Attachment G - Opposition - Z-20-21-4.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2022-12-07)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 3279 characters
1
Racelle Escolar
From:
Nicole R <nrrphx@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, October 7, 2021 8:12 PM
To:
Racelle Escolar
Subject:
Z-20-21-4 - Misleading Rebuttal by Mr. Beaudoin
Racelle, 
Please share this with the commission. I raised my hand to rebuttal the misleading rebuttal by Alan Beaudoin.  
At this evening's commission meeting, Mr. Beaudoin falsely stated they did not know my opposition until the second 
Encanto meeting. I was very clear of my opposition at the initial Encanto VPC meeting and I also attended a June 
neighborhood meeting where I provided feedback. At that meeting, other residents were in opposition that it did not fit 
the TOD. 
I would also appreciate being a part of the meetings with any Commissioners and Mr. Beaudoin and the applicant.  
Regards, 
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Interne
Nicole Rodriguez  
Certified Arborist | Urban Forestry | Sustainable Design | 
602-920-4945 
 
|  nrrphx@gmail.com
 
[linkedin.com]  
[twitter.com]
"The important thing is not to stop questioning." - Albert Einstein. 
Attachment G

2021 October 30 
Planning Commission  
City of Phoenix Planning & Development Dept 
200 W. Jefferson St. 
Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Opposition to Z-20-21-4 
Dear Planning Commission: 
The Urban Phoenix Project represents those within the light rail corridor who strive for a Central Phoenix 
in which walking, biking, and public transit are just as comfortable and convenient as driving. Achieving 
this requires a commitment to the best practices in urban design from both developers and City Hall.     
Few areas in Phoenix are overlayed by more urban infill policy plans than the one in question in Z-20-21-
4. There is an exceptional opportunity to provide the residents of Uptown with a quality destination that
complements light rail which instead could be replaced by a ubiquitous, low-intensity land use just as
easily found in more auto-dependent locations around the Valley. Make no mistake, the current UR TOD-
1 zoning classification, according to Phoenix Zoning Ordinance Sections 642 & 664, is in place along the
light rail corridor to prevent the exact type of auto-dominated use as proposed in the applicant’s PUD.
Developments do not inherently promote urbanism for simply existing near transit, they must 
intentionally interact with their surroundings. Strategy One of the ReinventPHX Uptown TOD Policy 
Plan (pg. 123) envisions form-based codes as a best practice to differentiate between conventional 
suburban design and urban environments. Approval of this rezone would allow the applicant to supplant 
strategies and design guidelines determined in the Uptown TOD Policy Plan and Walkable Urban (WU) 
Code in favor of standards that echo suburban developments. Uptown residents who volunteered their 
time in community workshops and visioning sessions expect leadership to reaffirm their interests in 
creating a quality, urban fabric as synthesized in the TOD policy plan.  
We oppose Z-20-21-4 and ask you to consider the efforts of the Uptown community to create clear and 
concise policies that embody their values for a more inclusive future.  
Respectfully, 
Mitchell Willard 
Director of Development, Urban Phoenix Project 
RCVD 11/2/2021