns mus(be
submitfed to the Park's, Recreation and Library D~partm~nt 'for·final
approval.
..
.
.
Thatthe developer shall provide an,alternative pavinrrmateriah,vhere the
entrance driveway cros~es tl)e equestrian tr~il. T_he alternative:paving
mater.ia! ~hall l;l.e :a$ _wide as~the,,eqµ~str;iJH'! t(?!I ~Q.d n:iustJ')e t;1sec}acros~ tb~
eritireWidth'.of th.e stre·e.t or-dr-iv.~way. The q[t~rn.c;lte;p~'{i[lg rn~!~ri~I qQd the.
m·aterial used at the street/trail ihterfac.ei~ha·11 p_e ac_ceptaple!' fo the Parks,
Recr~_ati9n· ~_tia'Library- Departniehtana .'Street T:ran~p·ortation Department.
5.
·Other isstJesi
a)
Th~t,T.1pq_n_ aRpro:y~l .of. t~j~.,f~q1.i'$$(by CitfGoUnci}, tf.te South Mouotain
Vill~ge Pl.~r:,_oi_ng 'GommJ.ttee,wl!I .9$ hqtifieq, qf,anfsubsecjTierit-i1iodificatic5ns
and/o~ defe_ti.oa~. pf~~ipuJatio11~ a,np/ofvwianc:~$-
b)
That:-the development shall commence construction within ·24 m.onths of'the
rezoning request approval by City Council.
Sincrely,
1
[} .
1
fill&l.lU8-----
L..· ~b '-(. l.lo
Sandra,E. Zwick
Plal'.lner Ill
H:\data\hea rings\pc\rat\Z-73::0-1-7
C: City Clerk
.J~y Neville (sent'~lectronicalty)
Files
Kah~ri :Stovall
Tammy Henry (sent-electronically)
Dave Barrier, DSD., (senFelectronically)
.'=- J •. Hyncik;.Public Transit-(sent electroriically).
Miguel Victor'(sent electronically)
Boqk
LynriiWest;(sent.electronicafly)
Ed: Bull, Burch ·&,Cracctiiolo PA; 702.East-Osborh(Road,,:Suite:200; Phoenix,. AZ; 85014
Mak_,;ii1Delopmnt. Services.;lnc;, Michael C, :1a20 West Drake Drive: #108, Teinpe·,,AZ, 85283
Del
Del
Mod
TC
Mod
Del

EXHIBIT F
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

NORTH
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
CITY OF PHOENIX PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT:
TO:
FROM:
* UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
UNITS STANDARD OPTION
MULTIPLES PERMITTED
ZONING MAP
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
REQUESTED CHANGE:
REVISION DATES:
DATE:
APPLICATION NO.
APPLICANT'S NAME:
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
R-3
R1-14
C-2
R1-6
S-1
CZ-100-93
155-85
APP
R1-18 *
Z14-97
APP
R1-10 *
Z14-97
S-1
R1-14
R1-10
BASELINE RD
HIGHLINE CANAL
34TH PL
HIGHLINE CANAL RD
MELODY DR
BEVERLY RD
35TH ST
32ND ST
32ND ST
400
0
400 Feet
6-1-2001
30.2 Acres
MUA
73-01
73-01
MAKAI DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC., MICHAEL C
ST.
48TH
I-10
ST.
32ND
ST.
Canal
River
ST.
40TH
24TH
Canal
ST.
AVE.
AVE.
AVE.
7TH
7TH
CENTRAL
South Mountain Park
19TH
27TH
Western
Highline
ST.
16TH
GUADALUPE RD.
SUPERSTITION FWY.
TH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE
BROADWAY RD
BASELINE RD
SOUTHERN AVE
South Mountain Village
S-1
01-35
D-10
6
9-5-2001
#

EXHIBIT G
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)

Date of VPC Meeting
December 12, 2023
Request
1) Request to modify Stipulation No. 1.a regarding
general conformance with the site plan date
stamped August 27, 2001

2) Request to modify Stipulation No. 1.b regarding a
detached sidewalk

3) Request to modify Stipulation No. 1.d regarding a
HOA

4) Request to modify Stipulation No. 1.f regarding
interior perimeter walls

5) Request to modify Stipulation No. 1.g regarding
parking stalls

6) Request to modify Stipulation No. 2.2a regarding
one-story homes

7) Request to modify Stipulation No. 2.2b regarding
floor plans

8) Request to modify Stipulation No. 4.a regarding a
25-foot easement on the west side of 32nd Street

9) Request to modify Stipulation No. 5.a regarding a
South Mountain Village Planning Committee
notification

10) Request to delete Stipulation No. 1.c regarding
commercial building height

11) Request to delete Stipulation No. 2.1a regarding
commercial building elevations

12) Request to delete Stipulation No. 3 regarding
Planning Hearing Officer review of a gated entry
design Streets and Rights-of-Way

13) Request to delete Stipulation No. 5.b regarding
construction commencement

VPC Recommendation
Approval with a modification and additional stipulations
VPC Vote
11-0

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

No members of the public registered to speak on this item.

STAFF BACKGROUND PRESENTATION

Samuel Rogers, staff, provided a presentation highlighting the request, subject site,
surrounding area, the original 2001 rezoning case and stipulations, and the request.

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Adam Baugh, with Withey, Morris, Baugh, PLC, provided a presentation on the subject
site context, history of subject site, the site plan, the request, the conceptual landscape
plan, the conceptual elevations, and the conceptual renderings.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Committee Member Marchuk asked about the proposed modification to Stipulation
2.2b that requires that the design of the proposed homes come to the Village Planning
Committee (VPC) before preliminary site plan approval and asked if the VPC would be
able to add additional stipulations when the design of the proposed homes comes in
front of the VPC. Mr. Rogers stated that he has never delt with this situation and does
not know if the VPC would be able to add additional stipulations when the design of the
proposed homes comes in front of the VPC. Mr. Baugh stated that the VPC would be
able to provide comments, direction, and guidance to the applicant on how to adjust and
change the design of the proposed elevations. Committee Member Marchuk asked for
confirmation that the VPC would not be voting when they review the design of the
proposed elevations. Mr. Baugh stated that the elevations would have to go to the PHO
again and explained that the PHO would implement the VPC recommendation through
adding additional stipulations.

Chair Daniels asked why the final elevations were not presented and asked if providing
elevations is a requirement of the PHO application. Mr. Baugh stated that the
elevations had not been created yet, explained that the site already has the proper
zoning for the proposed use, stated that the applicant is changing the site plan, and
explained that there is still more work to do. Mr. Rogers stated that elevations are
required for rezonings, but stated he would have to check the PHO process packet to
see what the submittal requirements are. Chair Daniels explained that the VPC votes

based on what they see, not on what something could possibly look like. Mr. Baugh
explained that the elevations provided were submitted as a part of the application and
stated that the VPC can change stipulations, stipulate to the elevations, or move
forward with the elevations. Chair Daniels reiterated that Mr. Baugh stated in his
presentation that the elevations had been from another project. Mr. Baugh explained
that the builder is comfortable with the proposed elevations and explained that the
stipulation requiring review of the elevation designs was proposed so that the VPC
could guide the elevations to be more acceptable to the VPC. Mr. Rogers stated that
elevations are required as a part of the PHO application.

Committee Member Brownell asked if the homes would be for sale or for rent. Mr.
Baugh stated that the homes would be for sale.

Committee Member Marchuk stated that Starbucks development to the north set an
important precedent when the applicant continued the case and brought revised
elevations that were specific to the MUA back to the VPC two months after their original
VPC hearing. Committee Member Brownell echoed Committee Member Marchuk’s
comments and stated his biggest concern was regarding whether the homes would be
for sale.

Committee Member Marcia Busching stated that the stipulation requires that the
applicant return to the VPC with elevations, stated that the VPC should approve the
request, and stated that the VPC should state that the elevations are not being
approved as a part of the motion. Committee Member Arthur Greathouse III stated
that the VPC will be able to add stipulations when the elevations come back to the VPC
for review, but not stop the project. Committee Member Busching stated that the
proposed stipulation requires the applicant to come back with elevations. Mr. Baugh
stated that the proposed Stipulation No. 2.2b could be amended to require the
elevations be reviewed and approved by the VPC and explained he would like to not
continue the case because there are contractual timeline obligations with the escrow
agreement.

Committee Member Busching stated that it looks like the development is proposed to
be gated, stated that she is not a fan of gated communities, and stated that she would
like to add a stipulation requiring that the development not be gated. Chair Daniels
stated she likes that it is a gated community, stated that she does not live in a gated
community, and explained that part of having housing diversity means having some
gated communities. Mr. Baugh stated that a 10-lot subdivision development like this is
more of an enclave that is appropriate for gating. Chair Daniels stated that an enclave is
a large, gated subdivision.

Committee Member Marchuk stated that VPC had stipulated a pedestrian connection
to this development on the to the proposed development to the north, stated that a
pedestrian connection to the north could be stipulated on this project, and asked if the
open space on the south portion of the property could be open to the public. Mr. Baugh
stated that the open space area is intended to be for retention. Chair Daniels stated
that the homeowners who live in the community pay for the gate and any liability that

comes with it. Committee Member Marchuk asked if the pedestrian connection would be
controlled access. Chair Daniels stated that normally residents would have a key to
access the pedestrian gate.

Mr. Baugh stated that the development team is not opposed to a pedestrian gate, but
there may be some ADA compliance issues with the slope and stated that the
pedestrian connection stipulation should be subject to ADA to compliance. Committee
Member Busching stated that the subject site is very flat. Tom Webber, with the
development team, stated that the subject site appears flat, but explained that there is
two to three feet of elevation difference between the two properties, stated that there
may not be enough space to provide adequate sloping, and stated he does not think the
development team can ask Starbuck to put the ADA ramp on their property. Committee
Member Kay Shepard asked if the gate would have to be ADA compliant and stated at
the nearby Safeway there is a pedestrian access to another property that is not ADA
compliant. Mr. Webber stated he is not familiar with the Safeway property, stated he
wonders when the Safeway development was built, and stated that he has always had
to provide ADA compliant paths. Committee Member Shepard stated that the Safeway
pedestrian connection had been built in the last three years.

Committee Member Marchuk asked if the developer would be required to conform to
the landscape plan and asked if the developer should be stipulated to conformance with
the landscape plan. Mr. Rogers stated that the VPC can stipulate general conformance
to the landscape plan. Committee Member Brownell asked if 25 percent shade
coverage could be stipulated. Mr. Baugh stated that the MUA district and the Baseline
Area Overlay District may require more than 25 percent shade coverage.

Chair Daniels stated that the VPC still needs to figure out what to do about the design
of the proposed elevations, stated that in the previous PHO case the VPC had required
that the applicant come back to the VPC with updated elevations, reiterated that
elevations are required as a part of the PHO packet, stated it is the VPC’s responsibility
to the community approve what they see, and stated that in the past developers had
made promises to the VPC that were not help up. Mr. Baugh stated that the proposed
stipulation could be modified to require the approval of the elevations by the VPC.

Committee Member Marchuk asked if staff could confirm if Stipulation 2.2b was
modified to require approval of the elevations, the VPC would have the opportunity to
vote and add stipulations. Mr. Rogers stated that he has never dealt with this situation
and could not speak definitively and stated that the PHO has some latitude on how he
deals with PHO cases. Committee Member Brownell stated that the VPC can approve,
but not accept the elevations, stated that the City will not have elevations so the
development team will have to come back and seek VPC approval of the elevations.
Chair Daniels asked for confirmation that MUA district has design requirements.
Committee Member Marchuk stated that some of the MUA district design requirements
are presumptions or considerations and stated that some of the presumptions and
considerations should be stipulated.

Committee Member Busching stated that if she were to make a motion she would
motion to recommend approval of PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8) as requested by the
applicant with a modification to Stipulation 2.2b to require VPC approval of the design of
the homes prior to preliminary site plan approval and with additional stipulations to
require a pedestrian access point to the development to the north, subject to ADA
standards, and to require general conformance to the landscape plan or City Code,
whichever is greater. Committee Member Marchuk stated that the PHO has some
level of latitude to make decisions and asked what uncertainty that latitude would add to
the situation. Committee Member Busching stated that her understanding is that the
PHO has latitude to adopt, modify, or deny VPC recommendations and stated that it
does not make much of a difference whether the applicant continues the case and
comes back to the VPC with elevations or if the applicant goes to the PHO now and
then comes back to the VPC for approval of the elevations because the PHO will have
the right to agree or disagree with the VPC recommendation at either time. Committee
Member Marchuk asked if it would be easier for the PHO to disagree with sending the
elevations back to the VPC for approval versus continuing the case and requiring the
applicant to come back to the VPC. Committee Member Busching stated that if the VPC
continues the case, there is no guarantee that the applicant will request a continuance
at the PHO hearing. Chair Daniels asked if the applicant would commit to requesting a
continuance at the PHO hearing. Mr. Baugh stated that that the development team
would rather have to VPC recommend denial than have the case continued. Chair
Daniels asked when the application was submitted. Mr. Rogers stated that the
application date should be in the packet and stated that to ensure the case is continued
at the PHO hearing the applicant would have to request a continuance. Committee
Member Shepard stated she would prefer to go forward with Committee Member
Busching’s potential motion.

Committee Member Darlene Jackson asked if it would be a bad thing if the developer
goes forward with the elevations presented. Chair Daniels stated that it would not
necessarily be a bad thing if the development team goes forward with the elevations
shown, explained that applicant had stated that elevations were from another project
and not designed specifically for this site, and stated that the VPC cannot analyze the
proposal properly without the actual elevations. Committee Member Brownell stated
that one of the elements that is missing from the discussion is that this is only a 10-lot
subdivision and stated it would not be the worst thing in the world if the applicant moves
forward with the elevations presented. Chair Daniels stated that is does not matter how
large or small the subdivision is, stated that she asked when the application was
submitted because the applicant should have been told that they need elevations for the
proposed project, stated that it feels like emotional blackmail when the applicant says
they have deadlines but they did not follow the requirement to submit elevations for the
proposed project, and stated she is in support of requiring the elevations to come back
to the VPC for approval. Mr. Baugh stated that the subject site is within the MUA
district, stated that the MUA district has design standards, stated that the modified
Stipulation No. 2.2b requires that the design of the homes reflect a rural design,
explained that the stipulation requiring VPC approval of the elevations is a great tool for
the VPC, stated that his team does not control the buyer’s timeline, and stated the

development team can commit to coming back to the VPC to allow them to influence the
final design of the elevations.

Committee Member Marchuk stated that he would like to work collaboratively with the
development team on getting the elevations to comply with MUA design requirements
when they come back, stated that the VPC should add a stipulation to elevate all
presumptions in 649.J to requirements, and stated if there are any presumptions the
development team wants to strike they can be negotiated when the development team
comes back for approval of the elevations. Mr. Baugh stated that he has not analyzed
all of the presumptions is 649.J and stated that the code uses presumptions and
requirements because every presumption may not make sense with every
circumstance. Committee Member Shepard asked if Committee Member Marchuk was
suggesting to elevate every presumption in the MUA district to a requirement and stated
the presumptions that apply to the elevations should be elevated to requirements.
Committee Member Marchuk stated that he is suggesting that only the presumptions in
the design section of MUA district be elevated to requirements and agreed that only the
presumptions applicable to elevations should be elevated to requirements. Committee
Member Brownell stated that this would be a good compromise. Mr. Baugh stated that
he does not think the elevation of all presumptions in 649.J should be put on the project
without doing the proper analysis. Committee Member Marchuk stated that the VPC
should have had the actual proposed elevations before the development team ever
came to the VPC.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: MOTION, DISCUSSION, AND VOTE

MOTION
Committee Member Busching made a motion to recommend approval of PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8) with a modification and additional stipulations. Committee Member
Shepard seconded the motion.

VOTE
14-0, motion to recommend approval of PHO-1-23--Z-73-01-6(8) with modifications and
additional stipulations passed with Committee Members Alvarez, Brooks, Brownell,
Busching, Coleman, F. Daniels, Holmerud, Jackson, Marchuk, Roque, Shepard, Viera,
Greathouse, and T. Daniels in favor.

VPC RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

1.a.
The development shall be in conformance with the site plan dated stamped
_____ August 27, 2001, with specific regard to areas to be counted towards
approximation of the 50% open space requirements in the MUA, as may be
approved by the PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, and
represented by:

•
A circular open space tract in the residential area.

•
Linear pedestrian tracts in the east and south connecting to adjacent
properties.

•
A pedestrian link from the residential to the commercial areas in the north
and crossing 32nd Street.

1.b.
A DETACHED SIDEWALK SEPARATED FROM THE CURB BY A
LANDSCAPED landscaped-tree lined strips SHALL BE PLACED that run
along ONE both sides of THE all PRIVATE local streets, AS APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT in the residential
area. This landscaped strip shall include a meandering sidewalk as shown on
the site plan.

1.c.
That the height of the commercial buildings be limited to one story along
Baseline Road as specified on the site plan.

1.d.
That a Homeowners Association (HOA) be created to maintain all COMMON
areas specified in 1A.

1.e.
That a design for the gated entry for the residential area shall be provided to
the PHO for review prior to preliminary site plan approval.

1.f.
That solid walls be allowed on the interior perimeter walls (east and south) not
the walls along 32nd Street or Baseline Road. These solid walls must
incorporate controlled gates where they intersect the linear pedestrian tracts
in the east and south that connect to adjacent properties so pedestrian
connections with future adjacent developments is allowed.

1.g.
That 81 parking stalls between the residential and commercial use shall be
built with an alternative paving material.

2.1.a. That the applicant shall submit detailed elevations of the commercial buildings
detailing the open areas between the buildings. These connections shall be
made through “transparent” type architectural elements working as shading
devices. These elements may include arcades, ramadas, isolated-decorative
walls, columns, and other elements that help define and support a shaded
pedestrian environment but allow the flow of vistas. This information shall be
submitted for review to the Planning Hearing Officer at the time of Preliminary
Site Plan Approval.

2.2.a. That only one-story houses shall be built on the south property line and 30%
of overall units shall be at one story.

2.2.b. The DESIGN OF THE HOMES SHALL floor plans shall be consistent with the
elevations that reflect a rural design, AND SHALL BE REVIEW AND
APPROVED BY THE SOUTH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE PLANNING

COMMITTEE BEFORE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL based on the
“Tuscan Architecture” style illustrated by the applicant.

3.a.
That a right-of-way totaling 60 feet shall be dedicated for the south half of
Baseline Road.

3.b
That right-of-way for 32nd Street realignment shall be dedicated as per plans
approved by the City of Phoenix. The future intersection for 32nd Street at
Baseline Road shall be flared to the minimum extent necessary and tapered in
the shortest reasonable distance to function with the existing improvements
on the north side of Baseline and with the future 40 foot of pavement within
the 60 foot of Right-of-Way planned for 32nd Street on the south side of
Baseline. Additional improvements may be required to accommodate left turn
access to the proposed driveways.

3.c.
That a 21 foot by 21 foot right of way triangle shall be dedicated at the
southeast and southwest corners of 32nd Street and Baseline Road.

3.d.
That sufficient right of way shall be dedicated to accommodate a busbay
(Detail P-1256) on Baseline road east of 32nd Street (new realignment).

3.e.
That rights-of-way dedications and street alignments for local streets within
the subdivision will be determined by DSD at the time of Preliminary
Subdivision Plat Review.

3.f.
That the developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved by
the city. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

3.g.
The applicant shall complete and submit the Developer Project Information
form for the MAG Transportation Improvement Program to the Street
Transportation Department (602-262-6193). This: form is a requirement of the
EPA to meet clean air quality requirements.

3.h.
That sufficient right-of-way must be provided for a underground tunnel
crossing Baseline Road running on the west side of the 32nd Street
(realignment) as may be approved by the Parks, Recreation and Library
Department and Street Transportation Department. This right-of-way should
be approximately 100 feet by 50-feet from the right-of-way of Baseline Road,
at the SWC of Baseline Road and 32nd Street realignment.

4.a.
That a 25 foot easement shall be provided on the west side of 32nd Street
and along Baseline Road to incorporate a multi-use trail as indicated on the
South Mountain Village/Laveen Village Trail System map. Plans must be
submitted to the Parks, Recreation and Library Department for final approval.

4.b.
That the developer shall provide an alternative paving material where the
entrance driveway crosses the equestrian trail. The alternative paving material
shall be as wide as the equestrian trail and must be used across the entire
width of the street or driveway. The alternate paving material and the material
used at the street/trail interface shall be acceptable to the Parks, Recreation
and Library Department and Street Transportation Department.

5.a.
That upon approval of this request by City Council, the South Mountain Village
Planning Committee will be notified of any subsequent modifications and/or
deletion of stipulations and/or variances.

5.b.
That the development shall commence construction within 24 months of the
rezoning request approval by City Council.

6.
ACCESS TO THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH SHALL BE REQUIRED
SUBJECT TO ADA STANDARDS.

7.
THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR
BETTER THAN THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE
PLAN DATED AUGUST 7, 2023, OR AS REQUIRED BY OTHER CITY
CODE, WHICH EVER IS GREATER.

8.
ALL THE PRESUMPTIONS OF MIXED USE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
SECTION 649.J BE CHANGED TO REQUIREMENTS, AS APPLICABLE TO
THE ELEVATIONS.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

VPC PROPOSED STIPULATION NO. 6

PEDESTRIAN ACCESS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE
NORTH, SUBJECT TO ADA STANDARDS AND AS APPROVED BY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

Staff comment: The intention of the Village Planning Committee (VPC) was to require
a pedestrian access point to the development to the north in alignment with the VPC
recommended stipulation on PHO-1-23--Z-73-01-6(8). The applicant site concerns
about being able to provide and ADA accessible path due to the grade difference of the
subject site and site to the north.

VPC PROPOSED STIPULATION NO. 7

THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR BETTER
THAN THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN DATED

AUGUST 7, 2023, OR AS REQUIRED BY OTHER CITY CODE, WHICH EVER IS
GREATER.
Staff comment: The intention of the stipulation was to require general conformance
with the landscape plan dated August 7, 2023 unless the underlying zoning
requirements are greater. The MUA zone requires the following planting standards:
Streetscape standards:
•
Min. 2-inch caliper (50% of required trees)
•
Min. 3-inch caliper or multi-trunk tree (25% of required trees)
•
Min. 4-inch caliper or multi-trunk tree (25% of required trees)
Perimeter property lines (not adjacent to a street):
•
Min. 2-inch caliper (60% of required trees)
•
Min. 1-inch caliper (40% of required trees)
Adjacent to a building:
•
Min. 2-inch caliper (60% of required trees)
•
Min. 1-inch caliper (40% of required trees)
VPC PROPOSED STIPULATION NO 8.
ALL PRESUMPTIONS APPLICABLE TO THE ELEVATIONS IN SECTION 649.J OF
THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL BE ELEVATED TO REQUIREMENTS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
Staff comment: The VPC wanted to ensure that any applicable presumptions regarding
the design of the elevations were not overcome administratively.

EXHIBIT H
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Mr. Byron Easton, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Teresa Garcia, Planner I, Assisting

December 20, 2023

ITEM NO: 2

DISTRICT NO. 8
SUBJECT:

Application #:
PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
Location:
Approximately 275 feet south of the southwest corner of
32nd Street and Baseline Road
Zoning:
MUA BAOD
Acreage:
4.6
Request:
1) Request to modify Stipulation 1.a regarding general
conformance with the site plan date stamped August 27,
2001.
2) Request to modify Stipulation 1.b regarding a detached
sidewalk.
3) Request to delete Stipulation 1.c regarding commercial
building height.
4) Request to modify Stipulation 1.d regarding a
Homeowners Association.
5) Request to modify Stipulation 1.f regarding interior
perimeter walls.
6) Request to delete Stipulation 1.g regarding parking stalls.
7) Request to delete Stipulation 2.1a regarding commercial
building elevations.
8) Request to modify Stipulation 2.2a regarding one-story
houses.
9) Request to modify Stipulation 2.2b regarding floor plans.
10) Request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding Streets and
Rights-of-Way.
11) Request to modify Stipulation 4.a regarding a 25-foot
easement on the west side of 32nd Street.
12) Technical corrections to Stipulation 4.b.
13) Request to modify Stipulation 5.a regarding South
Mountain Village Planning Committee notification.
14) Request to delete Stipulation 5.b regarding construction
commencement.
Applicant:
Baseline & 32nd, LLC/CG6, LLC
Owner:

Baseline & 32nd, LLC/CG6, LLC
Representative: William F. Allison, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 2

ACTIONS:

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer
recommended denial as filed, approval with modifications and additional
stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The South Mountain
Village Planning Committee reviewed the request on December 12, 2023. The
VPC recommended approval with a modification and additional stipulations by a
vote of 11-0.

DISCUSSION:
Bill Allison, representative of Withey Morris Baugh, PLC, gave an overview of
what occurred at the South Mountain VPC meeting. He gave an overview of the
proposed site and proposed stipulation modifications. He stated no elevations
were created by the applicant yet but would provide them to the VPC for review
when ready.

Marcia Busching, village planning committee member, thanked the applicant for
providing their recommendations to the VPC. She stated the recommendations
were a “win-win” for everyone involved.

Byron Easton, Planning Hearing Officer, stated he did not have any questions
and the requests were straightforward. He stated there was no public
correspondence for the case. He recommended approval with a modification for
Stipulation 1.a regarding general conformance with the site plan. He
recommended approval with a modification for Stipulation 1.b regarding a
detached sidewalk. He recommended approval for Stipulation 1.c regarding
commercial building height. He stated since the development is no longer a
commercial development, the stipulation was not needed. He recommended
approval for Stipulation 1.d regarding a Homeowner’s Association. He
recommended approval with a modification for Stipulation 1.f regarding interior
perimeter walls. He stated there was an error in advertising for Stipulation 1.g,
indicating the original request was to request a deletion instead of a modification.
He recommended approval for Stipulation 1.g, indicating that the specific number
of parking stalls is left over from the previous zoning case and would not make
sense for a residential development. He recommended approval for Stipulation
2.2a regarding one-story houses. He recommended approval for Stipulation 2.2b
regarding floor plans. He recommended denial as filed for Stipulation 3 regarding
Streets and Rights-of-Way. He stated the applicant revised the request to reflect
comments given by the Street Transportation Department, including keeping
Stipulation 3.f as originally written. He recommended denial for Stipulation 4.a
regarding a 25-foot easement on the westside of 32nd Street. He stated the
stipulation would be deleted instead of modified because the previous case (Item
No. 1) referenced a 30-foot wide MUTE and a 10-foot wide MUT, exceeding the

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 3

25’ easement requirement. He recommended approval for Stipulation 4.b
regarding a technical correction. He recommended approval for Stipulation 5.a
regarding South Mountain Village Planning Committee notification. He
recommended approval for Stipulation 5.b regarding construction
commencement. He recommended adding Stipulation 6, recommended by the
VPC, regarding pedestrian access. He recommended adding Stipulation 7,
recommended by the VPC, regarding landscape design, but did not agree with
the wording. He stated general conformance language will be used for the
stipulation. He recommended not adding Stipulation 8, recommended by the
VPC, regarding presumptions applicable to residential elevations. He stated
presumption language cannot be stipulated. He stated archaeological stipulations
and a Prop 207 stipulation would be added for this case.

Mr. Allison stated he agreed with Mr. Easton’s recommendations.

Ms. Busching stated she was frustrated. She stated that there have been a few
situations regarding new development presumptions in the BAOD that have been
overlooked by site planners. She stated the VPC was trying to add a stipulation
to reenforce presumptions so they will not be disregarded. She stated no one told
the village that presumptions cannot be included in the requirements.

Mr. Easton stated you cannot legally stipulated presumptions. He stated if the
village would like to submit a text amendment to alter the language of
presumptions in the Zoning Ordinance, they are welcome to. He stated he would
speak with the South Mountain village planner to see if an educational session
can be created between the city and the VPC to help better understand what can
be stipulated. He stated that he already approved a stipulation regarding the
design of the homes will be reviewed and approved by the South Mountain VPC
before preliminary site plan approval. He stated they will be given the opportunity
to see the elevations and if a preliminary review is approved by the VPC, the site
planner will have clear direction on the design of the homes.

Ms. Busching stated she agreed with Mr. Easton and did not realize the VPC has
the right to approve prior to preliminary site plan approval.

FINDINGS:

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 4

2) The request to Modify 1.B is approved with a modification. This stipulation
is now written with updated language and location specificity. The small
size and irregular shape of the subject parcel limits the ability to provide,
and need for, detached sidewalks on both sides of the private street. All
homes will have easy access to the detached sidewalk proposed for the
east portion of the project to access the open space area and to exit the
neighborhood to 32nd Street.

3) The request to delete Stipulation 1.c regarding the height of commercial
buildings is approved. This Stipulation is no longer pertinent considering
the new Site Plan and residential nature of the project.

4) The request to modify Stipulation 1.d is approved. An HOA will be
responsible to maintain all common areas on site, which are different than
those installed in the neighborhood across 32nd Street and listed in
stipulation 1.a.

5) The request to modify Stip 1.f is approved with a modification. This
modification specifies the location of solid walls as it pertains to this
request. The modification also removes the language referencing the
previous zoning case.

6) The request to modify Stipulation 1.g regarding parking stalls is actually a
request to delete the stipulation in its entirety. This request is approved
due to the fact that the specific number of parking stalls is a leftover from
the previous zoning case.

7) The request to delete Stipulation 2.1a regarding commercial building
elevations is approved as it is not applicable to this proposal.

8) The request Request to modify Stipulation 2.2a regarding one-story
houses is approved. The intent of the stipulation was to prepare for the
neighborhood being built to the south by staggering the height of the
houses, however, the neighborhood is already built.

9) The homes will be subject to the proposed, revised stipulation and to
design guidelines of the MUA and BAO districts. The Owners will not
develop elevations for the project until this application is concluded and
the applicant agrees the Village Planning Committee needs the
opportunity to review the elevations before preliminary site plan approval.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 5

to a development, both public and private, be constructed to City of
Phoenix and ADA standards. The stipulation still applies to this site as it
requires all streets needing to be built with this development to be
constructed to City of Phoenix standards.

11) The request to modify Stipulation 4.a regarding a 25-foot easement on the
west side of 32nd Street is approved. The location of the easement has
been specified to the current project.

12) The technical correction to remove the Library Department from the
stipulation has been approved.

13) The request to modify Stipulation 5.a regarding South Mountain Village
Planning Committee notification is approved.

14) The request to delete Stipulation 5.b regarding construction
commencement is approved.

STIPULATIONS:

1.
Site Planning:

a.
That The development shall be in general conformance with the site
plan dated STAMPED NOVEMBER 1, 2023 August 27, 2001, AS
APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS
AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT.with specific regard to areas to be counted towards
approximation of the 50% open space requirements in the MUA as
may be approved by DSD, and represented by:

• A circular open space tract in the residential area.

• Linear pedestrian tracts in the east and south connecting to
adjacent properties.

• A pedestrian link from the residential to the commercial areas
in the north and crossing 32nd Street.

b.
A DETACHED SIDEWALK, SEPARATED FROM THE CURB BY
landscaped, tree-lined strips SHALL BE PLACED that run ALONG
ONE both SIDE OF THE all PRIVATE local STREETS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 6

DEPARTMENT in the residential area. This landscaped strip shall
include a meandering sidewalk as shown on the site plan.

c.
That the height for commercial buildings be limited to one story along
Baseline Road, as specified on the site plan.

c.
d.
That aA Homeowners Association (HOA) be created to maintain all
COMMON areas. specified in 1.a)

d.
e.
That aA design for the gated entry for the residential area shall be
provided to the PHO for review prior to Preliminary Site Plan
approval.

e.
f.
That sSolid walls SHALL be allowed on the interior perimeter walls
BUT (east and south) not the walls along 32nd Street. or Baseline
Road. These solid walls must incorporate controlled gates where
they intersect the linear pedestrian tracts in the east and south that
connect to adjacent properties so pedestrian connections with future
adjacent developments is allowed.

g.
That 81 parking stalls between the residential and commercial use
shall be built with an alternative paving material.

2.
Building Design:

2.1 Commercial Buildings

2.1
2.2 Residential Buildings

a.
That only one-story houses shall be built on the south property line
and 30% of overall units shall be at one story.

b.
The DESIGN OF THE HOMES SHALL floor plans shall be consistent
with the elevations that reflect a rural design AND SHALL BE

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 7

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SOUTH MOUNTAIN
VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE BEFORE PRELIMINARY SITE
PLAN APPROVAL based on the “Tuscan Architecture” style
illustrated by the applicant.

3.
Streets and Rights-of-Way:

a.
That a A right-of-way totaling 60 feet shall be dedicated for the south
half of Baseline Road.

b.
That Right-of-way for 32nd Street realignment shall be dedicated as
per plans approved by the City of Phoenix. The future intersection for
32nd Street at Baseline Road shall be flared to the minimum extent
necessary and tapered in the shortest reasonable distance to
function with the existing improvements on the north side of Baseline
and with the future 40 foot of pavement within the 60 foot of right-of-
way planned for 32nd Street on the south side of Baseline. Additional
improvements may be required to accommodate left turn access to
the proposed driveways.

c.
That aA 21 foot by 21 foot right-of-way triangle shall be dedicated at
the southeast and southwest corners of 32nd Street and Baseline
Road.

d.
That Sufficient right-of-way shall be dedicated to accommodate a bus
bay (Detail P-1256) on Baseline Road east of 32nd Street (new
realignment).

e.
That Rights-of-way dedications and street alignments for local streets
within the subdivision will be determined by DSD at the time of
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Review.

f.
That The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to
the development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps,
streetlights, median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per
plans approved by the City. All improvements shall comply with all
ADA accessibility standards.

g.
The applicant shall complete and submit the Developer Project
Information for the MAG Transportation Improvement Program to the
Street Transportation Department (602-262-6193). This form is a
requirement of the EPA to meet clean air quality requirements.

h.
That Sufficient right-of-way must be provided for an underground

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 8

tunnel crossing Baseline Road running on the west side of the 32nd
Street (realignment) as may be approved by the Parks, Recreation
and Library Department and Street Transportation Department. This
right-of-way should be approximately 100 feet by 50 feet from the
right-of-way of Baseline Road at the southwest corner of Baseline
Road and 32nd Street (realignment).

4.
Archaeology:

5.
Trails:

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of December 20, 2023
Application PHO-2-23—Z-73-01-6(8)
Page 9
used across the entire width of the street or driveway. The alternative
paving material and the material used at the street/trail interface shall
be acceptable to the Parks, Recreation and Library Department and
Street Transportation Department.
5.
Other Issues:
a.
That upon approval of this request by City Council, the South
Mountain Village Planning Committee will be notified of any
subsequent modifications and/or deletions of stipulations and/or
variances.
b.
PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE
LANDOWNER SHALL EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER
OF CLAIMS IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE. 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.
c.
That the development shall commence construction with 24 months
of the rezoning request approval by City Council.
Upon request, this publication will be made available within a reasonable length
of time through appropriate auxiliary aids or services to accommodate an
individual with a disability. This publication may be made available through the
following auxiliary aids or services: large print, Braille, audiotape or computer
diskette. To request a reasonable accommodation, please contact Teleia Galaviz
at teleia.galaviz@phoenix.gov or (602) 291-2559 or TTY: 7-1-1.

EXHIBIT I
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

EXHIBIT J
of "Staff Report
for PHO-2-23--
Z-73-01-6(8)"

PHO-2-23--Z-73-01-6(8)
Proposed Conceptual Site Plan
Hearing Date: December 20, 2023