Attachment E - Addendum A Staff Report - Z-43-20-4.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2021-09-08)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 36287 characters
ADDENDUM A 
Staff Report: Z-43-20-4 
August 4, 2021 
Encanto Village Planning Committee 
Meeting Date: 
June 7, 2021 
Planning Commission Hearing Date: 
August 5, 2021 
Request From: 
C-2 CNSPD (Intermediate Commercial,
Coronado Neighborhood Special
Planning District) (1.13 acres) and P-1
CNSPD (Parking, Coronado
Neighborhood Special Planning District)
(0.46 acres)
Request To: 
PUD CNSPD (Planned Unit 
Development, Coronado Neighborhood 
Special Planning District) (1.59 acres) 
Proposed Use: 
Planned Unit Development to allow a 
hotel and other commercial uses. 
Location: 
Northwest corner of 12th Street and 
McDowell Road 
Owner:  
1144 McDowell Land, LLC 
Applicant: 
1144 McDowell Land, LLC 
Representative: 
Larry Lazarus, Lazarus & Silvyn P.C. 
Staff Recommendation: 
Approval, subject to stipulations 
The purpose of this addendum is to provide additional community correspondence 
received since the Encanto Village Planning Committee on June 7, 2021, to remove a 
stipulation at the request of the Public Transit Department, to include a revised site plan 
and elevations, and to add a stipulation to allow for medical uses on the site and a 
stipulation requiring general conformance to the revised plans for the proposed hotel 
use. 
The Encanto Village Planning Committee heard the above described case on June 7th, 
2021 and recommended denial of the request by a vote of 5-4.  
COMMUNITY CORRESPONDENCE: 
Since the Village Planning Committee meeting on June 7th, 2021, staff has received an 
additional two emails in opposition, six emails in support; and two petitions in support of 
Attachment E

Addendum A to the Staff Report Z-43-20-4 
August 4, 2021 
Page 2 of 4 
 
 
the project proposed by the applicant. The referenced emails and petitions are attached 
to this addendum. 
 
STIPULATIONS ADDDITION / DELETION: 
The Public Transit Department has requested Stipulation No. 2 requiring the dedication 
and construction of a bus stop pad along McDowell Road be deleted.  
 
The applicant has requested additional sub-points be added to Stipulation No. 1 to allow 
for medical office use with the same standards proposed for the hotel use. At present 
and at the direction of the applicant, the Development Narrative is written to only allow 
for a hotel use and all uses permitted in the Walkable Urban Code Transect 4-3 District. 
 
The applicant has also submitted a revised site plan and renderings, and has requested 
to add a stipulation to require general conformance to these exhibits should a hotel use 
be developed on the site. The site plan was updated to move trees that were located 
north of the sidewalk along McDowell Road to the south side of the sidewalk within the 
landscape planter, and to show an added porch area and stairs along the south side of 
the building. Renderings have been submitted that show these updates as well. The 
applicant has requested that a stipulation be added to require general conformance to 
these plans. If the PUD Narrative contains development standards or design guidelines 
that are more restrictive than what would otherwise be allowed by the permitted 
deviation relevant to general conformance, the development shall comply with the PUD 
Narrative. The general conformance stipulation shall not be construed to permit 
variations that are not in compliance with the PUD narrative or which would otherwise 
require an amendment per Section 671.E. of the Zoning Ordinance. 
 
Additionally, staff has identified that an additional fence height provision will need to be 
added to the development standards table to allow the wall heights proposed on the 
revised plans. 
 
STIPULATIONS 
Staff recommends approval subject to the following revised stipulations: 
 
1. 
An updated Development Narrative for McDowell Hotel PUD reflecting the 
changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and 
Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request. 
The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development 
Narrative date stamped May 18, 2021, as modified by the following stipulations: 
 
 
 
a. 
Front cover: Revise the date information on the cover page to add the 
following:  
 Hearing Draft: May 18, 2021 
 City Council Adopted: TBD [Add Adoption Date] 
 
 
 
 
B. 
PAGE 4 AND EXHIBITS: ADD AN EXHIBIT 8 TO INCLUDE THE 
RENDERINGS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 4, 2021.

Addendum A to the Staff Report Z-43-20-4 
August 4, 2021 
Page 3 of 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
C. 
PAGE 8: UPDATE FIGURE 2 TO MATCH THE SITE PLAN DATE 
STAMPED AUGUST 4, 2021. 
 
 
 
 
D. 
PAGE 14; WALKABLE URBAN CODE: APPLICATIONS AND 
MODIFICATIONS TABLE: CHANGE THE COLUMN HEADER FROM 
“COLUMN B: STANDARDS FOR HOTEL USE ONLY” TO “COLUMN 
B: STANDARDS FOR HOTEL AND MEDICAL OFFICE USE ONLY” 
 
 
 
 
be. 
Page 14: Change “1303 General Site Development Standards” to “1304
General Site Development Standards”.  
 
 
 
 
F. 
PAGE 15, 1305 FRONTAGE STANDARDS, FENCE STANDARDS: ADD 
AN ADDITIONAL BULLET TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING 
PROVISION UNDER THE FIRST BULLET: 
o DECORATIVE SCREENING OR OPEN FENCING ON TOP OF 
SOLID WALLS SHALL BE LIMITED TO 66 INCHES, WITH A 
COMBINED HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 78 INCHES.  
 
 
 
 
G. 
PAGE 15; WALKABLE URBAN CODE: APPLICATIONS AND 
MODIFICATIONS TABLE. 1306 LAND USE MATRIX IN COLUMN B: 
ADD “CLINIC, MEDICAL OR DENTAL; LABORATORY, MEDICAL, 
DENTAL OR CLINICAL; MEDICAL OR DENTAL OFFICE; PER 
SECTION 1306 LAND USE MATRIX.” 
 
 
 
 
ch. 
Page 20; Site; 1st Paragraph: Add the following language “proposals for 
non-standard material in the public right-of-way shall require approval 
from the Street Transportation Department” 
 
 
2. 
The developer shall dedicate right-of-way and construct a bus stop pad along 
westbound McDowell Road west of 12th Street. The bus stop pad shall be 
compliant with City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a minimum depth of 
10 feet. The bus bay shall be spaced from the intersection of McDowell Road 
and 12th Street according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1258.  
 
THE SITE SHALL BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN 
DATE STAMPED AUGUST 4, 2021 SHOULD A HOTEL USE BE DEVELOPED 
ON THE SITE, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
3. 
The developer shall dedicate 35-feet of right-of-way for the north side of 
McDowell Road, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
4. 
The developer shall dedicate a 10-foot sidewalk easement for the north half of 
McDowell Road, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

Addendum A to the Staff Report Z-43-20-4 
August 4, 2021 
Page 4 of 4 
 
 
 
Exhibits 
Community Correspondence (15 pages) 
Site Plan date stamped August 4, 2021 
Renderings date stamped August 4, 2021 (10 pages) 
McDowell Hotel PUD date stamped May 18, 2021 
 
5.  
The driveway along McDowell Road shall be restricted to three quarter access 
per City of Phoenix standard detail, as approved by the Street Transportation 
Department. 
 
 
6.  
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.  
 
 
7. 
The developer shall provide a No Hazard Determination for the proposed 
development from the FAA pursuant to the FAA’s Form-7460 obstruction 
analysis review process, prior to construction permit approval, as per plans 
approved by the Planning and Development Department.   
 
 
8. 
The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and 
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport 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. 
 
 
9. 
The developer shall grant and record an avigation easement to the City of 
Phoenix for the site, per the content and form prescribed by the City Attorney 
prior to final site plan approval. 
 
 
10. 
If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall 
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the 
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to 
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval. 
 
 
11. 
If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the 
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified 
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the 
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations. 
 
 
12. 
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.

From:
Karen Voyer-Caravona
To:
Nick Klimek
Cc:
Matteo Moric; Pradeep.Tiwarie@phoenix.gov; Mayor Gallego; Council District 4
Subject:
1144 E McDowell pre-application question
Date:
Wednesday, July 8, 2020 9:58:14 AM
Mr. Klimek:
My home is at 1144 E Almeria Rd, directly behind 1144 E McDowell ((2008640, Kiva Project # 20-590)
address, which is planned for redevelopment as a hotel.  I would like to know the current status of
this application and to request notification on any public meetings pertaining to the development.  
The outreach provided by the applicant's neighborhood representative was not forthcoming, which I
can only assume was due to the l knowledge that my husband, an AICP with over 25 years
experience in both the public and private section, would object strongly to pre-application currently
on file.  We do not object to the redevelopment itself but the numerous exemptions they are
seeking related to setback, height, parking, etc.   The impact on traffic and the fact that the current
plans do not align with the Neighborhood Conservation Plan for the Coronado Neighborhood are of
great concern.    Although the applicant was invited to attend the July meeting of the Coronado
Neighborhood General Meeting to present, it was reported that the applicant declined until the
August meeting, seeking to integrate feedback received from effected residents in Coronado
neighborhood. However, I am concerned decisions will be made at the City of Phoenix before
sufficient notification and input from neighborhood residents, who are understandably less able to
participate in the public process due to pandemic conditions.  
We have not received any written notification from the applicant.  The informal outreach by the
applicant's liaison was not forthcoming with any project details despite the fact that a presentation
had already been made before the McDowell merchants group and, the pre-application was on file
with the city.  It is worth noting that the copy of the presentation given to the Coronado
Neighborhood Association for distribution was not only limited to pretty elevation drawings but that
all the data in the margins was completely obscured.  The set back information, an issue of special
concern to all residents of Coronado's perimeter streets, was not provided. No staff comments were
included, nor was any information provided about how to contact City planning staff to give
feedback or ask questions.  
The conservation plan, which was approved by the Phoenix City Council on May 21, 1986, repeatedly refers
to the potential for Banner Hospital to encroach upon Coronado's residential character.  It is my
understanding that Banner is pushing for the approval of this plan and that one of the applicant's
representatives is a member of Banner's Board of Directors.  The developer purchased this property before
the successful completion of the entitlement process, which I understand to be risky and somewhat
unusual.  For this reason, some residents speculate that the project in its current form is a done deal.  I
hope this is not the case.
Karen Voyer-Caravona
1144 E Almeria Rd
928.814.8497

Background 
The developer submitted for a Preapplication (2008640, Kiva Project # 20-590) and received staff 
comments on 3/17/2020.   Preapplication meetings are useful to inform the developer of relevant codes 
and regulations to the proposed project.   After receiving the Pre-application comments, the developer 
undertakes studies, performs outreach and revises plans as necessary responding to staff comments in 
preparation to submit the formal application for rezoning and design entitlements. The attached files 
were provided by the developer's liaison and are also available through public record requests.  A 
follow-up phone call to Matteo Moric, Planner II, occurred on June 1, 2020 to receive application status 
and processing information.  A PUD application has not been submitted.  The Village Planner who 
coordinates with applicants on Zoning Applications in this area of the City is Nick Klimek and he can be 
reached at nick.klimek@phoenix.gov or 602-534-7696. An application to combine lots with Project 
Number 00-2913 has a Plan Review Status as Open.  
 
In addition to the zoning code, the subject site is must conform to the Coronado Neighborhood 
Conservation Plan. https://www.phoenix.gov/pddsite/Documents/PZ/pdd_pz_pdf_00300.pdf  
 
Neighborhood Conservation Plan for the Coronado Neighborhood:  
https://www.phoenix.gov/villagessite/Documents/pdd_pz_pdf_00094.pdf  
Here you will find additional goals, policies and land use information.  
 
A Powerpoint presentation “1144 E. McDowell Road, Hotel, PUD application, May 21, 2020” was 
provided that contained two slides of building elevations and a Site Plan.  Due to the blurred condition 
of the Site Plan, and reduced image extent that eliminated the required and proposed development 
standards and parking requirements, it cannot be determine if the developer responded to any of the 
preapplication staff comments.  To be fair to the developer's representative, the blurred depiction may 
be an issue of copying and pasting an image into the Powerpoint.  However, this is easily overcome by 
inserting and common practice to insert a .pdf image file directly into the Powerpoint presentation.   The 
availability of complete, clear, decipherable plans, project information and nature of request relevant to 
current zoning and proposed entitlements should not be glossed-over.  If the Developer is genuinely 
engaging a Neighborhood Association and community to incorporate meaningful feedback and buy-in, 
at a minimum clear documentation should be provided.  Second, the proposal is a complicated PUD 
application with stipulated requests to reduce development standards and parking requirements. The 
provided presentation does not outline the detail of the request nor discusses the rational that the 
proposed development should be granted.  With the stipulated reduction in development standards, is 
the community receiving a better design or does the resulting development place the developer’s 
burdend upon the community? For example, through a reduction of required parking on-site, where 
does the overflow of parking get displaced? Third, it would be respectful of the Developer to provide the 
Neighborhood Association Board complete plans and documentation in advance of the presentation 
such the Neighborhood Association Board has ample time to review, analyze and prepare concerns and 
meaningful questions, rather than merely having the Board respond to pretty pictures from an 
abbreviated presentation.  
 
After receiving the Board’s comments, what is the public participation plan to receive feedback from the 
Board and community? What is the notification procedure? Where can plans be reviewed?  Will there 
be a public presentation?   
 
Initial Concerns 
 
Comments provided to Coronado Neighborhood Association Board for June 4, 2010 General Meeting
Bob Caravona

1. Parking shortage.  
 105 spaces are required and only 64 spaces are provided.  This leaves a shortfall of 41 spaces.  This 
burden then becomes the neighborhood's as the shortfall in parking spaces have to be located 
elsewhere such as on neighboring streets. In other words, the Hotel operator strives to have full booking 
of 103 rooms.  When this occurs, the operator has only 64 spaces.  41 spaces need to be made-up 
elsewhere.    
 
Based upon a 41 parking space shortfall with curbside parking spaces at 23' in length, 943 feet of 
curbside parking would need to be found somewhere in the neighborhood.   Almeria's block length 
between 11th and 12th Streets is approximately 635'   There are code provisions for shared parking but 
it is believed the proposed development meets the criteria. Code 
requirements   https://phoenix.municipal.codes/ZO/702 
 
Other concern is whether parking code requires spaces for the bar and conference facilities.  Typically, 
hotels rent conference space for clients who are not guests (business meetings, wedding receptions, 
etc.)     The developer should provide a Parking Management Plan addressing these shortfalls and/other 
studies if Shared Parking is being requested.   
 
2. Request reduction in setbacks, parking and landscaping yards 
 
The decreased setback will create an urban curtain along 12th and Almeria which, in turn, changes the 
neighborhood characteristic along 12th and Almeria.  The precedent will be set - likely allowing future 
development to build to this reduced setback.  If the developer desires to build to the setbacks of the C-
2 district, it is their right.  A PUD application would change these minimum requirements to the 
developer’s request.. 
 
This is important because these required setback and landscape yards buffer commercial uses from 
residential.  The required North property line setback is 30'.  The developer proposes providing a 
4'average and 2'.2 ft. minimum. The setback along the east property line is required to have 30ft.  The 
developer proposes 13ft.    These setbacks and landscape areas are not adequate.  The building plans 
(walls) are imposed upon street and adjacent residential neighborhood residences without adequate 
landscaping to soften the transition and provide human scale.  Plant material cannot grow within a 2' 
area.  Again, the proposal displaces the burden of landscaping into the public realm (ie. public right-of-
way) rather than include the required landscaping on the privately owned lot.       
 
You may find the Development Standards required and provided setbacks/parking on sheet A0.4.  The 
development setback information was missing in the presentation.  The developer's representation 
should have these readily available and able to address the impacts, rationale and justification behind 
the setback and yard reduction.   
 
3. Public Participation Plan 
What is the Public Participation Plan to receive property owner comments within the notification 
distance and broader neighborhood comments?

Page 1 of 4 
 
 
 
Z-43-20n - PUD - 12TH AND MCDOWELL  
ENCANTO VILLAGE PLANNING  APPEAL LETTER 
 
project:  
Z-43-20N 
 
date:    
2021-07-29 
 
 
 
to: 
 
Nick Klimek, AICP 
 
 
Encanto Village Planner 
 
 
City of Phoenix  
 
 
Planning and Development Department 
 
 
200 W. Washington St 
 
 
Phoenix, AZ 85003 
 
from: 
 
Arthur (Artie) Vigil 
 
 
Coronado 17 year resident, 
 
 
 NCARB Architect, CNU-accredited, LEED AP 
 
 
2026 N 10th street 
 
 
Phoenix AZ, 85006 
 
Dear Mr. Nick Klimek and Phoenix Planning Commission Members, 
 
I am resident of Coronado Neighborhood and an architect.  I am in favor of this property being 
redeveloped.  However, not in favor of the PUD as current written and design.  
 
The design is not compatible with the Coronado Neighborhood and the 1986 Conservation Plan.   This 
PUD is requesting substantial parking and setback variances for a suburban styled national chain hotel.    
The building design ignores the context of the existing historic neighborhood.  PUD zoning applications 
should require developers to be build better quality projects than required with standard zoning.   
Instead we are presented with building materials and erratic building facace patterns that are typical 
for fast food chains and suburban hotel chain developments.   Approving this PUD without a 
requirement for compatible architecture would set a terrible precedent for future PUD's around the 
perimeter of the Coronado Neighborhood.     
 
 I'd like to encourage you to vote against this PUD as designed and have the developer go back to the 
drawing board with the following suggestions/stipulations. 
 
1) Building setback should be 30' along Almeria. 
 
2) McDowell Street  frontage should be revised to reflect the goals of the WU code.  
No Pool,  Main Street frontage design standards.    
 
3) Parking should be parked at 1 space per room.  (currently 0.67 spaces per 
room) 
 
4) Architecture should be revised to be compatible with the 1920's - 40's main 
street architectural character of Coronado and Miracle Mile.     
 
1)Building Setback: 
 The Almeria building setback should match the 30' that currently exists for the adjacent homes along 
the street.   Current proposal is at 17' and would negatively affect the existing alignment of homes and 
buildings on the street.

2021-07-29 
Z-43-20n - PUD - Arthur Vigil - Coronado Resident  
 
 
 
 
Page 2 of 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The current 17' setback along Almeria does not meet the PUD (zoning code requirements) which state 
that development standards will be established to compliment the dimensions and physical features of 
a site and the character of the neighborhood.    
 
The current PUD is modeled after the WU Code - T4 district.   This form based code for T4 requires that 
building setbacks match the building height when adjacent to historic districts and R1-6 zoning.  The WU 
code would require the building setback be 56' along Almeria. 
 
The current zoning is C-2 Commercial zoning.  The setback along Almeria is 30' for this zoning. 
 
This property is within the 1986 Coronado Conservation plan.  The primary objective of the plan is to 
promote development at a scale, quality and at locations where it will not adversely affect residents 
and their homes.   Regarding building setback, the Coronado Conservation plan states that setbacks 
should be commensurate with the height of the building and adjacent uses.   Further stating that this 
provision will not reduce any setback required by existing zoning ordinance.    Reminder that the 
Coronado Conservation plan was established in reaction to the building that is being remodeled.    
 
The 2015 General Plan, states that Areas of Preservation are meant to maintain established character 
and scale of a neighborhood or place.   Planning should be employed to ensure those places are 
protected and enhanced.    
 
On page 65 of the General Plan.  Underdeveloped land in older parts of the city should be developed 
in a manner that is compatible with viable existing development and the long term character and goals 
for the area.

2021-07-29 
Z-43-20n - PUD - Arthur Vigil - Coronado Resident  
 
 
 
 
Page 3 of 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2)  Walkable Main Street Frontage  
The zoning code for a PUD requests that the development should have standards that will compliment 
the dimensions and physical features of a site and the character of a neighborhood.   The developer 
would understand the goals of the Miracle Mile in re-establishing Main Street Architecture which defined 
the street from the 1920' through '40's.     
 
The WU code states that building facades shall be designed to provide a sense of human scale at the 
ground level by providing a clear architectural distinction between the ground floor and additional 
stories.  This proposal does not meet this objective in the design.    
 
The WU code states that all pedestrian entrances should be defined by their distinctive use of materials 
an architectural elements.   The primary building entry should be located within the primary frontage. 
Building frontages on arterials should be orientated to the arterial frontage.   The preferred arrangement 
is to front facades directly adjacent to the sidewalk.   The current design has the entrance elevated and 
hidden behind a courtyard and pool area under the building near the porte-cochere which does not 
promote a safe walk-able frontage.    
 
 
3) Parking.   
The PUD is requesting 0.67 spaces per room, the current zoning is 1 space per room.   The PUD makes no 
mention for how the deficient parking will be accounted for.     
 
Parking Required: 
105 guestrooms x 1 space per room = 105 parking spaces 
 
Parking Provided: 64 parking spaces 
 
Deficient:  41 parking spaces.   
 
The existing zoning is C-3 which would require 1 parking space per room.   
 
The WU code which is being used as a reference requires 0.75 spaces per room.   The WU code is only 
limited to within the Reinvent PHX transit orientated district policy areas.    This property is not adjacent to 
transit stations.   Therefore the burden of the missing parking would be placed onto the neighborhood 
when the hotel is booked.    
 
There has been mention of a cross access agreements with the hospital.  However the parking must be 
located within 300', and cannot cross an Arterial or Collector Street.   Therefore the only offsite parking 
that would be available would be to share the parking with the office buildings to the west.    This is not 
clarified in the PUD.    
 
The Coronado Conservation plan on page 28 encourages underground parking for new commercial 
development.   
 
4) Architecture 
The architecture that is proposed is not compatible with the character of Coronado Neighborhood.    
 
The 2015 General Plan under a goal for Certainty and Character on page 106, that Every Neighborhood 
and Community should have a level of certainty.  Ensure that development, redevelopment and 
infrastructure supports and reinforces the character and identify of each unique community and 
neighborhood.    This PUD design does not speak to the character of Coronado.  Its neither referenced 
or studied.

2021-07-29 
Z-43-20n - PUD - Arthur Vigil - Coronado Resident  
 
 
 
 
Page 4 of 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On page 110, these goals are continued for Historic Districts.   This goal states that New Development 
and Infill should be responsive to the historic surroundings and is compatible in size, scale, massing, 
proportion and materials.    
 
The Encanto Village plan further states these goals.   Page 12.  New Development should be compatible 
in scale, design and appearance.   Page 13....Promote neighborhood identity through planning that 
reinforces the existing landscaping and character area.   Page 15...it is important to preserve this historic 
character to be cohesive with the existing neighborhoods.   
 
The Coronado Conservation plan also states that a USE permit is required for hotel uses.   The current 
PUD is requesting that this use permit requirement is removed.     
 
Conclusion: 
The General Plan, Encanto Village Plan, Coronado Conservation Plan,  WU code, C3 zoning all guide 
development that is compatible and in harmony with the neighborhood.   This would be the first PUD 
approved within the Coronado Conservation Plan.   Please vote against this PUD or  recommend the 
following stipulations.   
 
1) Building setback should be 30' along Almeria. 
 
2) McDowell Street  frontage should be revised to reflect the goals of the WU code.  
No Pool at street frontage,  WU code Main Street frontage design standards.    
 
3) Parking should be parked at 1 space per room.  (currently 0.67 spaces per 
room) 
 
4) Architecture should be revised to be compatible with the 1920's - 40's main 
street architecture of Coronado.     
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thank You!  
 
 
Artie  A. Vigil III, ncarb . leed ap . cnu-a

From:
Krista Norton
To:
Council District 4
Cc:
Nick Klimek
Subject:
RE: Z-43-20-4 McDowell Hotel PUD
Date:
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 2:05:50 PM
Good Afternoon Councilmember Pastor:
I have been a live-in homeowner in the Garfield historic neighborhood since 2009. I am thrilled to
see all the development and improvements coming into the McDowell Road Corridor, as this is one
of the reasons I chose to purchase my home in Garfield in the first place.
Today I write to you in regards to the Z-43-20-4 McDowell Hotel PUD.
My son was born prematurely at Banner Good Samaritan, now Banner University, in 2011. I was
fortunate to live right around the corner from the hospital so that my extended family, friends and
visitors could easily go between the locations in order to help my immediate family and I with
anything we needed. Not everyone who uses Banner University’s Nicu or any urgent service for that
matter, has that luxury. I can only imagine how difficult it must be for families needing a place to
stay when visiting their loved ones. I was incredibly happy to hear about a planned hotel coming to
the intersection of 12th Street and McDowell that families could easily utilize when their loved ones
are at the hospital.
I have reviewed the zoning application for a Hotel, including the site plan and elevations, and I am in
support of the project. I believe that it will be a benefit to the McDowell Road Corridor, the
community, and both the Garfield and Coronado neighborhoods.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Krista Norton & Family
1230 E. Roosevelt Street
Phoenix, AZ 85006
k7norton@gmail.com

From:
James McDougall
To:
Nick Klimek
Cc:
Terrence Plas
Subject:
Fwd: Zoning Case Z-43-20-4
Date:
Wednesday, July 21, 2021 12:45:14 PM
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: James McDougall <jrmcii@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 8:37 PM
Subject: Zoning Case Z-43-20-4
To: Council.district.4@phoenix.gov <Council.district.4@phoenix.gov>
CC: Nick.klimeck@phoenix.gov <Nick.klimeck@phoenix.gov>,
terrence@plasinvestments.com <terrence@plasinvestments.com>
Dear Councilmember Pastor,
I am a resident in the area, and I support Zoning Case Z-43-20-4 - McDowell Hotel at 12th St
& McDowell Rd.
I have lived at 42 W Willetta St, Phoenix, AZ 85003 since early 2017. I would like to see this
project move forward, and I believe it will have a positive impact on my neighborhood and the
area surrounding it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jim McDougall

From:
Salem Elia
To:
Nick Klimek
Cc:
Nick Klimek
Subject:
Zoning Case # Z-43-20-4 Hotel @ 1144 E. McDowell Road
Date:
Thursday, July 22, 2021 5:01:05 PM
Miss. Laura Pastor
 
Please note , as an owner of a property( 1609 N. 12th Street ) just east of the above project, I am in
favor of the development, thanks.
 
Salem D. Elia
The Salem D. Elia Family Trust
10090 E. Evans Dr
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
salemelia@qwestoffice.net
 
 
Sent from Mail [go.microsoft.com] for Windows 10

Laura Pastor, Councilmember District 4 
City of Phoenix 
200 W. Washington St. 
Phoenix AZ 85003 
 
Zoning Case #Z-43-20-4 for a hotel at 1144 E. McDowell Road 
 
Councilwoman Pastor, 
I am a homeowner in the Coronado neighborhood and over the past year have followed the 
project’s evolution in response to concerns and suggestions made by my fellow Coronado 
residents and other community stakeholders.  
 
As a professional sustainable urban planning professional, I support this project. I have 
reviewed the PUD Narrative, including the revised site plan, landscape plan, circulation plan, 
open space plan, architectural renderings and traffic study. I believe the project will help 
activate a property that is currently, from my perspective in the neighborhood, a large vacant 
parking lot. The proposed hotel will activate the site and is located in a spot well suited to 
integate into our community’s fabric, as Coronado Park is just north of the site and several 
restaurants and businesses are in close proximity as well.  
 
The adaptive reuse of this long-vacant office building will unquestionably contribute to the 
revitalization and walkability of McDowell Road, and greatly enhance the southern entry into 
Coronado.  
 
I urge you to approve the rezoning to allow this transformation to happen. 
 
 
Rebecca Santiago ___________________ 
Signature 
 
2018 N 10th St Phoenix AZ 85006____________________________ 
Address 
 
7/24/21_______ 
Date 
 
 
To: Laura Pastor, council.district.4@phoenix.gov 
Cc:Nick Klimek, nick.klimek@phoenix.gov

1
Racelle Escolar
Subject:
FW: Support for Zoning Case #Z-43-20-4
 
From: Michelle Green <mgreen@lslawaz.com>  
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2021 9:24 AM 
To: Racelle Escolar <racelle.escolar@phoenix.gov> 
Subject: Fwd: Support for Zoning Case #Z‐43‐20‐4 
Sent from my iPhone 
 
Begin forwarded message: 
From: Marci Rosenberg <marcizrosenberg@gmail.com> 
Date: July 31, 2021 at 8:44:06 AM MST 
To: Larry Lazarus <llazarus@lslawaz.com>, Michelle Green <mgreen@lslawaz.com> 
Subject: Fwd: Support for Zoning Case #Z‐43‐20‐4 
This came in yesterday from my friend and very respected neighbor here in Coronado.  He is also willing to speak at the 
hearings.  Will keep you posted on progress with residents along the primary Almeria block over the weekend...  
‐‐Marci 
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Brad Bridwell <bbridwell78@gmail.com> 
Date: Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 8:45 PM 
Subject: Support for Zoning Case #Z‐43‐20‐4 
To: nick.klimek@phoenix.gov <nick.klimek@phoenix.gov>, council.district.4@phoenix.gov <council.district.4@phoenix.gov> 
 
Mr. Klimek and Councilwoman Pastor: 
 
I am writing to express my support for the above referenced zoning case for the addition of a hotel on the corner of 12th street and 
McDowell Road. The McDowell hotel will add considerable walkability, shade, and security to the Coronado and Garfield 
neighborhoods which surround it by adaptively reusing a vacant medical office building. The butterfly garden, the pool location on 
the McDowell side, and the walking paths are all well placed and the exterior facade will make a great addition as a southern 
entrance into the Coronado neighborhood. Additionally, we have several small businesses operating in and around Coronado that 
will benefit from the added hotel guests that it will attract.  
 
I have a large family spread out all across the state and we had the unfortunate events of caring for our mother and father as they 
both passed in Banner Good Sam just 13 months apart from each other. In each case, their deaths occurred over an elongated 
period of time of several weeks where family were traveling from Casa Grande, Tucson, Scottsdale, Chandler, Flagstaff, and Prescott. 
It would have been nice to have had such an easily accessible hotel room or rooms to give family members a place to rest, 
recuperate, and get their strength back together to walk into such trying times.  
 
Last thing I will say is that the existing building has no historic value, the redesigned and new sections of this proposed building look 
great and do not, in any way, shape, or form, need to conform to the historic preservation (because there’s nothing to preserve) we 
have come to expect on the interior of our historic neighborhoods. This development will only benefit our neighborhoods and the 
critical hospital infrastructure just across the street. 
 
Thank You, 
 
Brad Bridwell 
Coronado Resident 
2313 N Evergreen St 
Phoenix, AZ 85006 
602‐317‐8582 
 
Get Outlook for iOS [aka.ms]

July 30, 2021 
 
 
 
RE: Z-43-20-4 
 
 
 
 
To whom it may concern: 
 
 
On behalf of Garfield Organization, I would like to recommend approval of this 
zoning change.  
 
The proposal was presented at our Garfield Revitalization & Economic 
Development committee.  Residents were happy to see proposal for improving 
the intersection and providing a service for Banner University Medical Center 
Phoenix. There were no oppositions by any residents. 
 
We look forward to the new proposed hotel and the grand improvement it will 
bring to our McDowell streetscape.  
 
 
Thank you, 
 
 
 
Dana Johnson 
president

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10