Attachment G - Opposition Letters - Z-18-22-1.pdf

From:
vickie hunt
To:
Sarah Stockham
Subject:
Z-18-22-1 June 9 Meeting
Date:
Monday, June 6, 2022 11:07:43 AM
Hello Sarah,
I found your name on the website concerning this upcoming meeting. I would like my letter
added to the file for anyone to view that is making decisions in the matter. I also sent a hard
copy by mail. My husband has been reaching out as well. I’m just trying to make sure we’re
reaching the right offices and such. Please let me know if there is someplace else I should be
sending communications. Thank you for any help! 
I am writing concerning a zoning hearing Z-18-22-1 for parcels 210-11-003F and 210-
11-003G.
I will try to keep this as brief as possible and still provide all the information intended. I
live at 25839 N. 19th Ave. Phoenix Az 85085. Parcel # 210-11-001C   It is a nearly 2
acre farm/ranch. The property I own shares a border to our south with the land in
question. I will attach pictures so you can see how the properties line up. I have lived
here for 30 years and have watched this go from a one lane dirt road to a bustling city
street.  I completely understand growth and change, and honestly welcome much of it!
However, this build is posing a major privacy issue for my family/property. The R43
county zoning that’s always been here and the recently approved city annexation and
now S1 zoning, calls for 1 house per 1 acre. That is what borders the land on all sides
except 19th avenue. The homes across 19th Ave from the land are single family
residential. Mrs. Shilliday with CMI Construction told me in a conversation after
purchasing the land that she intended to build single family residential homes. Her intent
was to “provide a buffer” between the city homes on the west side of 19th Ave and the
rurally zoned ranch/farm homes that encompass the entire county island on the east side.
However 20 two story townhomes are not a buffer. That is not the middle ground
between rural and standard residential. The land is zoned for 2 homes currently.
According to current tax records it is a total of 2.02 acres. Possibly 4 homes on 1/4 acre
lots would be a buffer. Even 6-10 single story single family residences. Not 20.
These parcels are not made for homes to be stacked on top of fence lines. This is a
complete invasion of our privacy as well as our other neighbor to the south who shares
his west property line with the land. From a townhome that tall with all living space
on the top floor there will be views of my entire property including my back yard. While
that may be the norm in some neighborhoods, that is not what this kind is zoned or
meant for.
I am requesting that if the zoning is to be changed, that it is to single family residential
only. Not multi family. Also, more importantly, that single story homes only be allowed
to back up to the shared fence lines. Two story homes could back 19th Ave. A privacy
barrier tall enough to block views into our homes and yards from 30 feet up does not
seem reasonable.  We are really trying to be accommodating. We’re not saying no this
cannot pass. However the planned layout of this build is not only not in line with the
currently established neighborhood, it is, as I said, a total privacy violation. My request
Attachment G

is that only single story single family residential be approved. That is a buffer. Not a
multi family townhome community. 
I have attached a couple pictures as well. 
Thank you for your time,
Vickie Hunt
View from my front porch. Per plans, six 30ft townhomes would back that fence. Single story
would be much preferred.

View up my driveway next to our horse and livestock pens that the new builds will back up
to. 
-- 
Vickie

From:
Laurel Brodie
To:
Sarah Stockham
Cc:
Melissa Crawford; James Whatley
Subject:
RE: Z-18-22-1: - Item # 3 - June 9, 2022 6PM
Date:
Wednesday, June 8, 2022 6:06:35 PM
For the Record; 
Please know that the residents who are negatively impacted by this request, of which we are
one, have been ignored and belittled numerous times by this Committee and the High $
Attorneys hired by  developers whose only goal is to make a killing on land that they bought
for less because it was zoned to be of a different character when purchased. They made these
purchases knowing full well that they could bulldoze their way through the laughable
protective hurdles that had been put into place to protect individual residents that do not
have access to deep pockets, from having their neighborhood being downgraded through
zoning changes. And I've no doubt this will occur once again in this meeting. So please spare
us the concern of the "buffer being created for our neighborhood" You are doing us NO
FAVORS by allowing this. We had a more than sufficient "buffer" with 19th Avenue. Anything
of the East side of 19th Avenue infiltrates and invades our neighborhood in a manner that no
one here wants.  So at least be honest from the start and call a land grab a land grab, and
don't pretend that we have any say in this outcome. 
For what it's worth I'll still say my peace, but stopped holding my breath with this Committee
long ago. 
NO to the HIGH DENSITY housing, especially NO to the 2 STORY zero lot line development. If it
HAS to change from the current zoning it should be reasonable. Currently it is 1 home per acre
(when it was County) so  go ahead, double that, we'd even accept tripling that, but to retain
the rural character and maintain what we have left that the most that we'd be happy and
welcoming to. 
And to stand up specifically for the 2 most impacted residents who have our utmost
sympathies, James Whatley and Julian,  PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, since we know you are going
to allow this AT LEAST be human and DO NOT allow for 2 story homes on the North OR East
side of this property. 
And last to also protect the rest of us REQUIRE that a sign be in place that prohibits turning
left onto Yearling Rd. out of that developments ingress/egress.  We do not want or need that
traffic on our Privately Maintained Roadways. 
Planning a  neighborhood celebration if we are successful in ANY concessions to this proposed 
development

Rick & Laurel Brodie 
25657 N. 17th Avenue 
Phoenix, AZ 85085
laurel@clearskies.com

From:
tryitonjewels@aol.com
To:
Sarah Stockham
Cc:
laurel@clearskies.com; bruteyfool@aol.com
Subject:
Z-18-22-1 Item #3
Date:
Thursday, June 9, 2022 3:56:26 PM
To Whom it Concerns;
Here we are again writing emails and voicing our concerns about the devastation your votes are doing to
destroy our horse property community.  I personally have spent hours attending and speaking at every
virtual meeting trying to save our way of life only for the vote to be unanimous "yes" and "next on the
agenda".
Once again, it is ridiculous to do what is being suggested of put 2-story high-density housing in the
current zoning of 1 home per acre.
Please vote "NO" to this proposal.
Melissa Crawford
623 606 7248

1
Racelle Escolar
From:
Laurel Brodie <laurel@clearskies.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, August 2, 2022 10:44 PM
To:
PDD Planning Commission; Sarah Stockham; Racelle Escolar; James Whatley; Melissa Crawford
Subject:
Application #: Z-18-22-1  -  PLEASE HEED THE RECENT REJECTION OF THIS APPLICATION FROM THE DEER 
VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION AS THEIR VOICE THIS TIME DOES REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF THE 
RESIDENTS DIRECTLY EFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL 
Please Note: I am out of town for the month assisting in the care of my 98 year old Mom – It makes me very sad that I 
continue to have to deal with these issues but having lived within the County Island and having abided by all the various 
codes and changes within since the 1980’s, please realize and understand this is a critical matter to all of us that RESIDE 
within this effected area.  
 
 
For the Record;  
Please know that the residents who are negatively impacted by this request, of which we are one, have been 
ignored and belittled numerous times by the DV Planning Committee, the High $ Attorneys hired 
by  developers whose only goal is to make a killing on land that they bought for less because it was zoned to 
be of a different character when purchased, and The City of Phoenix Planning Department. The  property 
owner/developer  made this purchase knowing full well that they could bulldoze (and yes that is also meant in 
the literal sense) their way through the laughable protective hurdles that had been put into place to protect 
individual residents, that do not have access to deep pockets, from having their neighborhood being forever 
changed and downgraded through zoning changes.  
 
But FINALLY after all of the numerous and unwaivering requests by the actual residents that will be impacted 
by this decision we saw a LIGHT with the last DV meeting in which we held hope. More of a flashlight than 
searchlight beam, but still enough to give us hope. Please see that flickering light and continue to throw us 
that lifeline. And if you believe we don’t warrant that lifeline, we at least deserve, at the bare minimum,  a 
frank and detailed discussion as to why you believe that those who have invested and believed that sacrificing 
to build and create a life in an area that was consistently reaffirmed to be rural low density housing for 
decades does not warrant not only your careful consideration,  but also an honest conversation if you reject 
our requests.  
 
We also ask that you look very carefully as to the current approved developments which we believe adds even 
more reasons to support our opposition of any other high density projects being approved on the East side of 
19th Avenue between Happy Valley and Jomax as enough should be enough!!  Please take into account the 
fact that the USAA development has no access points to 19th Avenue North of Happy Valley, beyond the 
Parsons Road alignment. That alone should point to the fact that what remains of the East side of 19th should 
be left to be rural and low density. The canal does not allow for east bound traffic North of Happy Valley and 
therefore should encourage minimal traffic on that roadway.  Add to that,  that the roadways that do exist 
east of 19th Avenue between Happy Valley & Jomax are privately owned and maintained dirt roadways that 
can not, should not and will not be able to handle Cut Thru traffic during high traffic events. The last critical 
point for your consideration should be to note that the only southern access points to the substantial 
residential developments North of Jomax and South of Sonoran Desert Dr are 19th Ave/ Norterra Parkway and 
those are also already overloaded.   Encouraging even more traffic on these roadways would be irresponsible.  
 
I’d also like to add my other comments that originally went directly to the Deer Valley Planning Commission 
prior to their vote to NOT recommend hoping that they also had some merit in their decision to DISAPPROVE 
this re‐zoning;

2
 
Please spare us the concern of the "buffer being created for our neighborhood" You are doing us NO FAVORS 
by allowing this. We had a more than sufficient "buffer" with 19th Avenue. Anything of the East side of 
19th Avenue infiltrates and invades our neighborhood in a manner that no one here wants.  So at least be 
honest from the start and call a land grab a land grab, and don't pretend that we have any say in this 
outcome.  
 
For what it's worth I'll still say my peace, but stopped holding my breath with this Committee long ago.  
 
NO to the HIGH DENSITY housing, especially NO to the 2 STORY zero lot line development. If it HAS to change 
from the current zoning it should be reasonable. Currently it is 1 home per acre (when it was County) so  go 
ahead, double that, we'd even accept tripling that, but to retain the rural character and maintain what we 
have left that the most that we'd be happy and welcoming to.  
 
And to stand up specifically for the 2 most impacted residents who have our utmost sympathies, James 
Whatley and Julian,  PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE,  AT LEAST be human and DO NOT allow for 2 story homes on the 
North OR East side of this property.  
 
And last to also protect the rest of us REQUIRE that a sign be in place that prohibits turning left onto Yearling 
Rd. out of that developments ingress/egress.  We do not want or need that traffic on our Privately Maintained 
Roadways.  
 
 
Rick & Laurel Brodie  
25657 N. 17th Avenue  
Phoenix, AZ 85085 
laurel@clearskies.com  
 
 
 
Sent from Mail [go.microsoft.com] for Windows

1
Racelle Escolar
From:
James Wh <bruteyfool@aol.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 6:24 AM
To:
PDD Deer Valley VPC; Sarah Stockham; Racelle Escolar; Joshua Bednarek
Subject:
8-4 6p Meeting #Z-18-22-1
Dear Committee, 
 
I am writing in opposition of the re‐zoning # Z‐18‐22‐1  concerning the property at the North East corner of 19th Avenue 
and Yearling road. 
 
In review, this  2 1/2 acre county island property originally zoned R‐43 allowing one house per acre has been recently 
annexed into the city. It is now zoned R‐1 which is still one residence per acre. They want to re‐zone to S‐2 which 
basically allows multiple housing and build 20, 2 story townhomes on this lot that I share s as property line with. This 
property has not been re‐zoned and it’s not too late to stop this land grab dead in the water and preserve our county 
island. 
 
Directly across 19th Ave.  on City of Phoenix land, already zoned for multi‐housing, sits Union Park. A huge community 
consisting of a mix of single family houses and multi‐family units. They are increasing their total dwelling units by 1,400 
and their multi family units by 1,200. That is a huge increase and that can totally compensate for the 20 units this 
property wants to add to this congested area.  
 
This area has recently become surrounded by huge apartment complexes, townhomes and bungalows, with two more 
recently approved on 19th ave. Add to this area several new, huge storage facilities to accommodate all the down 
grading into multi‐family housing. 
 
There are plenty of areas around here to accommodate multi‐family housing, but there are few place to accommodate 
single family dwelling, our County Island being one of them. 
 
Please conserve our County Island, especially as the housing market slowly tanks. I understand that several committee 
members are In real estate and are all for growth as long as it makes a profit and benefits the community. This project 
does none of the above and I hope you members can agree with me on this and vote No on approving the re‐zoning of 
this property. 
 
Thank you for your time and understanding in this matter! 
 
Sincerely, 
James Whatley 
 
 
 
 
Sent from my iPhone