Attachment D - DSC Minutes - Z-TA-7-19-8.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2021-09-08)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 10458 characters
Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 1 of 6
DESIGN STANDARDS COMMITTEE (DSC) 
TEXT AMENDMENT Z-TA-7-19, TOWNSEND PARK 
MINUTES 
Monday, April 14, 2020 Meeting 
Per the most recent guidelines from the federal government, the Design 
Standards Committee held a meeting electronically, via a video conferencing 
platform.
DSC MEMBERS 
PRESENT 
DSC MEMBERS 
ABSENT 
STAFF PRESENT 
Ben Patton, Chair 
Allan Gutkin 
Planning and Development 
Department 
Matt Seaman, Vice-
chair 
Joshua Bednarek, Deputy 
Director, Planning 
Craig Steblay 
Christopher DePerro, Team 
Leader, Site Plan 
Dennis Newcombe 
Samantha Keating, Principal 
Planner  
Sarah Stockham, Central City 
VPC planner  
Vania Fletcher, DSC Liaison 
1.
Call to Order, introductions, and announcements.
The meeting was called to order by Chair Ben Patton at 2:24 pm, with a quorum
of four members. Introductions were made.
2.
Remote Meeting Procedures and Staff Announcements.
Ms. Fletcher provided information regarding the remote meeting procedures, and
informed the Committee that Mr. Allan Guktin had to recuse himself due to a
conflict of interest. She read out the roles and duties of the Design Standards
Committee under Zoning Ordinance Section 308.
3.
Review, discussion, and possible recommendation on the proposed draft of
the Text Amendment Z-TA-7-19 – Townsend Park.
Attachment D

Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 2 of 6 
The Chair called on Ms. Stockham to present. Ms. Stockham proceeded with a 
PowerPoint presentation that was provided to the Committee as part of staff 
documentation. She explained that the text amendment had three parts: to 
amend the regulatory density map, to amend the regulatory buffer alley map, and 
to amend the Townsend Park Character Area text for height.  
Ms. Stockham described the details of each of the requests, starting with the 
Density Map and the changes requested for a particular property to increase the 
density from 43.5 dwelling units per acre to 125 dwelling units per acre by right. 
 
Increase in Density: Ms. Stockham stated that staff found the proposal for density 
to be consistent with the transitional nature of the Townsend Park Character Area, 
the density designation to the west of the site, transit-oriented development 
policies and goals 
Buffer Alleys  
 
Ms. Stockham clarified that the intent of the buffer alleys was to protect low 
intensity residential neighborhoods – they alleys were not being removed, only 
the designation and that there were no single-family residences along the alleys 
in the proposal. Staff found that the proposal is consistent with existing uses and 
character of the area.

Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 3 of 6 
Height Bonus in the Townsend Park Character Area 
 
The final request, she explained, was to allow 30 percent Height Bonus for the 
entire character area. Staff found the proposal is consistent with the Major Urban 
Center TOD Strategic Policy Framework place type, the Downtown Phoenix Plan 
policies, and that the proposal maintains the existing height transition in the 
Character Area and provides for an increased level of community benefits. 
Ms. Stockham explained that she reviewed the original intent of the Downtown 
Code and that of the Downtown Phoenix Plan, the vision for the Townsend Park 
Character Area and the original intent to have a height and strategies to protect 
the East Evergreen Historic District east of 3rd Street. The Downtown Code 
adopted a transitional district west of 3rd Street as mixed uses were permitted, 
and Ms. Stockham explained that Townsend Park now has a very diverse number 
of businesses. She informed the committee that additional studies have been 
done post Downtown Code, such as Reinvent Phoenix and the 2013 TOD 
Strategic Policy Framework which defined place types for areas within the quarter 
mile from light rail stations. The TOD place type for this particular request falls 
under the major urban center. She stated that staff finds that this is consistent 
with the policies for McDowell. 
 
Ms. Stockham stated that staff’s recommendation is for approval of the three 
text amendment requests and that the Central City Village Planning Committee 
heard this request for information only on March 9 and will hear the request for 
recommendatio on May 11. 
Chair Patton noted while the text amendment did approve a specific plan, this 
came in because of a proposal for a specific developer plan. He had concern over 
amending the regulatory maps and that it could mean to be ‘in hot water with the

Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 4 of 6 
neighborhood’ without a plan of a development. The chair stated also that this 
could be a precedent. 
Mr. Seaman noted his concern over the proposal to increase the density from 
43.5 to 125 dwelling units per acre. He explained to staff that Townsend Park 
already permits an increase of density with Bonus Points for a maximum 100% 
increase, potentially allowing for 87 dwelling units per acre. Which meant that 
‘theoretically’ speaking, by approving 125 units, the developer could potentially 
increase the height up to 250 dwelling units per acre. He proposed that the 
density should only be increase to 67.5 dwelling units per acre, once bonus points 
were added, the total increase would come to the same 125.  
Ms. Stockham stated that an increase in density would have to come with 
‘cultural’ amenities to be approved and that 125 was the density on all properties 
on the west side of 3rd Street. He asked if outreach had been done to the 
community. The applicant stated that they had not done community outreach and 
also stated that there was no intent to go above the 125 dwellings per unit.  
Mr. Newcombe also commented on concerns over the lack of plans 
[development] and the outreach and asked staff if the Village Planning Committee 
(VPC) had anything to say. Ms. Stockham explained that the applicant made a 
presentation and VPC had a discussion, stating that they would prefer affordable 
housing. Mr. Newcombe stated that he was not as concerned about the increase 
in height. 
Mr. Seaman stated that he was very reluctant regarding amending regulating 
plans, because that is exactly what was being proposed, and while the DTC may 
not be have been adapting to changes in intensity, a lot more information was 
needed for review for this precedent, especially since this was being done as an 
owner request. He stated that maybe it was time to review the changes [in the 
DTC] to see why this one site is more deserving than other areas which that could 
go through a similar path.  
Mr. DePerro explained that the density change was specific to this site only and 
not to the whole of Townsend Park and that because of the DTC rezoning was not 
the recourse, only the change in the regulatory plans. 
Chair Patton reiterated that while the buffer alley and density only applied to the 
developer parcel, the height increase applied to all of Townsend Park, and Mr. 
Seaman asked for verification regarding the height. Ms. Keating showed the 
proposed language showing the language change that would apply to all:

Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 5 of 6 
 
The Chair stated that the density request was an issue, it was a precedent, and 
this could come up again. He noted that a slightly more intense density than 67.5 
would be acceptable, and he asked the committee for comments. Mr. Steblay 
stated that there was a precedent for 89 dwelling units per acre.  
Mr. Newcombe noted that changes have occurred overtime in Downtown and that 
the Character Area may be different in the future but was in agreement with the 
density concerns. He also noted that the 89 dwelling units per acre had a lot of 
history on it.  He wanted assurances that any increase would require separate 
sustainability bonus points. Mr. DePerro explained that you can’t use the same 
bonus points for different requests, bonus points for height have to be different 
than those for the density, that you can’t ‘double dip’. 
The committee looked at the Density Map to identify existing densities. The 
standard densities above 43.5 were 97 and 140. The committee felt that both 
were too high and that 97 was also due to a previous entitlement increase. Mr. 
Seaman reminded members that in order for a developer to double the density, 
they would have to achieve all bonus points to be approved, but that 89 dwelling 
units per acre could be the target number. 
The Chair offered a motion: To approve all three requests with the exception of 
the request for density, to be adjusted from 125 to 89 dwelling units per acre.  Mr. 
Seaman seconded. 
Discussion: Mr. Steblay directed comments to staff by saying that changing an 
entire area and spot zoning to allow extra entitlement feels like circumventing the 
system and this could lead to others trying to pull the same thing. He asked staff 
to evaluate maps and heights, it did not feel good to give special treatment for an 
individual. Ms. Stockham and Ms. Keating addressed the concerns by stating that 
the evaluation also included other policies for guidance such as Reinvent Phoenix 
and place types.  
Mr. Newcomb stated that in the future he would like to see the development plans 
to see where the ‘rubbing’ points were. The Chair stated that this case, as a 
model, felt like spot zoning. 
Mr. Steblay, stated that for the record, he didn’t like the way this was going, that 
they should look at a bigger picture. Mr. DePerro stated that as a city process, if 
someone wants to file a request, they can do it.

Design Standards Committee Minutes 
April 14, 2020 
Page 6 of 6 
The motion to approve all three requests with the exception of the request for 
density to be adjusted from 125 to 89 dwelling units per acre was approved 4-0.  
4. 
Committee Members announcements. 
None. 
5. 
Public comments concerning items not on the agenda. Not for discussion 
or action. 
None 
6. 
Identification of additional meeting dates and future agenda items. 
None identified 
7.  
Adjournment 
The meeting adjourned at 3:51 pm. 
 
For further information on this item please call Vania Fletcher, Planning & Development 
Department at 602-261-8664. You may also visit our website for this and other public 
meeting notices and agendas: https://phoenix.gov/cityclerk/publicmeetings/notices.