Attachment E - VPC Summary-Rec2 - Z-138-F-83-5.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2022-09-07)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 24607 characters
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary 
Z-138-F-83-5
Date of VPC Meeting 
July 13, 2022 
Request From:  
PUD PCD   
Request To:  
PUD PCD 
Proposed Use: 
Major Amendment to the DC Ranch PCD to allow an 
amendment to the Aldea Centre PUD to allow 
multifamily residential 
Location 
Northwest corner of 99th Avenue and 
Missouri Avenue 
VPC Recommendation 
Approval, per the staff recommendation  
VPC Vote 
6-4
VPC DISCUSSION: 
The Maryvale Village Planning Commission heard this case on May 11, 2022 and 
recommended denial by a 6-1 vote; however, after the meeting, it was discovered that 
the applicant failed to meet the notification requirements outlined in the rezoning 
process packet. The applicant returned to the Village Planning Committee for possible 
recommendation at the next available meeting date.  
Ed Bull, representing the applicant with Burch and Cracchiolo, provided an overview of 
the proposed rezoning application Z-138-F-83-5. Mr. Bull stated that the applicant would 
like to be a part of the solution for housing for essential workers and stated that this 
would have been the second time in over 40 years that his paralegal has missed 
sending out the notification letters when hundreds are sent every year. Mr. Bull 
described the surrounding land uses including commercial services to the south and 
office and industrial uses to the west and summarized the proposed rental rates for the 
Streamliner Aldea units to the north and the Cabana Aldea units to the south of the 
subject site. Mr. Bull added that Greenlight provides quality and safe housing for 
essential workers with numerous amenities on site and displayed the enhanced 
architectural features on Cabana Aldea which included contrasting colors and displayed 
the proposed Streamliner Aldea apartments which would be more affordable than the 
Cabana Aldea apartments but would still offer a wide range of amenities. Mr. Bull added 
that there is a proposed development called Vision 2 north of Aldea Centre PUD which 
would create additional employment opportunities within the proximity of the subject 
area and noted that within ten miles of the subject site there are over 9,200 businesses 
that require employees, which would require additional housing. Mr. Bull displayed the 
Attachment E

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
number of schools, hospitals, and urgent care/emergency rooms within the surrounding 
area and defined essential works that would include healthcare workers, retail, 
construction, government, and teachers, and summarized the careers that residents of 
Cabana 99th and noted the number of essential works. Mr. Bull concluded his 
presentation by summarizing the average income of the Maryvale Village and stating 
that the proposed development would help alleviate the housing crisis within the Village, 
stating that the applicant agrees with the staff findings and that the applicant accepts 
the proposed stipulations.  
 
Questions from the committee:  
Saundra Cole asked if the renters of the proposed multifamily development would have 
to pay extra for the proposed amenities on site. Mr. Bull stated that renters will not have 
to pay extra for any amenities as the fee is included in the rent. Ms. Cole asked how the 
property would be maintained in the future. Mr. Bull stated that maintenance of all the 
amenities and the buildings are essential to Greenlight and ensures that the 
development will be maintained for numerous years.  
 
Vice Chair Jeff O’Toole asked for clarification on the total number of units proposed at 
the previous meeting. Mr. Bull stated that the number of units within the proposed 
development is the same as previously proposed with 282 units for the Streamliner 
Aldea project and 257 in the Cabana Aldea apartment complex which would make a 
total of 539 units. Vice Chair O’Toole asked for clarification on how the applicant would 
be breaking even on cost if the proposed rent rates have changed. Mr. Bull stated that 
it depends on the market for housing and materials and noted that the materials, 
landscaping style, and features are the same as Cabana 99th.  
 
Warren Norgaard stated that the applicant presented the cost for luxury units in the 
valley would be but that there was no comparison to the units in the Maryvale Village. 
Mr. Norgaard asked what the guarantee would be for the proposed rents to remain the 
same after the project is completed and available for the public. Mr. Bull stated that the 
rents that were presented in the applicant presentation were from the Maryvale Village 
and not valley wide.   
 
JJ Bazzi asked who the owner would be in the long run and asked if Greenlight had any 
intentions of selling the development after it was completed. Mr. Bull stated that 
Greenlight has numerous investors but that he could not guarantee that Greenlight 
would own the development forever but that they can ensure that whoever the owner 
would be in the future, it will be maintained.  
 
Joe Barba stated that he was in favor of more affordable housing and wanted to know 
how long Greenlight typically owns their properties before selling them off to other 
investors. Mr. Bull stated that Rob Lyles, with Greenlight, has stated that the 
developments are designed to accommodate essential workers for attainable housing. 
Mr. Bull added that the design would ensure that the project remains affordable. Mr. 
Barba asked what the ownership timeframe was for the last project that was 
constructed by Greenlight. Rob Lyles, with Greenlight, stated that the Streamliner 
Aldea has been designed to be a long-term property of Greenlight. Mr. Barba asked if 
other Streamliner projects have been built within the city. Mr. Lyles stated that there is 
a proposed development on 67th Avenue and McDowell Road but that it has not started 
construction, there is another development on 16th Street and Polk. Mr. Lyles stated 
that the configuration of the building would allow them to be more affordable.  Mr.

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Barba stated that there have been concerns with properties being flipped due to the 
increase in apartment demand. Mr. Lyles stated one of their investment partners has 
an affordable housing fund of one billion dollars in Utah and that it restricts the reselling 
of projects from four to seven years. Mr. Bull added that the project on 67th Avenue 
and McDowell Road would also be a Streamliner project and that the design is meant to 
serve the essential worker community.  
 
Mr. Bazzi stated that he would like some sort of guarantee that the applicant will be 
fulfilling a need in the community and would like to add some sort of stipulation that 
would ensure that a portion of the project will remain attainable housing. Mr. Bull stated 
that there aren’t any zoning stipulations that would ensure that a portion of the project 
remains affordable housing but noted that Greenlight is committed to providing 
attainable housing designs so that even if the owner changes, the rent will still be 
attainable. Mr. Bazzi stated that housing is an important need within the community. 
Chair Gene Derie stated that the City of Phoenix cannot impose rent control. Sarah 
Stockham, staff, confirmed that rent cannot be controlled via a rezoning stipulation but 
Committee Member Bazzi might have been referencing a deed restriction. Mr. Bazzi 
confirmed that he was referring to a deed restriction that would allow for a certain 
portion of the project to remain attainable.  
 
Ms. Cole stated that citizens within the Maryvale Village are protective of one another 
and that is why the committee members have numerous questions to ensure that the 
proposed project is adequately serving the community.   
 
Viri Hernandez stated that there is a Housing Plan within the City of Phoenix and 
stated that there has been a conversation to ensure that a certain percentage of 
housing is affordable but without rent control. Ms. Hernandez asked staff how the City of 
Phoenix ensures that these affordable housing projects are being completed and are 
successful. Ms. Stockham, staff, stated that Mayor Gallego provided an explicit goal of 
50,000 units by 2030 and part of the breakdown included market rate and affordable 
units. Ms. Stockham stated that one example of the City providing workforce housing is 
through the RFP process of City-owned land. Ms. Hernandez asked if there were any 
percentages out of the 50,000 units that would have to be market rate and affordable. 
Ms. Stockham stated that the Housing Phoenix Plan proposed a total number of units, 
total of which was a combination of market-rate and affordable units. Mr. Hernandez 
asked if any department is keeping track of the type of housing that is being developed 
within the City of Phoenix. Ms. Stockham stated that the Housing Department is 
keeping track of the number and type of units and that they have a dashboard on their 
website. Ms. Hernandez asked if the dashboard was a public dashboard for anyone to 
view. Ms. Stockham confirmed that the dashboard is public. Ms. Hernandez asked if 
the units were separated by village and by different housing types. Ms. Stockham 
stated that the dashboard was not separated by the village but that she would have to 
research if there were any distinctions in the type of housing. Ms. Hernandez asked 
how the City is basing affordability. Ms. Stockham stated that she is not with the 
Housing Department so she would not be the best person to answer the question. Mr. 
Bull stated that if an individual is paying more than thirty percent of their income on 
housing, then they would be considered overpaying for housing. Ms. Hernandez stated 
that Maricopa County has been one of the counties with the highest inflation, highest 
evictions, and homelessness rates and stated that she wanted to review how the City 
has been combating the housing shortage and the lack of housing affordability.

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Ken DuBose stated that he had visited Cabana 99th located on 99th Avenue, analyzed 
the current land uses within the surrounding area and noted that the term “streamline 
rents” was a new term for him. Mr. DuBose stated that in the past, the Committee hadn’t 
imagined multifamily being developed on the northwest corner of 99th Avenue and 
Missouri Avenue, but due to the commercial uses to the south and the warehousing 
uses to the west, he stated that multifamily would be a compatible addition. Mr. DuBose 
added that he supported the streamliner design and rent concept because it would 
result in affordable housing for essential workers.  
 
Zeke Valenzuela stated that he is currently a resident of Cabana 99th and that he was 
very satisfied with the services provided and as a result, he supported the design 
concept presented for the proposed multifamily development on the northwest corner of 
99th Avenue and Missouri Avenue.  
 
Public Comment:  
Jacob Dunklee stated that a teacher’s monthly wage has been approximately 2,000 
dollars and due to the current housing market, the majority of their income goes to 
housing. Mr. Dunklee concluded his statement by adding that Maryvale needs 
affordable housing to incentives teachers to continue working within the City of Phoenix. 
Chair Derie asked Mr. Dunklee if he supported the proposed multifamily development. 
Mr. Dunklee confirmed that he supports the proposed development because it would 
offer housing opportunities to teachers within the city.  
 
Moon Johnson stated that her family was forced to leave their home after three years 
because of the rent increases due to the current market and stated that she had to 
accommodate a thousand dollar increase in rent in order to avoid being displaced from 
her current home. Ms. Johnson added that as a result of the increase in rent, her family 
has been financially burdened and stated that essential workers like herself and her 
family have been left behind due to the current market. Ms. Johnson concluded her 
statement by adding that attainable housing like the one proposed on 99th Avenue and 
Missouri supports essential works in numerous fields such as education, health care, 
and education and stated that by providing attainable housing, it would allow for her 
children to continue to thrive within the community and contribute to the local economic 
growth. Chair Derie asked Ms. Johnson if her children were students within the 
Maryvale Village. Ms. Johnson confirmed that her children were students within the 
Maryvale Village.  
 
Kareem Neal stated that he had been teaching within the Maryvale Village for 
approximately 16 years and that he has been working with the Arizona Superintendent 
on initiatives to recruit teachers. Mr. Neal noted that due to the current housing market, 
it has been difficult to recruit teachers and that he supported Mr. Dunklee’s comment 
stating that Maryvale needed affordable housing in order to incentivize teachers to 
continue to work within Phoenix. Mr. Neal ended his public comment by stating that 
affordable housing is needed to keep good teachers within the Maryvale Village and 
that he was supportive of the proposed multifamily development. Chair Derie asked for 
Mr. Neal’s address for the record. Mr. Neal stated that his address was 355 North 
Central Avenue.  
 
Erik Espinoza stated that the support for the proposed multifamily development and the 
major amendment was coming from individuals that did not live within the Maryvale 
Village. Mr. Espinoza stated that the proposed development would affect the tenants’

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
future health, safety, and welfare due to the industrial uses located in proximity of the 
subject area and added that the purpose of a PUD is to allow flexibility in land use while 
protecting properties and by allowing multifamily adjacent to industrial uses, there was 
no way to effectively mitigate the adverse effects. Mr. Espinoza added that he has 
witnessed property damage to the traffic signal on 99th Avenue and Montebello, an 
increase in traffic congestion, and an increase in commercial traffic through residential 
neighborhoods. Mr. Espinoza noted that he has contacted the City of Phoenix to 
implement signs to prevent commercial traffic in residential neighborhoods but that he 
has not noticed an improvement. Mr. Espinoza stated that the current PUD narrative 
only limited hours for current residential developments and that with this new 
development, operations could occur 24 hours a day. Mr. Espinoza stated that the 
proposed development standards would not preserve and enhance the lifestyle of 
existing and future residents and that if the applicant cared about the future residents of 
this proposed multifamily development, they would have addressed the possible health 
concerns in their presentation. Mr. Espinoza concluded his public comment by stating 
that he is opposed to the high-density multifamily development. Chair Derie asked for 
clarification on the route that commercial trucks were taking through Mr. Espinoza’s 
residential neighborhood. Mr. Espinoza stated that 103rd Avenue is a dead-end street 
and that there has been a “No Thru Traffic” sign installed but that it has done little to 
mitigate commercial traffic and added that even if a Committee Member stated that they 
had visited the site, it was not enough to assess the issues occurring within the 
surrounding area and noted that there has already been a significant increase of 
commercial traffic along 99th Avenue and Montebello Avenue.  
 
Maria Armenta stated that she was in favor of the proposed multifamily development 
because she was about to leave the Maryvale Village due to the increase in rent. Ms. 
Armenta stated that her entire income goes to rent and to bills and as a result, she has 
been living paycheck to paycheck and added that she would like to see more attainable 
housing so that she can continue to live within the Maryvale Village and so that her 
children could also grow up within the community as well. Ms. Armenta ended her public 
comment by stating that she is in support of the proposed development and that it would 
benefit the entire community.  
 
Ms. Stockham, staff, stated that there was a member of the public in the attendee list 
that had their hand raised. Chair Derie allowed the community member to speak.  
 
Ben Swenson stated that he worked for the management company that owned and 
developed the Home Depot on the southwest corner of 99th Avenue and Camelback 
Road. Mr. Swenson stated that a majority of the tenants of the shopping center on 99th 
Avenue and Camelback Road have stated that they would like to see more residential 
uses within the area and added that during the Covid-19 pandemic a lot of local 
businesses struggled to remain in business because of the lack of residential uses in 
the area. Mr. Swenson noted that local traffic is required for local businesses to thrive 
and that they still had five acres that they were looking to develop and stated that they 
had been trying to obtain a local grocery store to be located in that area. Mr. Swenson 
concluded his public comment by stating that residential development is necessary 
within the area in order for businesses to thrive and continue to serve the community. 
 
Applicant Response:  
Mr. Bull stated that he thanked the members of the public for providing their input on 
the proposed development and noted that the need for housing is needed within the

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Maryvale Village. Mr. Bull added that the proposed multifamily development would act 
as a buffer between the industrial and commercial uses and single-family residential 
uses and added that their proposed multifamily development would not be creating 
commercial traffic as Mr. Espinoza stated in his public comment. Mr. Bull noted that the 
proposed multifamily development would be gated and buffered from the industrial and 
commercial uses, that Greenlight develops residential housing that is of high-quality 
design, and that numerous individuals are satisfied with the services provided within 
other Greenlight developments.  
 
Committee Discussion:  
Vice Chair O’Toole stated that he would like to reiterate some of the comments that he 
had made during the last Village Planning Committee meeting for the new members. 
Vice Chair O’Toole stated that the most common rezoning requests involve rezoning to 
high-density residential and that the goal of the Village Planning Committee is to 
determine if the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses and 
characteristics. Vice Chair O’Toole added that there are approximately 6,000 housing 
units already approved to be built within a three-mile radius of the subject site and 
added that he supports attainable housing but that the proposed location of the 
multifamily development is not suitable for the site. Vice Chair O’Toole stated that due 
to the recent major amendment to the Algodón Center PUD, the Maryvale Village has 
lost major employment opportunities and that the applicant could add this multifamily 
development within the Algodón Center PUD rather than within the Aldea Centre PUD. 
Vice Chair O’Toole noted that his primary concern with this proposed development is 
the location of the site and that the Village Planning Committee has approved almost all 
other rezoning requests to allow for multifamily development within the Village and as a 
result, this has created a significant change to the Maryvale Village.  
 
Ms. Hernandez stated that the Committee has heard from a wide range of Maryvale 
residents that support the proposed multifamily development because it would signify 
more housing within their communities and that it is possible that some of the committee 
members do not have the same necessities as the people that live within the heart of 
Maryvale Village. Ms. Hernandez noted that life expectancy within south Phoenix and 
west Phoenix is less than individuals living in north Phoenix because of the policing, 
jobs, and housing that have affected the community’s quality of life. Ms. Hernandez 
added that she is part of community organizations that have gone into the community to 
survey residents’ needs and concerns and that the primary concern is the lack of 
affordable housing within the market. Ms. Hernandez stated that she understood that 
one proposed project will not solve the issues within the Maryvale Village, that it would 
require changes to the City’s policies but that the community has made it clear that 
housing is a major necessity and noted that with the expansion of the Valley Metro Light 
Rail, more out of state developers will begin to propose development that would make 
Maryvale unaffordable for the existing residents. Ms. Hernandez suggested that the 
committee have a clear goal of what they would like to achieve within the Maryvale 
Village and that the committee should analyze the impact that the proposed 
development will have on the community. Ms. Hernandez concluded that she is 
supportive of the proposed rezoning change and the proposed multifamily development 
because she has heard numerous stories of displacement and housing is a primary 
need within Maryvale Village.

City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona  85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 
Motion:  
Zeke Valenzuela motioned to recommend approval of Z-138-F-83-5 per the staff 
recommendation. JJ Bazzi seconded the motion.  
 
Vote:  
5-5, Motion to recommend approval did not pass with Committee Members Bazzi, 
DuBose, Hernandez, and Valenzuela, in favor and Committee Members Barba, Battle, 
Norgaard, O’Toole, and Derie in opposition.  
 
Ms. Hernandez asked the committee members who were in opposition to explain their 
reasoning since there was a large number of members of the public present in support 
of the proposed amendment and proposed multifamily development. Chair Derie asked 
staff if he had the authority to ask the committee members to explain their vote. Ms. 
Stockham, staff, stated sometimes committee members explain their vote while they 
are casting it, and the chair can allow comments if it germane the motion. Ms. Stockham 
stated that a new motion can be made since the previous motion did not pass.  
 
Motion:  
Joe Barba motioned to recommend approval of Z-138-F-83-5 per the staff 
recommendation. Ken DuBose seconded the motion.  
 
Vote:  
6-4, Motion to recommend approval passed with Committee Members Barba, Bazzi, 
Cole, DuBose, Hernandez, and Valenzuela, in favor and Committee Members, Battle, 
Norgaard, O’Toole, and Derie in opposition.  
 
Mr. DuBose stated that he voted in favor of the major amendment because this area 
has changed over time and that when the stadium was built, the vision was for hotels 
and for a major commercial location; however, this vision has been replaced by 
warehousing, commercial and multifamily. Mr. DuBose noted that he lives and works 
within close proximity to the subject area and stated that the proposed vision has 
drastically changed, and that housing would be the best compatible use in this location.  
 
Ms. Hernandez stated that she would like the applicant to provide updates to the 
community of the proposed multifamily development and that she would like the 
community’s input to be taken into consideration.  
 
Vice Chair O’Toole stated that his vote was in opposition to the proposed development 
because of the surrounding warehousing and commercial land uses, the proposed 
multifamily development could be built on another location such as the Algodón Center 
PUD, and that nothing guaranteed that the rents will remain the same since there were 
no policies in place to ensure rent control.  
 
Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation:  
None.