Attachment B - Staff Report - PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2022-12-07)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 81023 characters

Staff Report: PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8
APPLICATION #:
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8
LOCATION:
Approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of 19th
Avenue and Latona Lane
EXISTING ZONING:
R1-10
ACREAGE:
5.12
REQUEST:
1) Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance
with the site plan date stamped July 28, 2017.
2) Review of conceptual elevations by the Planning Hearing
Officer per Stipulation 4.
APPLICANT:
Terrascape Consulting, LLC
OWNER:

Bella Rosa Partners, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Terrascape Consulting, LLC
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approval with modifications and additional stipulations, as recommended by the Planning
Hearing Officer.
PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Hearing Officer heard the request on August 17, 2022 and recommended
approval with modifications and additional stipulations.
VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The South Mountain Village Planning Committee heard this request on August 9, 2022
and recommended approval by a vote of 7-4.
Attachment B

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 2 of 8

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS

The subject site consists of 5.12 gross acres located approximately 130 feet north of the
northwest corner of 19th Avenue and Latona Lane and is zoned R1-10 (Single-Family
Residence District). The subject property constitutes only the southern portion of the
11.15 gross acres included in original Rezoning Case No. Z-47-17.

The applicant requested modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance with
the site plan date stamped July 28, 2017. The stipulated site plan (Exhibit H) depicted a
32-unit subdivision at a density of approximately 3.03 dwelling units per gross acre on the
full 11.15 gross acres of the original rezoning case area. Approximately 15 dwelling units
were depicted on the southern half of the site. The proposed conceptual site plan (Exhibit
G) depicts an 18-unit single-family subdivision at approximately 3.51 dwelling units per
gross acre. A single street terminating in a cul-de-sac on the western edge of the site is
proposed, and approximately 9 percent of the gross area would be reserved for common
area open space. The lots are 58 feet wide with minor variations around the cul-de-sac.

Building elevations were not provided in the original rezoning case. Stipulation 4 requires
that conceptual elevations be reviewed and approved for consistency with the Rio
Montaña Area Plan by the Planning Hearing Officer through the public hearing process.
The proposed conceptual elevations (Exhibit I) depict single-story homes at a maximum
height of approximately 19 feet 6 inches to the ridge. These proposed elevations were
also redesigned and resubmitted after the August 9, 2022 South Mountain Village
Planning Committee (VPC) meeting to address their recommended additional stipulation
regarding covered porches. The elevations depict a variety of building materials (stone
façade, composite siding, wood elements, brick veneer), multiple building colors,
variation in roof design, and multiple architectural features (wood posts, gable
ornamentation, varied window sizes, decorative garage panels).

The appellant argues that the proposed increase in density is not appropriate for this
community and does not provide any transition to S-1 zoned properties in the
surrounding area. The appellant states that she supports preservation of rural character,
consistency with the Rio Montaña Area Plan, single-story development, and a maximum
density of 3 dwelling units per gross acre.

PREVIOUS HISTORY

On January 10, 2018, the Phoenix City Council approved Rezoning Case No. Z-47-17-8,
a request to rezone approximately 11.15 gross acres located approximately 130 feet
north of the northwest corner of 19th Avenue and Latona Lane from S-1 (Ranch or Farm
Residence), R1-10 (Single-Family Residence District), and R1-18 (Single-Family
Residence District) to R1-10 (Single-Family Residence District), subject to stipulations.

On February 20, 2019, the Phoenix City Council approved a modification of Stipulation 3
as recommended by the Planning Hearing Officer regarding the timing of the elevation
review by the South Mountain VPC. This modification was intended to allow the VPC to

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 3 of 8

review elevations prior to final site plan approval rather than preliminary site plan
approval. On August 9, 2022, the South Mountain VPC meeting reviewed the elevations
per Stipulation 3 as a separate agenda item from the PHO request and recommended
approval with two recommendations regarding staggered lots and front porches (Exhibit
K). For further discussion, see Planning Hearing Officer Finding #1.

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS

Public Correspondence
Twelve letters of opposition were received regarding this request. Concerns expressed
include the following:

• Increase in density compared with the stipulated site plan (12 letters)
• Building height (12 letters)
• Reduction in open space compared with the stipulated site plan (11 letters)
• Enhanced setbacks along 19th and 20th Avenues (11 letters)
• Increased shade and heat mitigation measures (11 letters)
• Concern regarding Rio Montaña Area Plan conformity (11 letters)

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION

Residential 2 to 3.5 dwelling units per acre

CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING LAND USE

Zoning
Land Use

On-site:

R1-10
Vacant

North:

R1-10
Vacant

South:

S-1
Single-Family Residential

East:

S-1
Tree Farm
(Across 19th Avenue)

West:

S-1
Single-Family Residential
(Across 20th Avenue)

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER FINDINGS

The Planning Hearing Officer’s recommendation was based on the following findings:

1) The South Mountain Village Planning Committee (VPC) heard two agenda items
regarding this case at their August 9, 2022 meeting. The first (Agenda Item #7)

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 4 of 8

was the PHO request itself. The second (Agenda Item #8) was for review and
comment on architectural elevations per the requirements of Stipulation 3. Note
that Stipulation 3 is redundant of, and less restrictive than, the requirement for
PHO review of conceptual elevations required by Stipulation 4. However, during
the review and comment item, the VPC made two recommendations regarding the
provision of staggered front setbacks and front porches. These recommendations
are addressed in these findings along with the consideration paid to the VPC’s
discussion during the PHO request itself.

2) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance with the site
plan is recommended for approval with modifications to provide more standard
conformance language and to add a new sub-stipulation requiring staggered front
setbacks.

The subject property includes only the southern 5.12 gross acres of the 11.15
gross acres rezoned in the original case. The stipulated site plan depicted a 32-
unit single-family subdivision at approximately 3.03 dwelling units per gross acre
and approximately 13.9% open space. Units were arranged around four cul-de-
sacs oriented north/south, with most of the open space along the west property
line. The street running east/west through the site terminated in an emergency
gate along the west property line.

The proposed conceptual site plan depicts an 18-unit single-family subdivision at
approximately 3.51 dwelling units per gross acre, with approximately 9% open
space. Units are arranged along a street running east/west through the site. The
street terminates in a cul-de-sac along the west property line. Most of the open
space is along the west property line. The proposal is substantially similar to the
stipulated site plan, with the caveat that it is designed with less than half of the
original area. The density remains below, and the open space above, Ordinance
standards. The proposal is compatible with existing development in the
surrounding area.

A new sub-stipulation is recommended requiring staggered front setbacks. This
recommendation is consistent with the recommendation of the South Mountain
Village Planning Committee. It is also consistent with design recommendations in
the Rio Montaña Area Plan (Page 39, Figure 71).

3) The applicant submitted conceptual elevations for review and approval per the
requirements of Stipulation 4. The stipulation has been complied with and is
recommended to be deleted and replaced with a standard language stipulation for
general conformance to the elevations provided. Stipulation 4 states that the
elevations submitted should be consistent with recommendations in the Rio
Montaña Area Plan. The elevations depict a variety of building materials (stone
façade, composite siding, wood elements, brick veneer), multiple building colors,
variation in roof design, and multiple architectural features (wood posts, gable
ornamentation, varied window sizes, decorative garage panels). This diversity is

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 5 of 8

consistent with the Rio Montaña Area Plan and many of the design choices are
compatible with the rural and agricultural character described in the plan.

4) An additional stipulation is recommended to require front porches to be provided
per the requirements of the Baseline Area Overlay District (651.E.3.b.(4)). This
recommendation is consistent with the recommendation of the South Mountain
Village Planning Committee. It is also consistent with the Rio Montaña Area Plan
(Page 22; Page 23; Page 44, Figures 97 and 100) and the intent of Stipulation 4.

5) The Street Transportation Department recommends one additional stipulation
addressing required dedications, detached sidewalks, and landscaping along 19th
Avenue. This stipulation is recommended for inclusion.

19th Avenue is identified on the City Council Approved Street Classification Map
as a D-Section Arterial roadway. This cross section requires a total right-of-way
dedication of 50-feet where the last 10-feet may consider a 10-foot-wide sidewalk
easement. Within the ROW/sidewalk easement, an 11-foot-wide landscape strip
located between back of curb and sidewalk is required to create a separated
detached sidewalk and allow planting space for trees to mature and to adequately
shade the sidewalk.

While Stipulation 2 (not a part of this request) addresses detached sidewalks,
requiring a minimum 5-foot-wide landscape strip between back of curb and
sidewalk, this does not override the City Council approved Street Classification
Map. While all other detached sidewalks within the development may allow the 5-
foot-wide landscape strip, 19th Avenue cannot and shall comply with the
recommended stipulation as described.

6) 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.
The development shall be in general conformance with the site plan date
stamped JUNE 30, 2022 July 28, 2017, as modified by the following
stipulations and approved by the Planning and Development
Department, WITH SPECIFIC REGARD TO THE FOLLOWING:

A. THE SITE PLAN SHALL DEPICT STAGGERED FRONT
SETBACKS FOR COVERED BUILDING ELEMENTS, SUCH THAT
ANY TWO ADJACENT LOTS SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM
VARIATION IN FRONT SETBACK OF 4 FEET.

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 6 of 8

2.
All sidewalks shall be detached with a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped
strip located between the sidewalk and back of curb and shall include a
minimum 2-inch caliper shade trees planted a minimum of 20 feet on
center or equivalent groupings staggered along both sides of the
sidewalk, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.
The landscape strip shall be installed by the developer and maintained
by the HOA.

3.
Architectural elevations shall be presented to the South Mountain Village
Planning Committee for review and comment prior to final site plan
approval.

4.
Conceptual elevations shall be reviewed and approved for consistency
with the Rio Montaña Area Plan by the Planning Hearing Officer through
the public hearing process for stipulation modification prior to preliminary
site plan approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes
only. Specific development standards and requirements may be
determined by the Planning Hearing Officer and the Planning and
Development Department.

THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH
THE ELEVATIONS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 17, 2022, AS MODIFIED
BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

5.
COVERED PORCHES A MINIMUM OF SIXTY SQUARE FEET IN AREA
AT A DEPTH OF AT LEAST SIX FEET SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE
FRONT YARD OF FIFTY PERCENT OF THE HOMES IN A
SUBDIVISION. NO PORCH SHALL TERMINATE WITHIN THE PLANE
OF A DOOR OR WINDOW.

6.
5.
The perimeter wall adjacent to 19th Avenue shall include minimum 3-foot
offsets at a minimum spacing of every 50 feet and material and textural
differences, such as stucco and/or split face block with a decorative
element, such as tile, glass insets, or stamped designs, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

7.
6.
Fence and wall materials adjacent to common areas and open space as
depicted on the site plan date stamped July 28, 2017 shall consist of
wrought iron, split rail, corral fencing, or a combination of 3 feet of solid
masonry topped by open wrought iron or a similar material, or a
combination of the aforementioned fence types and open farm fencing,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 7 of 8

8.
THE DEVELOPER SHALL DEDICATE MINIMUM 50-FEET OF RIGHT-
OF-WAY ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF 19TH AVENUE.
IMPROVEMENTS SHALL INCLUDE A MINIMUM 5-FOOT-WIDE
DETACHED SIDEWALK AND MINIMUM 11-FOOT-WIDE LANDSCAPE
STRIP LOCATED BETWEEN THE BACK OF CURB AND SIDEWALK,
AS APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. LANDSCAPE STRIP PLANTING
REQUIREMENTS TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT.

9.
7.
The developer shall dedicate right-of-way totaling 25 feet for the east half
of 20th Avenue, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department

10.
8.
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 Planning and Development Department. All
improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

11.
9.
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.

12.
10.
The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence,
and operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor International
Airport (PHX) to future owners or tenants of the property. The form and
content of such documents shall be according to the templates and
instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney.

13.
PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY 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.

Exhibits
A – Appeal Document (2 pages)
B – Applicant’s Narrative (12 pages)
C – Aerial Map (1 page)
D – Zoning Map (1 page)
E – Recorded Ordinance from Rezoning Case No. Z-47-17 (5 pages)

Staff Report – PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
October 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Page 8 of 8

F – Sketch Map from Rezoning Case No. Z-47-17 (1 page)
G – Proposed Site Plan date stamped June 30, 2022 (1 page)
H – Stipulated Site Plan date stamped July 28, 2017 (2 pages)
I – Proposed Elevations date stamped August 17, 2022 (4 pages)
J – South Mountain Village Planning Committee Summary from August 9, 2022 for PHO-
2-22—Z-47-17-8 (4 pages)
K – South Mountain Village Planning Committee Summary from August 9, 2022 for
Review and Comment Item Regarding Stipulation 3 (4 pages)
L– PHO Summary for PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8 from August 17, 2022 (9 pages)

EXHIBIT A

S:\Planning\Rezoning\Hearings\PHO\Appeals\2022\DRAFT - PHO Internal Appeal Form -
PHO-2-22-Z-47-17-8.doc updated 8/24/2022 vcm

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER APPEAL
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL HOLD
A PUBLIC HEARING ON:
CASE NUMBER:
PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
LOCATION:
Approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of
19th Avenue and Latona Lane
PHO HEARING DATE:
August 17, 2022

RECEIVED:
August 24, 2022
APPEALED BY:

Opposition

Applicant
APPEALED TO:
PLANNING
COMMISSION
October 6, 2022

TENTATIVE DATE
CITY COUNCIL
November 2, 2022

TENTATIVE DATE
APPELLANT NAME AND ADDRESS/EMAIL:
PHONE:
Jewel Clark
2020 West South Mountain Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85041
hjewelclark@fastmail.com

480-664-9436
RECEIPT NUMBER:

REASON FOR REQUEST:

The community opposes the change from 3 houses/acre to 3.5 houses/acre on this
application b/c it does not align with current appropriate density or even appropriate
transition to the surrounding established properties, which are all S-1 Acre + homes.

The community has worked hard to keep our rural character by keeping density in
new developments low, no more than 3 houses/acre, and working with developers to
align better to the Rio Montana Plan, which guides Our area's look/feel. While we are
grateful the development will be all single story, we do not want this density held up
as a precedent for any future approvals in our area. It is a disappointing exception to
the rule.
TAKEN BY:
Camryn Thompson

c:
Alan Stephenson

Joshua Bednarek

Tricia Gomes

Racelle Escolar

Adam Stranieri

Greg Harmon
Brad Wylam
Victoria Cipolla-Murillo
Julie Garcia

Ben Ernyei - Posting

GIS Team

EXHIBIT B

Bella Rosa

8020 S. 19th Ave

APN 300-17-004M

TSC# 1394

1 | P a g e

June 30, 2022 (Revised July 8, 2022)
Adam Stranieri
Planning Hearing Officer
City of Phoenix
252 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003

RE:
PHO Stipulation Modification Request for Z-47-17-8 / 2-22—Z-4717-8

On behalf of Bella Rosa 19 Partners LLC (“Developer”), Scapegoat/Terrascape (“Applicant”) is
providing a written request for a PHO stipulation modification request. The Developer is proposing
to construct a single-family housing community consisting of eighteen (18) lots on a 5.12-acre (4.61
net acres) parcel of land located approximately 1,700 feet south of the SWC of W. Baseline Road
and S. 19th Ave in Phoenix, Arizona with an APN# 300-17-004M, as shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1 – AERIAL MAP

CASE HISTORY
Z-47-17-8: The Site was rezoned from S-1 to R1-10 PRD approved by City Council on January 10,
2018, through Ordinance G-6405 with eight (8) stipulations.
PHO-1-18--Z-47-17-8: Amendment to the Site was applied for and approved by City Council on
February 20, 2019, through Ordinance G-6560 with 10-Stipulations (see Exhibit I).
At the time of the original rezoning and PHO Amendment, the Site was planned as a larger 10.56-
acre subdivision with 32 single-family lots. Access into the subdivision provided for an emergency

Bella Rosa

8020 S. 19th Ave

APN 300-17-004M

TSC# 1394

2 | P a g e

entry off of 20th Avenue, one resident entry off of 19th Avenue and four (4) cul-de-sacs connected
by 50’ wide private streets. See Exhibit II to view the original site plan.
After the rezoning, plans for the 10.56-acre parcel did not move forward and the subdivision was
not constructed. The property was eventually split into two separate parcels for purposes of
developing two different subdivisions using the recently approved R1-10 PRD zoning for single
family residential housing.
As the property has been subdivided into two parcels and the design intent has changed since
the original concept of the rezoning, a request for modifications from the original site plan and to
Ordinance G-6560 is being required.
PROPOSED STIPULATION MODIFICATIONS:
This PHO requests modifications to the following stipulations outlined in Ordinance G-6560, as listed
below:
Sitpulation 1.
The development shall be in general conformance with the site plan dated
stamped July 28, 2017, as modified by the following stipulations and
approved by the Planning and Development Department. June 30, 2022, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
Rationale: As plans for a single 10.56-acre subdivision are no longer being considered and the
lot has been split, the site plan for this particular parcel requires reconsideration for design and
lot layout for the newly split parcel. The size of the parcel still allows enough feasibility to meet
the requirements of R1-10 PRD with minor adjustments to the re-orientation and re-design of
the lot and street layout.

Sitpulation 4.
Conceptual elevations shall be reviewed and approved for consistency with
the Rio Montaña Area Plan by the Planning Hearing Officer through the
public hearing process for stipulation modification prior to preliminary site
plan approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes only.
Specific development standards and requirements may be determined by
the Planning Hearing Officer and the Planning and Development
Department. – PHO is required for this stipulation, as stated. PHO must be
complete prior to preliminary site plan submittal.
Rationale: The elevations attached with this application offer several design themes such as
Rustic Spanish Colonial and Western Ranch that are consistent with the Rio Montaña Area
Plan. Key architectural features include four (4) housing design options with a diverse façade
palette and varying trim and building materials. The conceptual layout of the houses
themselves will emphasis the house facade and maintain a 10’ garage setback from the
house’s façade. Material and palette changes help to create breaks in the façade which
specify undulation and changes in the overall building faces of each side.

As detailed in the attached exhibits, Bella Rosa, will continue to provide lotted single-family homes
with some minor changes from the original stipulated site plan. Careful consideration has gone
into planning the Site to create a community that is attractively designed and aesthetically
landscaped while maintain consistency with the development guidelines of the R1-10 PRD lotting
requirements. The property will be professional designed and managed to create the necessary
open space and amenities that are desired in residential communities. Residents will be able to

Bella Rosa

8020 S. 19th Ave

APN 300-17-004M

TSC# 1394

3 | P a g e

enjoy neighborhood style living with modern finishes and private indoor/outdoor living areas.

The primary access for the community will be located off 19th Avenue and will serve as the entry
and exit point for residents. The cul-de-sac provides for enough turning radii to allow easy
maneuverability for emergency and trash collector vehicles.

Standards for the Site will continue to follow the R1-10 district with necessary site plan
enhancements to achieve a slightly higher density from the original 3.5 DU/acre. The following
table describes the proposal in comparison to the requirement of R1-10:

Standards
R1-10 PRD
Proposed
Minimum Lot Width:
45’ (unless approved by either the
design advisor or the Single-Family
Architectural Appeals Board for
demonstrating enhanced
architecture that minimizes the
impact of the garage (see Section
507 Tab A.2.12.1 B(2)(b) [sic]))
58’
Minimum Lot Depth:
None, except 100’ adjacent to
freeway or arterial
140’ (Avg)
Dwelling Unit Density (units/gross
acre)
3.5; 4.5 with bonus
18 Lots / ± 5.12-Acres = 3.5 DU/Acre
Minimum Perimeter Building Setback:
Street (front, rear, side) – 15’
Property Line (rear) – 15’ (1-story); 20’
(2-story)
Property Line (rear) – 10’ (1-story); 15’
(2-story)

Street (front, rear, side) – 15’
Property Line (rear) – 15’ (1-story);
20’ (2-story)
Property Line (rear) – 10’ (1-story);
15’ (2-story)

Landscaped Setback Adjacent to
Street:
15' average, 10' minimum
(Does not apply to lots fronting onto
perimeter streets)
15' average, 10' minimum
(Does not apply to lots fronting onto
perimeter streets)
Common Space Minimum:
5%
9%

CONCLUSION

Approval of the requested stipulation modification will allow the Project to move forward with the
development of Bella Rosa as previously discussed by the Phoenix City Council in its approval of
Z-47-17-8. This request maintains an efficient design layout that is similar to the originally approved
lot sizing and density requirements while accommodating a newly proposed layout that will
neither jeopardize the original intent nor compromise the remaining original stipulations. The
proposed zoning stipulation modification is accompanied by the following documents:

1. PHO Checklist
2. Ownership Verification form
3. Information Form
4. Preliminary Site plan
5. Conceptual Landscape Plan
6. Elevations
7. Parcel map (with project area identified)
8. Legal Description

EXHIBIT I

follows:
Official Records of Maricopa County Recorder
ADRIAN FONTES
ORDINANCE G-6560
20190150288 03/05/2019 10:49
ELECTRONIC RECORDING
G6560-5-1-1--
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STIPULATIONS APPLICABLE
TO REZONING APPLICATION Z-47-17-8 PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED BY ORDINANCE G-6405.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as
SECTION 1. The zoning stipulations applicable to the property located
approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of 19th Avenue and Latona Lane in
a portion of Section 1, Township 1 South, Range 2 East, as described more specifically in
Attachment "A," are hereby modified to read as set forth below.
STIPULATIONS:
1.
The development shall be in general conformance with the site plan date stamped
July 28, 2017, as modified by the following stipulations and approved by the
Planning and Development Department.
2.
All sidewalks shall be detached with a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped strip
located between the sidewalk and back of curb and shall include a minimum 2-
inch caliper shade trees planted a minimum of 20 feet on center or equivalent
groupings staggered along both sides of the sidewalk, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department. The landscape strip shall be installed by
the developer and maintained by the HOA.
3.
Architectural elevations shall be presented to the South Mountain Village
Planning Committee for review and comment prior to FINAL preliminary site plan
approval.

4.
Conceptual elevations shall be reviewed and approved for consistency with the
Rio Montana Area Plan by the Planning Hearing Officer through the public
hearing process for stipulation modification prior to preliminary site plan approval.
This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes only. Specific development
standards and requirements may be determined by the Planning Hearing Officer
and the Planning and Development Department. .
5.
The perimeter wall adjacent to 19th Avenue shall include minimum 3-foot offsets
at a minimum spacing of every 50 feet and material and textural differences, such
as stucco and/or split face block with a decorative element, such as tile, glass
insets, or stamped designs, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.
6.
Fence and wall materials adjacent to common areas and open space as depicted
on the site plan date stamped July 28, 2017 shall consist of wrought iron, split rail,
corral fencing, or a combination of 3 feet of solid masonry topped by open
wrought iron or a similar material, or a combination of the aforementioned fence
types and open farm fencing, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.
7.
The developer shall dedicate right-of-way totaling 25 feet for the east half of 20th
Avenue, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.
8.
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 Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.
9.
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.
10.
The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) to
future owners or tenants of the property. The form and content of such
documents shall be according to the templates and instructions provided which
have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
SECTION 2. Due to the site's specific physical conditions and the use
district granted pursuant to Ordinance G-6405, this portion of the rezoning is now
subject to the stipulations approved pursuant to Ordinance G-6405 and as modified in
Section 1 of this Ordinance. Any violation of the stipulations is a violation of the City of
2
Ordinance G-6560
t

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. Building permits shall not be issued for the subject site until
all the stipulations have been met.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the
decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity
of the remaining portions hereof.
PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 20th day of February,
2019.
ATTEST:
•)M#~~
City Cle
REVIEWED BY:
_W-=---r(¥2-==~-------City Manager
PL:tmi:LF19-0248:02/20/19:2093585v1
Exhibits:
A- Legal Description (1 Page)
B- Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)
3
MAYOR
Ordinance G-6560

EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PH0-1-18--Z-47-17-8
PARCEL NO. 1: (Tax Parcel 300-17-004L)
THE NORTHERLY 396.52 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER
OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 2 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, SOMETIMES
DESCRIBED AS THE EAST HALF OF FARM UNIT "H", ACCORDING TO THE FARM
UNIT PLAT;
EXCEPT THE EAST 33 FEET THEREOF, AS TO CONVEYED TO MARICOPA
COUNTY BY QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 105 OF DEEDS, PAGE 418, .
RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.
PARCEL NO.2: (Tax Parcei300-17-004M)
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER
OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 2.EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THE EAST HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER;
·
EXCEPT THE NORTHERLY 396.52 FEET; AND
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 590.28 FEET; AND
EXCEPT THE EAST 33 FEET AS CONVEYED TO MARICOPA COUNTY BY QUIT
CLAIM DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 105 OF DEEDS, PAGE 418, RECORDS OF
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.
4
Ordin~nce G-6560

ORDINANCE LOCATION MAP
EXHffiiTB
ZONING SUBJECT TO STIPUlATIONS: *
SUBJECT AREA: - - - -
I
.
---------~)~
il
i I,_
----....
~- ·-r
0
200
R1-10
PRD~
400
]I
!1
-j:
I
I
I •
000 Feet
N
~
7Dning Case Nmnber: PH0-1-18-Z-47-17-8
Zoning Overlay: NIA
Planning Village: South Mountain
w
~
I
w
~
<t
.WO:::
~
.... t)
I 2 I
._wl-
,._o,..._,
,...,...,
....
(I)
I
lx;
"'¢
~~..,.:.I
BROADWAY RDI---+--+-~-+-+-t-+-..-+-+-+-r--+--t
SOUTHERN AVEI-+-t-+-+-t--1-+-t---'r-r-r ~-+-+-1
BASELINE RD·1
..1
I
,' I ,1 I
,1 ,
,1
I
,I
11
L.,
00881 NS RD I
I
I \, I
I I
I
I
)
\ \ \ ' \,__ PH0-1-18--Z-47-11-8
NOT TO SCALE
Drawn Date: 1124/2019
V""""\p<ki\S-IDeparlmerrt Shs<E!I,Info<mati<m Sy;iem$\PLGIS\ts_'JS,am\Co<'"'Jur>clions\Zoning\Suppi!Asps_Ordl\Aaps\ZJ19_0r<I\2-:W-1S\PH0.1-18--Z-4l-17-8.,...,..,
5
Ordinance G-6560

EXHIBIT II

EXHIBIT C

S 19TH AVE
PRIVATE
S 20TH LN
S 20TH DR
W DESERT LN
W IAN DR
S 18TH AVE
W SOUTH MOUNTAIN AVE
S 18TH LN
S 21ST DR
W MAGDALENA LN
W HARWELL RD
S 20TH AVE
W LATONA LN
W PRIVATE RD
S PRIVATE
Maricopa County Assessor's Office
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8
Property Location: Approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of
19th Avenue and Latona Lane
0
240
480
120
Feet ´

EXHIBIT D

S 19TH AVE
PRIVATE
S 20TH LN
S 20TH DR
W DESERT LN
W IAN DR
S 18TH AVE
W SOUTH MOUNTAIN AVE
S 18TH LN
S 21ST DR
W MAGDALENA LN
W HARWELL RD
S 20TH AVE
W LATONA LN
W PRIVATE RD
S PRIVATE
S-1
R1-10*
R1-10*
R1-10 PRD*
R1-10*
R1-18*
C-2*
Maricopa County Assessor's Office
Planning & Development Department
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8
Property Location: Approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of
19th Avenue and Latona Lane
0
240
480
120
Feet ´

EXHIBIT E

EXHIBIT F

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
APPLICANT'S NAME:
DATE:
REVISION DATES:
REQUESTED CHANGE:
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
ZONING MAP
MULTIPLES PERMITTED
CONVENTIONAL OPTION
* UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
FROM:
TO:
BROADWAY RD
BASELINE RD
DOBBINS RD
27TH AVE
19TH AVE
7TH AVE
CENTRAL AVE
7TH ST
16TH ST
40TH ST
48TH ST
24TH ST
32ND ST
SOUTHERN AVE
I-10
APPLICATION NO.
Richard Jellies, The Lead Group
Z-47-17
11.15 Acres
08/11/2017
QS 01-24
D-7
SOUTH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE
Z-47-17
1901
1830
8316
8312
8308
1820
1819
1815
1811
1807
1804
1803
1802
1729
1728
1725
1724
1721
7815
7823
7819
8020
1947
1935
1905
1843
7809
2012
2013
8008
8004
2008
7818
7814
7810
2009
2004
2005
7827
7811
2108
7805
7809
7813
7816
7812
7808
7813
2111
7825
2110
7821
7817
2106
8019
8015
7828
7824
7820
2017
2016
8030
2111
2107
8020
8115
8111
8012
8107
8023
7704
2106
2050
2020
8250
8240
8230
1905
1906
S 20T
H LN
S 19TH AVE
W HARWELL RD
S 20TH
AVE
W LATONA LN
S 20
TH DR
R1-18
Z-96-97
R1-10*
Z-58-07
C-2*
Z-101-76
C-2*
Z-110-07
S-1
R1-10*
Z-66-01
S-1
Z-96-97
PHO3-11
R1-18*
Z-171-99
R1-10
Z-109-00
R1-10 *
Z-121-03
300
0
300
150
Feet
R:\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2017\Z-47-17.mxd
S-1, R1-10, R1-18
R1-10
39
N/A, 6, 3
8, 5, 2
50
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8
S-1 (8.41 a.c.)
R1-10 (1.49 a.c.)
R1-18 (1.25 a.c.)
R1-10 (11.15 a.c.)

EXHIBIT J

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8

Date of VPC Meeting
August 9, 2022
Planning Hearing Officer
Hearing Date
August 17, 2022
Request
1) Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance with the site plan date stamped July 28,
2017
2) Review of conceptual elevations by the Planning
Hearing Officer per Stipulation 4
Location
130 feet north of the northwest corner of 19th Avenue and
Latona Lane
VPC Recommendation
Approval
VPC Vote
7-4; Members Alvarez, Brooks, Busching, Montoya,
Shepard, Marchuk and Daniels in favor. Coleman,
Holmerud, Muhammad Roque, and Viera opposed.
VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

8 members of the public registered to speak on this item.

Dean Chiarelli, Mike Josic, Cheverra Trillo, Gina Johnson, Nick Torrez, Ravi Sharma
donated time to Jewel Clark.

Fatima Muhammad Roque asked what community outdoor areas and spaces were
being provided for the community. Chuck Kennedy said that large retention basins,
limited access to 20th Avenue, shade structures, picnic tables, and possible barbecue
areas may be provided.

Dr. George Brooks asked how the site is capturing new resources to maximize
efficiency, such as higher SEER rated units, Energy Star ratings, and electric vehicle
outlets. Mr. Kennedy mentioned they are providing water efficient fixtures, drought
tolerant planting, and landscaping that provides shade.

Chair Tamala Daniels stated a HERS rating of 55 or lower is a good energy efficient
number. Dr. Brooks asked what the HERS rating was for the proposed homes. Mr.
Kennedy answered they didn’t have one at this stage

Dr. Brooks asked if the applicant read the South Phoenix Food Plan. Chuck Kennedy
stated they did not.

Gene Holmerud asked if the developer is providing EV vehicle outlets in the homes.
Mr. Valencia mentioned that things like EV outlets could be options the developer can
provide but the city would not be able to enforce them. Gene Holmerud mentioned that
would be one way to make incremental change.

Dr. Viera asked if more energy efficient items could be requested by the committee
even if the city cannot enforce them instead of waiting five or more years for things to be
required. Mr. Valencia answered that the committee can make any recommendation
they’d like but advised to make enforceable stipulations to avoid being set up for
disappointment. Gene Holmerud asked for examples of what the committee could
stipulate. Mr. Valencia stated open space, landscaping, tree caliper size, and tree
spacing to name a few.

Kevin Zenk wanted to clarify that he never received a copy of the Food Action Plan to
review. Mr. Valencia said he would forward the Food Action plan to the applicant. Dr.
Viera asked that the Climate Action Plan be forwarded too.

Chair Daniels asked if the streets would be tree lined. Kevin Zenk said they would be.

Chair Daniels asked for the original site plan to be showed and why the emergency
access to 20th was removed from the new site plan. Kevin Zenk stated there was
conversation with the Fire department and they said the cul-de-sac turnaround radius
met fire requirements. This would also allow for more retention and open space area.

Chair Daniels asked staff if the Street Transportation Department was okay with only
one access point. Mr. Valencia answered that a technical appeal would be required
because the streets are not connecting. Mr. Valencia added that Fire is okay with the
cul-de-sac radius because the cul-de-sac radius is designed with a fire truck being able
to turn around in mind. Connecting the street and gating it off would not count as
connectivity but connecting it does result in less open space. Mr. Valencia also showed
an aerial to point out that 20th avenue does not connect any further north and how 19th
avenue has the bigger build out and is more connected.

Chair Daniels asked if the cul-de-sac triggers the technical appeal. Mr. Valencia
answered that it triggers two technical appeals. One for having an overlength distance
to the cul-de-sac from 19th Avenue and one for not connecting to 20th Avenue. Chair
Daniels asked if Streets was okay with that. Mr. Valencia replied that he did not
receive any comments from Streets because this is a PHO case and street
correspondence more than likely was sent to the Hearing Officer.

Chair Daniels asked if the developer had met with the PHO already. Mr. Valencia said
that has not happened yet because the public hearing for PHO is after the Village.
Recommendations made at the Village will be forwarded to the PHO for their analysis.

Gene Holmerud asked if a light duty fence for fire to smash through could be
constructed. Mr. Valencia said the original proposal had an emergency gate and fire

could gain access through what’s called a Knox box. Crashing through a fence would
possibly be a last resort.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Erin Hegedus was concerned that there are no real heat mitigations proposed. Ms.
Hegedus talked about an open SRP irrigation canal across on 19th Avenue. There are
numerous crashes that happen on 19th Avenue and Southern because it is a two-lane
street that goes into a swerve. She expressed that there is a lack of infrastructure in the
area to support the density that keeps coming in the area and that here are many
reports of crashes in the irrigation ditch across from the site. Ms. Hegedus also
expressed concerns with the lack of tree canopy, landscape enhancements, and
sidewalk details not being shown on the plans.

Jewel Clark stated that the original development had three houses per acre and that
anything with higher density is not keeping in character with the area. Mrs. Clark asked
for the city to keep the density to the original approval and asked for greater street
setbacks from the S-1 homes across the street. Mrs. Clark stated dropping the density
would allow for the greater setbacks to be achieved and for an even greater open space
percentage which is more consistent with the surrounding area. Mrs. Clark also brought
up how all the existing and recently approved projects in the area are single-story in
height and was not sure why the applicant is proposing two-story homes without
showing any of those elevations. Mrs. Clark stated the Rio Montaña Area Plan calls for
limited two-story homes, yet the applicant has given no indication of how many they
intend to provide. Mrs. Clark said there is enough lacking to either continue or deny the
request, an inconsistency with the character of the Rio Montaña Area Plan, and lack of
commitment to heat mitigation from the applicant’s proposal. Mrs. Clark mentioned their
neighborhood area feels cooler because of the amount of open space there is, and as a
strong supporter of sustainability she would like to see more requirements being placed
on these final products since the site was only recently acquired in April there should be
more time to review and improve the proposal. Mrs. Clark commented on the elevations
and how the Rio Montaña Area Plan not only mentions garages be recessed 10-feet
back from the front, but also calls for alley and side loaded garages. Mrs. Clark finished
her remarks summarizing that the key issues are density, open space, setbacks, and
single-story if possible.

APPLICANT RESPONSE

Kevin Zenk said that they submitted a landscape plan showing tree lined streets as well
as the necessary vegetation in the landscape strips, but that it was denied, and they
were told it was not needed. As for density and open space they are more than double
what is required in R1-10 PRD. Density of 3.5 du/ac is within what is allowed in R1-10
PRD zoning and the Rio Montaña Area Plan. Mr. Zenk said they are willing to be
stipulated to Energy Star conformance and to work with the utility and development
teams to ensure theses homes are sustainable and energy efficient.

COMMITTEE DISCUSSION

Marcia Busching appreciated all the public and committee comments including
irrigation, open space, and tree lined streets. She reminded the committee that
unfortunately the request being presented is to provide comments for a modification to a
previously approved site plan and as a result she is in favor of the item.

Kay Shepard agreed with Marcia Bushing and stated that she was ready to make a
motion.

MOTION:

Kay Shepard motioned to approve case PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8 as filed. Marcia
Busching seconded the motion to approve.

VOTE:

7-4, motion passed; Members Alvarez, Brooks, Busching, Montoya, Shepard, Marchuk,
and Daniels in favor. Coleman, Holmerud, Muhammad Roque, and Viera opposed. Mr.
Holmerud stated with the site being purchased in April it seemed rushed together.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

1) Note that this item is related to Item #8 (Review and Comment Item - regarding
Rezoning Case No. PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8) heard on this same agenda. See
documents regarding that item and case file for further discussion on these
items.

EXHIBIT K

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
REVIEW AND COMMENT
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8

Date of VPC Meeting
August 9, 2022
Location
130 feet north of the northwest corner of 19th Avenue and
Latona Lane
VPC Recommendation
Stipulation 3 met and two recommendations provided to
staff regarding staggered lots and front porches
VPC Vote
11-0; Members Alvarez, Brooks, Busching, Coleman,
Holmerud, Montoya, Muhammad Roque, Shepard, Viera,
Marchuk, and Daniels in favor.
VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Mr. Valencia mentioned Stipulations 3 and 4 of the underlying case created
redundancy. Stipulation 3 for review and comment would have less weight than
providing PHO comments for their review as part of Stipulation 4. Mr. Valencia asked
the committee if they would like to provide elevation comments to the PHO they should
do so as part of this discussion, unless they would rather have the applicant come back
to them prior to final site plan approval.

Chair Daniels stated that we don’t really have elevations.

Mr. Valencia said exactly and that is why the committee could be specific as to what
they would like to achieve from the elevations such as height, or side loaded garages.

Marcia Bushing asked for clarification on the elevations on pages 72 and 73 of the
packet and if there are only four elevations being proposed.

Kevin Zenk answered that those are the preferred conceptual elevations.

Mr. Valencia shared two additional elevations for a single-story home that were emailed
by the applicant after the packet had been sent out and asked the applicant if they had
any two-story homes proposed. Chuck Kennedy answered that the majority would be
single-story, but they wanted to allow some flexibility to be able to build two-story in
case a buyer wanted additional floor area.

Mr. Valencia reminded the committee that if they wanted to restrict the heights or
certain lots to be a certain height this would be the time to provide that information.

Chair Daniels said she did not have an issue with height as it creates diversity, but she
did want to go over side loaded garages and characteristics for the Rio Montaña area
plan while going over the elevations.

Mr. Valencia presented the elevations while bringing out that some key areas include
reduction of garage dominance which could be done by stepping back the garage which
all the elevations seem to indicate. Mr. Valencia stated that side loaded garages are
closer to the front property line but break up garage dominance because it has windows
and acts like a faux front. Mr. Valencia stated that none of the elevations indicate side
loaded garages so of the committee wants that they will have to give some specifics
such as percentage of elevations to provide that option. Mr. Valencia next mentioned
front porches are also characteristic of the Rio Montaña Area Plan and that all the
proposed elevations do not indicate porches or their dimensions. All elevations indicate
pitched roofs which Mr. Valencia said was another Rio Montaña Area Plan character
trait. As well as the variety of materials being proposed.

Chair Daniels asked how much percentage could be asked for on porches. Mr.
Valencia cited earlier cases where the committee stipulated 75 percent of the
elevations to have porches.

Chair Daniels stated she would like to see front porches on the elevations and asked if
side loaded garages create a staggering effect. Mr. Valencia replied that a staggering
effect is created by side loaded garages because the building projects forward on some
lots while others are further back.

Chair Daniels asked for side loaded garages and for porches on 75 percent of the
elevations since the applicant is also seeking the technical appeals creating a win-win
situation.

Kevin Zenk mentioned that side loaded garages would be difficult to achieve on lots of
this width because of turning radius requirements. Mr. Zenk added that they are
accepting of the front porch requirements as it does create more massing and reduces
the prominence of the garage. Chair Daniels replied that she has seen smaller lots
with side loaded garages.

Gene Holmerud asked if the elevations are coming back for them to review. Mr.
Valencia stated if the committee wants the applicant to come back with elevations as
Stipulation 3 of the underlying case, then the comments they provide are under no
guarantee of being implemented during site review. If the committee opts to provide
comments to the PHO, then the PHO can use those comments as part of their review.
Although there is no guarantee that the PHO will enact the committees’ comments, the
committees’ comments hold more weight in that forum. Gene Holmerud stated that if a
motion is made then it should be to provide comments to the PHO.

MOTION 1

Mr. Valencia asked if the motion the committee wanted was to consider Stipulation 3
met and to provide elevation comments to staff to include requiring 25 percent of the
elevations to accommodate side loaded garages and 75 percent of the elevations to
provide front porches, with porches to be designed consistent with recommendations in
the Rio Montaña Area Plan, with a minimum 6-foot depth and a minimum 60 square-feet
in area.

Gene Holmerud agreed and made that motion. No second was provided for this
motion. The motion failed.

MOTION 2

Kay Shepard stated that side loaded garages would not look appealing due to the
amount of concrete that would be required for the driveway and maneuvering area on
lots of this width. Chair Daniels agreed with Kay Shepard and asked if they could still
stagger the houses. Mr. Valencia answered that the lots are about 140 feet in depth
and that there is that opportunity to create undulation. Kay Shepard stated that she
liked the staggered idea.

Ms. Shepard made a motion to consider Stipulation 3 of PHO-2-22-Z-47-17-8 met and
to provide two recommendations to staff:

1) The lots in the subdivision shall be staggered.

2) 75 percent of the elevations shall provide covered porches. Porches shall be
consistent with recommendations in the Rio Montaña Area plan and provide a
minimum of six-foot depth and a minimum sixty square feet in area.

Marcia Busching seconded the motion.

VOTE:

11-0; Members Alvarez, Brooks, Busching, Coleman, Holmerud, Montoya, Muhammad
Roque, Shepard, Viera, Marchuk, and Daniels in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

1) Note that this item was advertised and intended to be heard as a ‘Review and
Comment’ item and therefore, no motion and vote was required. However, there
is no impact from the VPC having taken a motion and vote and the
recommendations will be provided to staff regardless.

2) Note that this item is related to Item #7 (Rezoning Case No. PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-
8) heard on this same agenda. See documents regarding that item and case file
for further discussion on these items.

3) The VPC did not provide specific dimensions for the staggering of front yard
setback lines. However, an example of this staggering is depicted in Figures 71
and 72 on page 39 (42 in PDF) of the Rio Montaña Area Plan and is also
mentioned as an option in the Single-Family Design Review Checklist (SFDR).

4) The Rio Montaña Area Plan, page 22 (25 in PDF), mentions “providing deep
overhangs and covered porches on residential buildings”. Although no specific
dimensions are given, note that the nearby Baseline Area Overlay District
(BAOD) provides recommended dimensions in Section 651.E.3.b.(4).

EXHIBIT L

REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Adam Stranieri, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Bradley Wylam, Planner I, Assisting

August 17, 2022

ITEM NO: 5

DISTRICT 8
SUBJECT:

Application #:
PHO-2-22--Z-47-17-8
Location:
Approximately 130 feet north of the northwest corner of 19th
Avenue and Latona Lane
Zoning:
R1-10
Acreage:
5.12
Request:
1) Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance with the site plan date stamped July 28,
2017.
2) Review of conceptual elevations by the Planning Hearing
Officer per Stipulation 4.
Applicant:
Terrascape Consulting LLC
Owner:

Bella Rosa Partners LLC
Representative: Terrascape Consulting LLC

ACTIONS:

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer
recommended approval with modifications and additional stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The South Mountain
Village Planning Committee heard this request on August 9, 2022 and
recommended approval by a vote of 7-4.

DISCUSSION:

Kevin Zenk, representative with Terrascape Consulting, reviewed the subject site
and surrounding uses. He provided an overview of the original rezoning case and
noted that both parcels in the original rezoning case area have changed
ownership and will be developed separately. He reviewed the proposed
conceptual site plan, which depicts an 18-unit single-family subdivision at
approximately 3.51 dwelling units per gross acre. He stated that a single street
with a cul-de-sac is proposed and that approximately 9% of the gross area would
be reserved as common open space. He stated that the lot widths at
approximately 58 feet are similar to the lot sizes on the stipulated site plan. He
provided an overview of the proposed elevations and stated that the elevations
are consistent with design guidelines from the Rio Montaña Area Plan, including

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 2

staggered lots with various front setbacks and a variety of building materials. He
noted that only single-story elevations were submitted but noted that he hopes to
include a two-story elevations in the final development of the subdivision. He
noted that the Rio Montaña Area Plan states that houses with varying heights are
encouraged to create housing diversity. He stated that landscaping was
discussed at the South Mountain Village Planning Committee (VPC) and
displayed a conceptual landscape plan that depicts landscaping along streets.

Michael Josic, adjacent property owner to the west speaking in opposition,
expressed concerns regarding privacy and wished to eliminate all two-story
homes from the western side of the subdivision. He specified that Lots 8, 9, 10,
and 11 should be limited to single-story development only.

Jewel Clark, adjacent property owner to the west speaking in opposition, stated
that she is representing multiple property owners in the surrounding area,
including Miguel Rubio and Ravinder Sharma, who also own property adjacent to
the subject site. She stated that the stipulated site plan depicts 3.03 dwelling
units per gross acre, compared to the 3.51 dwelling units per gross acre currently
proposed, and noted that the density would be greater than that approved in two
recent rezoning cases at the southeast and southwest corners of 19th Avenue
and South Mountain, approximately 600 feet south of the subject site. She stated
that the proposed density is out of character with the surrounding community,
which consists of large lot residences that are zoned S-1. She stated that the
development should be limited to approximately 3 dwelling units per acre,
consistent with the stipulated site plan. She stated that the Rio Montaña Area
Plan states that the area is to be preserved with open space and create an area
that feels rural. She noted that active agriculture is present in the surrounding
area. She stated that by reducing the number of units, increased open space and
perimeter setbacks could be introduced that may ease neighbors’ concerns. She
stated that she would like the development to consist of single-story units only,
which would match the character of the area. She noted that there are no two-
story residences near the property and that the two subdivisions recently
approved to the south are limited to one story. She stated that the Rio Montaña
Area Plan notes that two-story development should be limited. She reiterated that
the density of 3.51 dwelling units per gross acre significantly deviates from the
density on the stipulated site plan and noted that she hoped the site would be
limited to single-story development. She stated that the lack of two-story
elevations in the applicant’s submittals is concerning.

Mr. Zenk stated that the developer is willing to stipulate that Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11
are to be limited to single-story development, as recommended by Mr. Josic. He
stated that the Rio Montaña Area Plan notes that a diversity of building heights is
recommended. He stated that the two-story residences are proposed to be
staggered in development and not located directly adjacent to other two-story

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 3

units. He stated that the development would be in conformance with the density
and height permitted by the R1-10 zoning district.

Adam Stranieri, Planning Hearing Officer, stated that 12 letters in opposition
were received prior to the hearing and noted that Ms. Clark’s letter comprised the
text of 11 of those letters. He stated that the concerns noted in the
correspondence include the increased density, building height, and reduction in
open space. He provided an overview of the South Mountain Village Planning
Committee (VPC) recommendation, which recommended approval by a vote of
7-4. He noted that the VPC made two recommendations during a “review and
comment” item regarding architectural elevations per Stipulation 3. He noted that
they recommended adding a stipulation that front setbacks be staggered and
requiring front porches. He noted that the VPC recommendations were
addressed in Mr. Zenk’s presentation. He stated that Stipulations 3 and 4 are
redundant and that he would consider the VPC’s recommendations for
Stipulation 3 made in conjunction with the recommendation on the PHO item. He
stated none of the application materials provided by the applicant discuss or
propose two-story buildings and that the conceptual elevations did not include
any two-story home designs. He stated that he is not comfortable recommending
any stipulation that infers that two-story development would be permitted due to
the lack of two-story elevations. He also stated that the intent of Stipulation 4 was
to address the lack of elevations in the original rezoning case and require the
applicant to provide elevations, when available, through a public hearing process.
He stated that he does not feel the stipulation has been complied with if the
applicant did not provide any two-story elevations and now wants approval for
such homes. He stated that he would be comfortable recommending a
continuance to allow the applicant to provide elevations for the two-story homes
they have discussed, or alternately he would be comfortable providing a
recommendation based solely on the single-story elevations provided. He noted
that a general conformance stipulation to solely single-story elevations would not
allow the applicant to construct two-story homes without a subsequent PHO case
to modify that stipulation to include those designs. He discussed the use of
‘general conformance’ as a term in zoning stipulations. Mr. Zenk stated that he
would prefer to move forward with a recommendation based on the conceptual
building elevations provided.

Mr. Stranieri provided an overview of the proposed conceptual site plan and
stated that the density depicted consists of approximately two more units than
what would be permitted using the density shown on the stipulated site plan. He
stated that the change is modest and remains below the maximum permitted
density in the R1-10 zoning district. He stated that approximately 9% open space
is depicted on the proposed conceptual site plan, which is approximately twice
the minimum open space required by the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that a
technical appeal may be required regarding the termination of the cul-de-sac on
the west portion of the site. Scott Lucas, representative with Terrascape

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 4

Consulting, stated that the technical appeal has not been applied for, but would
be following the results of the PHO process.

Mr. Stranieri recommended approval of the request to modify Stipulation 1 with a
modification to provide more standard language. He stated that the proposed
conceptual elevations depict a variety of building materials, multiple building
colors, variation in roof design, and multiple architectural features such as wood
posts, gable ornamentation, varied window size, and decorative garage panels.
He stated that the staggered front setbacks, which was recommended by the
South Mountain VPC and recommended in the Rio Montaña Area Plan is
recommended for approval as a new sub-stipulation of Stipulation 1. He stated
that the stipulation would state that the front setback is to be staggered a
minimum of 4 feet compared to adjacent lots. He stated that the South Mountain
VPC recommendation requiring front porches is recommended for approval. He
stated that this stipulation would follow standard language drawn from the
Baseline Area Overlay District. He recommended that Stipulation 4 regarding the
review and approval of conceptual elevations be replaced with a standard
language general conformance stipulation with the elevations date stamped
August 17, 2022. He requested that staff combine the multiple elevations
submitted throughout the hearing process under a single cover and date stamp
for simplicity. He stated that the Street Transportation Department
recommended an additional stipulation regarding dedications, detached
sidewalks, and landscaping along 19th Avenue.

Mr. Josic asked a question regarding an open irrigation canal on the west side of
19th Avenue. Mr. Lucas stated that the drainage would be updated through street
improvements along the subject site’s frontage. Mr. Stranieri noted that the
proposed conceptual site plan approved by the PHO would not have an impact
on any existing Subdivision or Zoning Ordinance technical requirements that may
be implemented as the developer continues through the plan review process.

FINDINGS:

1) The South Mountain Village Planning Committee heard two agenda items
regarding this case at their August 9, 2022 meeting. The first (Agenda
Item #7) was the PHO request itself. The second (Agenda Item #8) was
for review and comment on architectural elevations per the requirements
of Stipulation 3. Note that Stipulation 3 is redundant of, and less
restrictive than, the requirement for PHO review of conceptual elevations
required by Stipulation 4. However, during the review and comment item,
the VPC made two recommendations regarding the provision of staggered
front setbacks and front porches. These recommendations are addressed
in these findings along with the consideration paid to the VPC’s discussion
during the PHO request itself.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 5

2) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance with
the site plan is recommended for approval with modifications to provide
more standard conformance language and to add a new sub-stipulation
requiring staggered front setbacks.

The subject property includes only the southern 5.12 gross acres of the
11.15 gross acres rezoned in the original case. The stipulated site plan
depicted a 32-unit single-family subdivision at approximately 3.03 dwelling
units per gross acre and approximately 13.9% open space. Units were
arranged around four cul-de-sacs oriented north/south, with most of the
open space along the west property line. The street running east/west
through the site terminated in an emergency gate along the west property
line.

The proposed conceptual site plan depicts an 18-unit single-family
subdivision at approximately 3.51 dwelling units per gross acre, with
approximately 9% open space. Units are arranged along a street running
east/west through the site. The street terminates in a cul-de-sac along the
west property line. Most of the open space is along the west property line.
The proposal is substantially similar to the stipulated site plan, with the
caveat that it is designed with less than half of the original area. The
density remains below, and the open space above, Ordinance standards.
The proposal is compatible with existing development in the surrounding
area.

A new sub-stipulation is recommended requiring staggered front setbacks.
This recommendation is consistent with the recommendation of the South
Mountain Village Planning Committee. It is also consistent with design
recommendations in the Rio Montaña Area Plan (Page 39, Figure 71).

3) The applicant submitted conceptual elevations for review and approval per
the requirements of Stipulation 4. The stipulation has been complied with
and is recommended to be deleted and replaced with a standard language
stipulation for general conformance to the elevations provided. Stipulation
4 states that the elevations submitted should be consistent with
recommendations in the Rio Montaña Area Plan. The elevations depict a
variety of building materials (stone façade, composite siding, wood
elements, brick veneer), multiple building colors, variation in roof design,
and multiple architectural features (wood posts, gable ornamentation,
varied window sizes, decorative garage panels). This diversity is
consistent with the Rio Montaña Area Plan and many of the design
choices are compatible with the rural and agricultural character described
in the plan.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 6

4) An additional stipulation is recommended to require front porches to be
provided per the requirements of the Baseline Area Overlay District
(651.E.3.b.(4)). This recommendation is consistent with the
recommendation of the South Mountain Village Planning Committee. It is
also consistent with the Rio Montaña Area Plan (Page 22; Page 23; Page
44, Figures 97 and 100) and the intent of Stipulation 4.

5) The Street Transportation Department recommends one additional
stipulation addressing required dedications, detached sidewalks, and
landscaping along 19th Avenue. This stipulation is recommended for
inclusion.

19th Avenue is identified on the City Council Approved Street
Classification Map as a D-Section Arterial roadway. This cross section
requires a total right-of-way dedication of 50-feet where the last 10-feet
may consider a 10-foot-wide sidewalk easement. Within the
ROW/sidewalk easement, an 11-foot-wide landscape strip located
between back of curb and sidewalk is required to create a separated
detached sidewalk and allow planting space for trees to mature and to
adequately shade the sidewalk.

While Stipulation 2 (not a part of this request) addresses detached
sidewalks, requiring a minimum 5-foot-wide landscape strip between back
of curb and sidewalk, this does not override the City Council approved
Street Classification Map. While all other detached sidewalks within the
development may allow the 5-foot-wide landscape strip, 19th Avenue
cannot and shall comply with the recommended stipulation as described.

6) 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.

STIPULATIONS:

A. THE SITE PLAN SHALL DEPICT STAGGERED FRONT
SETBACKS FOR COVERED BUILDING ELEMENTS, SUCH THAT
ANY TWO ADJACENT LOTS SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM
VARIATION IN FRONT SETBACK OF 4 FEET.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 7

3.
Architectural elevations shall be presented to the South Mountain Village
Planning Committee for review and comment prior to final site plan
approval.

THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH
THE ELEVATIONS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 17, 2022, AS MODIFIED
BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 8

9.
7.
The developer shall dedicate right-of-way totaling 25 feet for the east half
of 20th Avenue, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of August 17, 2022
Application PHO-2-22—Z-47-17-8
Page 9

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 Les Scott at leslie.scott@phoenix.gov or 602-376-3981
or TTY: 7-1-1.