Attachment C - PHO Summary - PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7).pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2021-11-17)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 45336 characters
REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION  
Mr. Adam Stranieri, Planner III, Hearing Officer  
Bradley Wylam, Planner I, Assisting  
 
October 20, 2021 
 
ITEM NO: 2 
 
 
DISTRICT 7 
SUBJECT: 
 
 
 
Application #: 
PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Location: 
Northwest corner of 75th Avenue and Baseline Road  
Existing Zoning:  R1-8, R-3A, and C-1 
Acreage:  
40.09 
Request: 
1) 
Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general 
conformance with the site plan date stamped April 10, 
2002. 
2) 
Review of site plans and elevations by the Planning 
Hearing Officer per Stipulation 2. 
3) 
Deletion of Stipulation 9 regarding the completion of the 
Developer Project Information Form for the MAG 
Transportation Improvement Program. 
4) 
Deletion of Stipulation 17 regarding 50 percent open 
space being high and dry. 
5) 
Modification of Stipulation 22 regarding architectural 
character consistent with the Laveen Plan. 
6) 
Deletion of Stipulation 24 regarding corporate colors 
and associated graphics as an accent feature. 
7) 
Deletion of Stipulation 25 regarding pitched roofs on 
commercial buildings. 
8) 
Deletion of Stipulation 27 regarding windows on any 
facade with a primary customer entrance. 
9) 
Deletion of Stipulation 28 regarding landscaping of 
surface parking areas. 
10) Modification of Stipulation 35 regarding maximum 
height of service station canopies or drive-through 
canopies. 
11) Deletion of Stipulation 36 regarding canopy support 
pillar size and materials. 
12) Modification of Stipulation 42 regarding a maximum of 
312 lots. 
13) Modification of Stipulation 43 regarding minimum lot 
widths. 
14) Modification of Stipulation 45 regarding rural mail 
delivery and the use of gang mailboxes. 
Attachment C

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 2 
 
15) Modification of Stipulation 46 regarding roof treatment 
variety. 
16) Modification of Stipulation 48 regarding general 
conformance with the site plan dated April 5, 2002. 
17) Modification of Stipulation 52 regarding a variety of at 
least six different types of roof treatments. 
18) Modification of Stipulation 53 regarding materials that 
would minimize stucco and tile. 
19) Modification of Stipulation 56 regarding substantial 
conformance with view fence pictures. 
20) Technical corrections to Stipulations 10, 23, 33, and 38. 
Applicant: 
Cassandra Ayres, Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC 
Owner: 
Coplen 61.4 LLC, et al. 
Representative: 
Paul Gilbert, Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC 
 
ACTIONS 
 
Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer 
recommended denial as filed and approval with modifications and additional 
stipulations. 
 
Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The Laveen Village 
Planning Committee heard this case on October 11, 2021 and recommended 
denial by a vote of 8-0. 
 
DISCUSSION 
 
Paul Gilbert, representative with Beus, Gilbert, McGroder PLLC, provided a 
summary of the request and the relevant stipulation modifications and deletions. 
He stated that the revised narrative date stamped October 19, 2021 reflects 
feedback that was received at the Laveen Village Planning Committee (VPC) 
meeting and in additional meetings with Linda Abegg, a member of the Laveen 
VPC. He stated that they would be withdrawing their original requests regarding 
stipulations 28, 35, 36, and 46. He provided a summary of twelve proposed 
additional stipulations that were agreed upon with Ms. Abegg.  
 
Lewis Smith, resident of a nearby neighborhood, stated that he hoped the 
proposed Stipulation 66 regarding height restrictions would limit the height of 
houses along 75th Avenue in addition to the proposed height limit along the north 
boundary, citing concerns about views to the west. He stated he spoke with other 
neighbors in the community who provided feedback regarding school class sizes, 
construction noises, and apartments located adjacent to 75th Avenue.  
 
Stephanie Hurd, Laveen VPC member, stated that there were concerns in the 
surrounding community regarding the community outreach that was completed 
prior to the VPC meeting. She stated that she supports quality housing products,

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 3 
 
but 45-foot lot widths, traffic, and the proposed elevations would not attract 
people to the area. She stated that receiving new elevations is important to a 
future Laveen VPC approval. She described the requests from Linda Abegg and 
asked that the developer adopt all her requests.  
 
Carlos Ortega, Laveen VPC member, expressed the same concerns regarding 
public outreach as the two prior speakers. He stated that he had concerns 
related to 45-foot lot widths and noted that he would like to see the applicant 
incorporate 50- and 55-foot-wide lots on the site. He noted there were concerns 
regarding building materials and colors. He expressed desire for the applicant to 
continue their outreach to hear more from the surrounding community.  
 
Margaret Shalley, Trailside Point/ Laveen Farms Block Watch President, 
expressed concerns related to the public outreach prior to the hearing. She 
hoped to receive clarification regarding the notification requirements and the 
amount of public outreach conducted. Adam Stranieri, Planning Hearing Officer, 
noted the notification requirements prior to the VPC meeting and PHO hearing.  
 
Tonya Glass, Laveen VPC member, stated she was disappointed in what was 
presented to the Laveen VPC and stated she wished the revisions made after the 
VPC meeting were discussed beforehand. She stated she received 
communication from nearby residents that noted concerns regarding the initial 
public outreach. She agreed that the applicant should go back to the community 
to receive more feedback.  
 
Linda Abegg noted that she could not speak for the entire VPC but stated that 
much of the concern at the meeting was regarding elevations, lot widths, and 
driveway widths. She stated that by having 5-foot side setbacks on the single-
family portion of the development, the perceived density would be lower than a 
typical development with 45-foot-wide lots. Mr. Stranieri looked to provide 
clarification that the intent of her stipulations regarding the elevations would 
include a future VPC review for elevations for both single-family and multifamily 
buildings.  
 
Mr. Gilbert responded to the public feedback and stated they are in total 
agreement with the stipulations and changes requested by Ms. Abegg. He stated 
that they could agree with a modification to the stipulation requested by Mr. 
Lewis regarding single-story, single-family homes along 75th Avenue. He stated 
walking paths and trails will be included in the project. He stated that there is a 
significant decrease in overall density based on this plan as compared to the 
stipulated plan, which could help limit class sizes in schools. He stated that the 
elevations will come back through the VPC and PHO for both the single- and 
multifamily product. He stated they provided 129 letters to neighbors, registered 
associations, and previous opposition as required.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 4 
 
Mr. Stranieri provided background on the original rezoning case and stated that 
there would be a reduction in density as compared to the stipulated plans. He 
reviewed the public correspondence received before the hearing. He stated that 
he would recommend approval with modification regarding Stipulation 1 
regarding the proposed site plan date stamped October 19, 2021. He stated that 
the three bullets underneath Stipulation 1 would also be removed to reflect the 
current plans. He stated the modifications of Stipulation 2 regarding review of 
elevations would be approved with modification to provide standard language. He 
stated that the proposed deletion of Stipulation 9 regarding the completion of the 
Developer Project Information Form would be denied because there is no record 
of completion of that form from the original rezoning case. He stated he would 
recommend approval of the deletion of Stipulation 17 regarding 50% open space 
being high and dry. He stated that for Stipulations 22, 24, 25, and 27 he 
recommended approval of the proposed deletion. He noted that the proposed 
general conformance to the site plan would lock the developer into this plan, and 
any future plans regarding commercial development would require a PHO 
hearing to reflect commercial development proposals. He stated that Stipulation 
42 regarding a maximum of 312 lots would need to be modified due to the new 
plan for the development but proposed that this stipulation be incorporated into 
Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance with the site plan. Ms. Abegg stated 
she would like to see the multifamily portion of the site be stipulated to a specific 
number of units, but that she is comfortable with deleting the requirement 
regarding the total number of lots. Mr. Gilbert stated he agreed with this 
modification to be deleted and include a unit count for the multifamily portion. Mr. 
Stranieri stated that the proposed modification of Stipulation 43 regarding 
minimum lot widths of 45 feet be recommended for approval with modification to 
specify it applies solely to detached residential. He stated the modifications of 
Stipulation 45 regarding rural mail delivery and the use of gang mailboxes be 
approved. He stated that the deletion of Stipulation 48 be recommended 
approval noting that it is redundant with Stipulation 1. He stated that the 
proposed modification of Stipulation 52 regarding roof treatments provided more 
clarity as compared to the existing stipulation and would be recommended for 
approval. He stated that the applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 53 
regarding materials that minimize stucco and tile be recommended for approval 
noting that the proposal creates more certainty than the existing stipulation while 
providing a similar intent. He stated that the modification of Stipulation 56 
regarding view fencing be recommended for denial to allow for a complete 
deletion. He noted that Stipulation 56 conflicted with Stipulation 12, which is not 
requested to be modified. He stated he recommended approval of each of the 
twelve additional stipulations that were agreed upon in conjunction with Ms. 
Abegg with minor modifications, stating that these stipulations also reflected 
attention to many of the concerns expressed by individuals who spoke earlier in 
the hearing. He provided a summary of the department review comments 
received and noted the Street Transportation Department recommended to 
include an additional stipulation regarding bicycle parking.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 5 
 
FINDINGS 
 
1) The original rezoning case consisted of proposed single-family, 
multifamily, and commercial uses on approximately 120.35 gross acres 
located between 71st Avenue and the Phoenix City Limits to the west, and 
between Vineyard Road to Baseline Road.  The stipulated site plan 
included four development parcels.  The subject site of this current PHO 
request constitutes Parcels 1 and 2.  Parcel 1 in the original rezoning case 
was designated for the Laveen Area Conveyance Channel (LACC).  
Parcel 2 included a mixture of approximately 15.76 gross acres of R-3A 
zoning, approximately 14.5 gross acres of R1-8 zoning, and approximately 
10.28 gross acres of C-1 zoning. In the R-3A zoning area, there was no 
specific density or unit count specified.  In the R1-8 zoning area, there 
were 49 single-family residential lots depicted. The C-1 area depicted 
conceptual footprints of commercial buildings only.  The entirety of the 
subject area did not develop, and the property remains vacant.   
 
The proposed conceptual site plan depicts 134 detached single-family 
residential lots on the entirety of the R-3A and R1-8 zoned areas at a 
density of approximately 4.6 dwelling units per gross acre.  Open spaces 
are provided along the perimeter of the development, in two pocket parks, 
and in centrally located areas along Ellis Street.  Proposed lots are 45 feet 
in width (See Finding #9 for a more detailed discussion of lot widths).  In 
the C-1 zoned area, the proposed conceptual site plan depicts 97 
townhome units.  The proposed layout and use are compatible and 
consistent with the land use pattern in the surrounding area.  The resulting 
lot mix results in a significant reduction in the potential number of 
multifamily residential units and an increase in the number of single-family 
lots.  As specified above, multifamily units were not quantified in the 
stipulated plan.  However, note that the R-3A district permits 23.1 dwelling 
units per gross acre in the PRD development option which infers a 
hypothetical maximum of 364 units on 15.76 gross acres. 
 
2) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general 
conformance is recommended for approval with modifications and an 
additional stipulation.  The modifications include new standard language 
for general conformance.  Additionally, Bullet Point #1 regarding the LACC 
is recommended to be deleted as a modification as this parcel is not 
identified on the conceptual site plan as a Development Parcel in the way 
that it had been on the stipulated plan. Finally, this portion of the 
Development Parcel was transferred to the City as originally 
contemplated.  Bullet Point #2 is recommended to be deleted as 
requested by the applicant as there is no multifamily residential proposed 
in the specified location.  Bullet Point #3 is recommended to be deleted as

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 6 
 
a modification as the language was specific to the layout of open space on 
the conceptual plan and is not relevant to the current proposal.  
 
The additional stipulation recommended for inclusion is to require specific 
regard to a maximum of 97 multifamily units on the property zoned C-1 as 
depicted on the proposed conceptual site plan.  This recommendation is 
added in lieu of the applicant’s request for modification of Stipulation 42 to 
avoid redundancy.  The recommendation only addresses multifamily 
residential on the C-1 property to allow the applicant flexibility in the 
single-family units to comply with the remainder of the stipulations in this 
case.  See Finding #8 for related discussion. 
 
3) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 2 is recommended for 
approval with a modification.  The modification is to replace the entire 
stipulation with standard language regarding PHO legislative review.  The 
applicant’s proposed language includes a reference to plat approval and 
the Laveen Village Planning Committee.  The standard language sets the 
timing of this review prior to final site plan approval.  There is no need to 
stipulate VPC review as all PHO cases are routed to these Committees for 
review. 
 
It should be noted that during the PHO hearing, the applicant agreed to 
remove all references to the original proposed conceptual elevations from 
their application for the townhome product and to instead return through 
the VPC and PHO per this recommendation for both single- and 
multifamily development.  This stipulation captures that commitment. 
 
4) The applicant’s request to delete Stipulation 9 regarding submittal of a 
Street Transportation Department form is recommended to be denied.  
This stipulation reflects a simple administrative task that the Street 
Transportation Department confirmed has not been completed.  Once the 
specified form is submitted the applicant will be compliant and the 
stipulation will not impact their ability to move forward. 
 
5) The applicant’s request to delete Stipulation 17 regarding high and dry 
open space is recommended for approval.  In their narrative the applicant 
noted that a portion of the proposed open space serves as retention, 
which supports environmental goals to reduce water usage. They 
additionally noted that the original developers and the City entered into a 
Development Agreement (“Laveen Channel Development Agreement”) 
(City of Phoenix Contract No. 99116) that allowed a reduction in required 
open space because of the easement granted regarding the LACC.  The 
recommendation will also help to avoid potential conflicts with this existing 
agreement.  Finally, it should be noted that the stipulation’s original intent

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 7 
 
was to apply to the entire 120.35 gross acres of the original rezoning area.  
The subject property of this request will be subject to Zoning Ordinance 
standards regarding development of open spaces. 
 
6) The applicant’s request to modify or delete Stipulations 22, 24, 25, and 27 
are recommended to be approved.  These stipulations apply solely to 
commercial development and are not relevant to the current request.  If 
the developer were to propose commercial development within the C-1 
zoned area of the subject site, they would be required to file a PHO 
application for stipulation modifications regarding the site plan and 
elevation general conformance requirements at a minimum.  
Recommendations regarding enhanced development standards and 
design guidelines would be evaluated at that time. 
 
7) The applicant requested to withdraw their original request for deletion of 
Stipulation 28 during the PHO hearing.  The applicant withdrew their 
original requests to delete Stipulations 35 and 36 in their revised narrative 
date stamped October 19, 2021. 
 
8) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 42 regarding a maximum 
number of lots is recommended to be approved with a modification to 
delete it in its entirety.  The original stipulation contains a unit cap that 
applied to the entire 120.35 gross acres of the original rezoning area. This 
unit cap was also incomplete in that it addressed single-family residential 
units only and did not address the R-3A zoned area. Further, the 
applicant’s language could be similarly misinterpreted or create confusion 
if the townhomes or another portion of the site was proposed to develop 
with traditional multifamily.  As discussed in greater detail in Finding #1, 
the proposed lot mix results in a significant reduction in the potential 
number of multifamily residential units and an increase in the number of 
single-family lots.  See Finding #2 for additional related alternative 
language. 
 
9) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 43 regarding lot widths is 
recommended to be approved with a modification.  The modification is to 
provide standard language regarding lot widths and specify that this 
restriction applies solely to single-family detached residential uses.  The 
stipulation is not intended to apply to multifamily or single-family attached 
land uses. The applicant’s proposed language referencing zoning 
designations is unnecessary as C-1 does not permit single-family 
residential uses by right.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 8 
 
The original stipulation was intended to apply solely to the single-family 
zoned areas of the site as multifamily residential uses were depicted on 
the R-3A zoned area of the site.  As discussed in greater detail in Finding 
#1, the current proposal reflects a significant reduction in potential units, 
intensity, and scale, particularly on the R-3A zoned area. 
 
10) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 45 regarding rural mail 
delivery is recommended to be approved with a modification.  The 
applicant noted in their narrative that there may be postal delivery 
efficiencies achieved using gang mailboxes and that the stipulation should 
not be applied to the townhome development or on commercially zoned 
property.  The modification will provide greater specificity that this applies 
to residentially zoned property only. 
 
11) The applicant requested to withdraw their original request for deletion of 
Stipulation 46 during the PHO hearing.   
 
12) The applicant’s request to delete Stipulation 48 regarding general 
conformance is recommended for approval. This stipulation is redundant 
of the requirements in Stipulation 1. 
 
13) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 52 regarding roof treatments 
is recommended to be approved.  The request reduces the total number of 
treatments to be offered but introduces color diversity.  Additionally, the 
applicant noted that the new text regarding the proposed roof styles was 
written to provide consistency with the existing roof materials on 
subdivisions in the surrounding area. 
 
14) The applicant’s request to modify Stipulation 53 regarding minimizing 
stucco is recommended to be approved. The original stipulation lacked 
certainty in only requiring certain materials to be offered.  The applicant’s 
proposal is more specific in requiring the specified materials on at least 
one elevation per floor plan. 
 
15) The applicant’s request for modification of Stipulation 56 regarding view 
fencing is recommended to be denied as filed and instead to be deleted in 
its entirety.  Both the original and proposed stipulation lack clarity as to 
where these fences should be implemented, except along 71st Avenue.  
Additionally, this requirement may conflict with the existing Stipulation 12 
which already addresses view fencing adjacent to internal trails and open 
space areas and requires a different view fence design.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 9 
 
16) In the revised narrative date stamped October 19, 2021, the applicant 
requested the addition of ten new stipulations.  They stated that these 
stipulations were the result of enhanced outreach.  These stipulations are 
recommended to be approved as follows:  
 
a. PHO Legislative review and Village Planning Committee 
notification – This stipulation requires stipulation modification through 
the PHO process and notice to the VPC of stipulation modification 
requests. 
b. Enhanced architecture on front elevations – This stipulation 
requires lots zoned R1-8 and R-3A to provide enhanced architectural 
features including, but not limited to, textural changes, pilasters, and 
offsets.  This will help provide home designs with sufficient variation in 
elevations and detailing which addresses goals of design diversity. 
c. Theme walls – This stipulation requires theme walls for lots zoned R-
18 and R-3A.  This will provide an enhanced perimeter aesthetic and 
help contribute to an identifiable image for the subdivision. 
d. Enhanced building materials – This stipulation requires lots zoned 
R1-8 and R-3A to incorporate building materials including, but not 
limited to, stone veneer, textured brick, and board and batten.  This will 
help provide home designs with sufficient variation in elevations and 
detailing which addresses goals of design diversity. 
e. Enhanced garage door design – This stipulation requires garage 
doors on lots zoned R1-8 and R-3A to provide decorative 
embellishments.  This will improve streetscape appearance by 
minimizing the impact of the garage as the predominant architectural 
feature. 
f. Enhanced architecture on attached units – This stipulation requires 
a combination of architectural techniques, including but not limited to, 
variation in the roofline, recessed entrances, and vertical elements, 
which are intended to reduce the impact of building massing. 
g. Enhanced architecture for front facades on attached units – This 
stipulation requires enhanced façade treatments including, but not 
limited to, textural changes, offsets, and reveals.  This will help provide 
home designs with sufficient variation in elevations and detailing which 
addresses goals of design diversity. 
h. Roof design on attached units – This stipulation requires attached 
units to provide pitched, gable, or hipped roof types.  This will 
contribute to the unique character in this village and provide 
consistency with other developments in the surrounding area. 
i. 22-foot driveways – This stipulation requires that single-family 
residential lots provide a minimum driveway length of 22 feet.  This will

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 10 
 
help to provide adequate space for large vehicles common in this 
community. 
j. 25-foot height restriction along northern property boundary – This 
stipulation is recommended to be approved with a modification.  The 
applicant requested a restriction to “one story or 25 feet in height”.  
This is unclear in that this could alternately permit both a one story and 
30-foot home or a two-story and 25-foot home.  The modification is 
recommended to limit the restriction to 25 feet in height which provides 
greater certainty as to the building massing in this area.  Additionally, 
the applicant agreed during the PHO hearing to extend this restriction 
to single-family detached residential lots along 75th Avenue.   The 
stipulation is further modified to capture this commitment. 
 
17) In an email dated October 20, 2021 and during the PHO hearing, the 
applicant requested two additional stipulations.  They stated that these 
stipulations were the result of enhanced outreach.  These stipulations are 
recommended to be approved as follows: 
 
a. Minimum 5-foot side yard setbacks – This stipulation requires 
minimum 5-foot side yard setbacks on properties developed with 
single-family residences.  The applicant stated that this proposal will 
help to offset the impact of the reduced lot widths (See Finding #9 for 
further discussion).   
b. Minimizing stucco on single-family units – This stipulation requires 
that front elevations on the properties zoned R1-8 and R-3A shall 
include a maximum of 75% stucco and a minimum 25% accent 
material.  This is intended to improve visual interest in the street facing 
façade, contribute to character called for in the Southwest Growth 
Study, and provide consistency with other homes in the surrounding 
area. 
 
18) The Street Transportation Department recommends an additional 
stipulation regarding bicycle parking to be provided per Section 1307.H for 
multifamily development.  This stipulation is recommended for inclusion.  
The subject site is in proximity to multiple multi-use trails to the north and 
south, established bike lanes to the east, and is adjacent to the Laveen 
Area Conveyance Channel (LACC) to the south which provides a 
connection to the south bank of the Rio Salado. Bicycle infrastructure 
supports the established and future planned multi-modal network and 
promotes the goals of the City Council approved Complete Streets Policy. 
This recommendation applies solely to multifamily development because 
single family homes often include private yards, garages, or other similar 
spaces for recreational equipment storage.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 11 
 
 
STIPULATIONS 
 
1. 
That THE development shall be in general conformance with the site plan 
date stamped OCTOBER 19, 2021 April 10, 2002 by the City of Phoenix 
Planning Department with specific regard to AS MODIFIED BY THE 
FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, AND WITH SPECIFIC REGARD TO THE 
FOLLOWING: 
 
 
 
a. 
The parcel designated for Laveen Conveyance Channel Corridor.   
 
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY 
ZONED C-1 SHALL NOT EXCEED 97 UNITS.  
 
 
 
 
b. 
The location of multi-family because of its proximity to the Laveen 
Conveyance Channel Corridor. 
 
 
 
 
c. 
The centralized open space provided for single-family development 
west of 75th Avenue. 
 
 
 
2. That at the time multi-family and/or commercial development is proposed, 
building elevations and site plans shall be submitted for review by Planning 
Hearing Officer, and Laveen Village Planning Committee shall be notified. 
 
CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY, 
MULTIFAMILY, AND/OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE 
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING HEARING OFFICER 
THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS FOR STIPULATION 
MODIFICATION PRIOR TO FINAL 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. 
 
 
STREETS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY 
 
 
3. 
That Right-of-way totaling 55 feet and a 10-foot sidewalk easement shall be 
dedicated for the north half of Baseline Road. 
 
 
4. 
That Right-of-way totaling 30 feet shall be dedicated for the west half of 
71st Avenue.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 12 
 
5. 
That Right-of-way totaling 80 feet with a 20-foot sidewalk easement shall be 
dedicated for 75th Avenue. 
 
 
6. 
That A 21-foot by 21-foot right-of-way triangle shall be dedicated at the 
northeast and northwest corners of 75th Avenue and Baseline Road. 
 
 
7. 
That A 21-foot by 21-foot right-of-way triangle shall be dedicated at the 
northwest corner of 71st Avenue and Baseline Road. 
 
 
8. 
That The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the 
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, 
median islands, landscaping and other incidentals as per plans approved 
by the City. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility 
standards 
 
 
9. 
That The applicant shall complete and submit the Developer Project 
Information Form for the MAG Transportation Improvement Program to Mr. 
Alan Hilty (602) 262-6193, with the Street Transportation Department. This 
form is a requirement of the EPA to meet clean air quality requirements. 
 
 
LANDSCAPED SETBACKS, OPEN SPACE, TRAILS, FENCING AND 
ENTRANCES 
 
 
10. That Each entrance to the subdivision on Baseline Road shall incorporate 
subdivision entry signage and monumentation into the perimeter wall of the 
subdivision. Samples of fencing and entry design concepts shall be 
consistent with the Laveen Plan and approved by the PLANNING AND 
Development Services Department. 
 
 
11. Fence line shown on southern boundary of parcels three and four to 
substantially conform to zoning exhibit dated April 5, 2002 and stay broken 
down into smaller segments that undulate to break up the fence line on 
Baseline Road as shown. 
 
 
12. That Walls constructed adjacent to internal trails and open space areas 
shall be view walls. View walls shall be 100% wrought iron or a combination 
of 4 feet masonry and 2 feet of wrought iron. This standard is exclusive of 
the single-family homes next to 71st Avenue, open space on the southern 
portion of the site and the residential developments adjacent to commercial 
development. 
 
 
13. That The development shall comply with the Laveen Plan regarding the 50-
foot setback along Baseline Road.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 13 
 
14. That A 10-foot multi-use trail shall be provided along Baseline Road, and 
along the northern boundary of the property in conjunction with the property 
to the north. That An 8-foot multi-use trail shall be provided along the east 
side of 75th Avenue. Trails shall be consistent with the approved trail 
standards as approved by the Parks and Recreation Department. 
 
 
15. That A 10-foot shared use path (sidewalk) shall be provided within the 20-
foot sidewalk easement along the west side of 71st Avenue as approved by 
the Parks and Recreation Department. 
 
 
16. That Passive and/or active recreational amenities shall be provided in the 
open space area. 
 
 
17. That 50% of the open space shall be high and dry. 
 
 
17. 
18. 
That Pedestrian walkways/connections shall be provided between the multi-
family and commercial development. 
 
 
18. 
19. 
That Pedestrian walkways/connections within the commercial and multi-
family residential developments shall be constructed of materials other than 
asphalt. If concrete is used, it must be stamped. 
 
 
TRANSIT STOPS 
 
 
19. 
20. 
a. That Right-of-way and construction of bus bay (P1257) and transit pad 
(P1261) shall be constructed at the following locations, Northbound 
75th Avenue north of Baseline Road; 
 
 
 
 
b. That Right-of-way shall be dedicated at the following location for future 
construction of bus bay and transit pad: Westbound Baseline Road 
west of 75th Avenue. 
 
 
 
20. 
21. 
That Right-of-way and construction for transit pads (P1262) shall be 
constructed at the following locations: 
 
 
 
a. Northbound 75th Avenue north of Fremont Road. 
 
 
 
 
b. Southbound 75th Avenue south of Fremont Road. 
 
 
 
 
c. Westbound Baseline Road west of 71st Avenue. 
 
 
 
 
d. Westbound Baseline Road west of 73rd Avenue 
 
 
 
COMMERCIAL DESIGN

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 14 
 
21. 
22. 
That All buildings shall have a similar architectural character. A theme 
consistent with the Laveen Plan shall be approved by the PLANNING AND 
Development Services Department prior to any preliminary site plan 
approval. The theme shall include a minimum of two of the following 
materials AS ACCENT MATERIALS: native stone, burnt adobe, textured 
brick, wood (when shaded by overhangs or deep recesses), or exposed 
aggregate concrete. 
 
 
22. 
23. 
That Rear and side facades and roofline treatment, including color, texture 
and material shall be "architecturally finished" to minimize visual impact to 
adjacent residential areas as approved by THE PLANNING AND 
Development Services Department. 
 
 
24. That corporate colors and associated graphics shall be used only as an 
accent feature as determined by the PLANNING AND Development 
Services Department, so that they will not dominate the architectural design 
of the development. 
 
 
25. That commercial buildings shall have pitched roofs and/or pitched roof 
architectural elements. 
 
 
23. 
26. 
That the A shade arcade, a minimum of ten feet in width, shall be provided 
along any building wall with a primary customer entrance. 
 
 
27. That windows or windows with doors shall comprise a minimum of 50% of 
the square footage of any façade with a primary customer entrance. 
 
 
24. 
28. 
That Fifteen percent of surface parking areas within the commercial 
development, exclusive of the required perimeter landscaping and front 
setbacks, shall be landscaped and maintained. Landscaping shall be 
dispersed throughout the parking area with the interior width of all planting 
islands to be no less than eight feet in width and a minimum of 120 square 
feet in area. 
 
 
25. 
29. 
That There shall be no more than six parking spaces between any pad 
structure and Baseline Road. 
 
 
26. 
30. 
That There shall be no overnight parking of recreational vehicles, travel 
trailers, or similar vehicles. 
 
 
27. 
31. 
That There shall be no permanent installation of mobile containers 
permitted, exclusive of temporary loading and unloading.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 15 
 
28. 
32. 
That Any drive-through shall be screened from view of the perimeter street 
with a landscaped berm or a combination of a wall and landscaped berm at 
least four feet in height. 
 
 
29. 
33. 
That The site plan (commercial development), shall connect the 
parcels/buildings together with shade protected walkways as approved by 
the PLANNING AND Development Services Department. The pathways 
shall reflect a common landscaping theme and include a minimum of two-
inch caliper shade trees placed 20 feet on center exclusive of 
driveway/roadway crossings. 
 
 
30. 
34. 
That The setbacks shall be landscaped with 2-inch caliper shade trees 
planted an average of 20 feet on center. 
 
 
31. 
35. 
That Any service station canopies or drive-through canopies shall not 
exceed 16 feet in height measured from the ground to the underside of the 
canopy. 
 
 
32. 
36. 
That All canopy support pillars shall be a minimum of two feet wide by two 
feet deep, from the ground to the underside of the canopy, and shall be 
finished with the same body and accent materials as the primary building. 
 
 
33. 
37. 
That Electrical and service boxes shall be painted to match the building 
and/or screened from view. 
 
 
34. 
38. 
That All canopy lighting shall be flush-mounted or recessed, as approved 
by THE PLANNING AND Development Services Department. 
 
 
OTHER 
 
 
35. 
39. 
That The property owner shall record documents that disclose to 
purchasers of property within the development the existence and potential 
characteristics of agricultural use property in the vicinity. The form and 
content of such documents shall be reviewed and approved by the City Law 
Department prior to final site plan approval. 
 
 
36. 
40. 
That The subject site has the potential to contain archaeological resources. 
That The applicant shall submit an archaeological survey for review and 
approval by the City Archaeologist (602) 495-0901. 
 
 
37. 
41. 
That The maximum density relating to the R1-8 PRD portion SHALL not 
exceed 3.76 du/acre. 
 
 
42. That the maximum number of lots shall not exceed 312.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 16 
 
38. 
43. 
That the minimum lot width of regular rectangle lots not be less than 55 
feet, and slightly smaller lot widths may be allowed on cul-de-sacs and 
curves. 
 
THE MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL LOT WIDTH SHALL BE 45 FEET FOR 
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL USES, EXCEPT THAT 
SMALLER LOT WIDTHS ARE ALLOWED ON CUL-DE-SACS AND 
CURVES, AS APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
39. 
44. 
That The minimum amount of open space shall not be less than 12%. (This 
12% as indicated on the April 5, 2002 site plan will be "interior" to the 
overall residential neighborhood, which includes the contiguous 
development to the north. Also, open space is set aside for trail continuity, 
along the outside edge, as part of the 12%). 
 
 
40. 
45. 
That Sidewalks, curbs, and streetscapes ON RESIDENTIALLY ZONED 
PROPERTY will SHALL be designed in such a way to allow for rural mail 
delivery. The use of gang mailboxes shall not be allowed. 
 
 
41. 
46. 
That The minimum overhang on any given product with a peaked roof will 
be 18 inches. 
 
 
42. 
47. 
That On the site plan dated April 10, 2002, homes on lots 5-7, 124-128 
(Parcel 3), 8-11, 117-126 (Parcel 4) not exceed one-story. 
 
 
48. That the plan will remain in general conformance to the site plan dated April 
5, 2002. 
 
 
43. 
49. 
That Dwelling footprints will be placed in such a manner as to maximize the 
distance between houses. 
 
 
44. 
50. 
That Building setbacks will be offset along the street frontage. 
 
 
45. 
51. 
That Wrap-around architectural details and materials will be used on both 
sides of houses along street frontages on corner lots. 
 
 
46. 
52. 
That A variety of at least six TWO different types of roof treatments 
STYLES (E.G., FLAT CONCRETE SHINGLES AND “S” CONCRETE 
SHINGLES) SHALL be offered IN AT LEAST TWO COLORS that include a 
range of roof materials of clay, concrete, tile, shakes or shingles in an 
assortment of colors.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 17 
 
47. 
53. 
AT LEAST ONE ELEVATION PER FLOOR PLAN SHALL INCLUDE That a 
range of durable materials that would minimize stucco and tile be offered 
such as EITHER brick, decorative concrete block, and OR stone accents. 
 
 
48. 
54. 
That All mechanical equipment and dishes larger than 20 inches must be 
ground-mounted. 
 
 
49. 
55. 
That Lots 111-121, Parcel 4, on the east side of the project SHALL be a 
minimum of 10,000 square feet in size as shown on zoning exhibit dated 
April 5, 2002. 
 
 
56. That view fence substantially conform to pictures presented by Great 
Western Homes, made of 2/3 (+/- four feet) decorative block on bottom and 
1/3 (+/- two feet) wrought iron on top separated every (+/- 10-12 feet) with 
minimum two-foot square masonry posts with decorative caps including 
fence adjacent to 71st Avenue. 
 
 
50. FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THE DEVELOPER 
SHALL PROVIDE SECURED BICYCLE PARKING AS REQUIRED IN 
CHAPTER 13, SECTION 1307.H FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, 
AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
51. ANY REQUEST TO CHANGE, DELETE, OR MODIFY STIPULATIONS 
SHALL BE PRESENTED THROUGH THE PLANNING HEARING 
OFFICER PROCESS AND NOTIFICATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE 
LAVEEN VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE PRIOR TO THE PLANNING 
HEARING OFFICER HEARING. 
 
 
52. FRONT ELEVATIONS OF LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R-3A ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL CONTAIN A COMBINATION OF THE 
FOLLOWING ARCHITECTURAL EMBELLISHMENTS AND DETAILING: 
TEXTURAL CHANGES, PILASTERS, OFFSETS, RECESSES, 
VARIATION IN WINDOW SIZE AND LOCATION, OR OVERHANG 
CANOPIES, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
53. FRONT ELEVATIONS OF LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R-3A ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL INCORPORATE A MINIMUM OF THREE 
OF THE FOLLOWING BUILDING MATERIALS: STONE VENEER, 
TEXTURED BRICK, STUCCO, AND BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING, 
SHUTTERS, OR DECORATIVE GABLE VENTS, AS APPROVED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 18 
 
54. FRONT ELEVATIONS OF LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R3-A ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL BE COMPRISED OF A MAXIMUM OF 
75% STUCCO OR OTHER MAIN MATERIAL, AND A MINIMUM OF 25% 
ACCENT MATERIAL. 
 
 
55. LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R-3A ON THE WEST SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE 
SHALL INCLUDE THEME WALLS WHICH SHALL INCLUDE MATERIAL 
AND TEXTURAL DIFFERENCES SUCH AS STUCCO AND/OR SPLIT 
FACE BLOCK, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
56. GARAGE DOORS ON LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R-3A ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL INCORPORATE DECORATIVE 
EMBELLISHMENTS SUCH AS, ADDED MATERIALS SURROUNDING 
THE DOOR, GARAGE DOOR HARDWARE, OR STAMPED PANEL 
DOORS, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
57. ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL REDUCE BUILDING MASS BY USING A 
COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES, AS APPROVED BY 
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
 
A. 
VARIATION IN THE ROOFLINE AND FORM. 
 
 
 
 
B. 
USE OF PROTECTED OR RECESSED BUILDING ENTRANCES. 
 
 
 
 
C. 
VERTICAL ELEMENTS ON OR IN FRONT OF EXPANSIVE BLANK 
WALLS. 
 
 
 
 
D. 
USE OF WALL PLANE OFFSETS AND PROJECTIONS. 
 
 
 
 
E. 
USE OF FOCAL POINTS AND VERTICAL ACCENTS. 
 
 
 
 
F. 
INCLUSION OF WINDOWS ON ELEVATIONS FACING STREETS 
AND PEDESTRIAN AREAS. 
 
 
 
58. FRONT FACADES GREATER THAN 60 FEET IN LENGTH OF 
ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF TWO OF THE 
FOLLOWING ELEMENTS REPEATING AT APPROPRIATE INTERVALS, 
EITHER HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY: TEXTURE AND MATERIAL 
CHANGES, OFFSETS, REVEALS, RECESSED FRONT ENTRIES, 
ARCHWAYS OR PROJECTING RIBS, WALL PLANE PROJECTIONS OR 
RECESSES, VARIATIONS IN WINDOW SYSTEMS, OR VERTICAL

Planning Hearing Officer Summary of October 20, 2021 
Application PHO-2-21--Z-111-01-8(7) 
Page 19 
 
LANDSCAPE FEATURES, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
59. ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST 
SIDE OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL HAVE PITCHED, GABLE, OR HIPPED 
ROOF TYPES. 
 
 
60. DRIVEWAYS FOR LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R-3A ON THE WEST SIDE 
OF 75TH AVENUE SHALL BE 22 FEET IN LENGTH AS MEASURED 
FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. 
 
 
61. THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT SHALL BE 25 FEET FOR ALL 
SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL LOTS ALONG 75TH 
AVENUE AND THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE SUBJCT 
PROPERTY. 
 
 
62. ALL LOTS ZONED R1-8 AND R3-A ON THE WEST SIDE OF 75TH 
AVENUE, WHICH ARE DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, SHALL PROVIDE MINIMUM FIVE-FOOT SIDE 
YARD BUILDING SETBACKS. 
 
 
63. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER 
SHALL EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS IN A 
FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.  THE WAIVER 
SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDER'S 
OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE 
REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD. 
 
 
 
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. Please contact the Planning 
and Development Department, Angie Holdsworth, at voice number 602-495-5622 or TTY 
use 7-1-1.