Attachment C - VPC Summaries - Z-61-22-7.pdf
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
28205 characters
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Date of VPC Meeting January 9, 2023 Request From R-5 RI, P-1, and C-3 CMOD Request To WU Code T5:5 and WU Code T5:5 CMOD Proposed Use Multifamily residential Location Southeast corner of 9th Avenue and Fillmore Street VPC Recommendation Continuance to February 13, 2023 VPC Vote 12-3-1 VPC DISCUSSION: Seventeen members of the public spoke on this item, 10 in favor and seven in opposition. Committee Member Christopher Colyer recused himself for this item, bringing quorum to 15 members. STAFF PRESENTATION Anthony Grande, staff, provided an overview of the subject site and surrounding area, the proposed zoning, and the proposed development. Mr. Grande described the background of policies affecting the area, the staff findings, and staff recommendation of approval subject to stipulations. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Shane Essert, representing the applicant with Trumont Group Arizona, introduced himself and provided an overview of the proposal, discussing the history of the company and their involvement with the site, the project location, the existing condition of the site leading to a desire to redevelop, and the proposed development. Mr. Essert further described the outreach and citizen participation for the project, leading to the evolution of the design through three stages. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE Rachel Frazier Johnson noted that some of the opposition was concerned about parking and asked the applicant for clarification on the proposed parking. Mr. Essert ATTACHMENT C Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 January 9, 2023 Page 2 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 replied with the parking numbers, noting that it meets code. Cyndy Gaughan asked if Trumont Group would be involved in the development of the new church. Mr. Essert replied that they would not. Darlene Martinez asked about bike parking on the site and asked how the development team is defining attainable housing. Mr. Essert replied that bike parking is included and that the proposed housing is targeting people in the income range of 50,000 dollars to 80,000 dollars annual income without using any affordable housing financing mechanism. Vice Chair O’Grady asked about ground floor activation with the carriage units and about the anticipated rents for each type of unit. Mr. Essert provided the rent breakdown by unit size and noted that commercial spaces will be included on the ground floor of the carriage units, intended to be leasable as art studios. Zach Burns asked about the involvement of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Mr. Essert replied that the applicant went to the HPC and there was not a recommendation to preserve any portion of the site. Mr. Grande explained the process for receiving a demolition permit for older buildings, including review by the HPC. Jeff Sherman asked if other alternatives were considered, such as developing the parcel across the street, and asked if some of the parking could have been put to a different use. Mr. Essert stated that the team had discussed many options with the church and that ultimately the proposed development provided the best option for the church for this site. PUBLIC COMMENTS Anthony Cox introduced himself as a pastor of the church living across the street from the subject site and stated that he supported the project because it will enhance the area and allow the church to continue its presence in the neighborhood. Mr. Cox noted that the site has become a burden to the church because of blight and disrepair. Mollie McCurdy introduced herself as a resident living near the subject site and stated that the project does not incorporate community concerns, asking the Committee to vote for a continuance. Med Skeens introduced himself and spoke in favor of the proposal, stating that he sees the benefit of the development and that preservation of the existing building would be very expensive. John Ramirez introduced himself and spoke in favor of the proposal, stating that he lives in the neighborhood and is a member of the church and that the existing buildings are very old. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 January 9, 2023 Page 3 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Cheryl Fulford introduced herself and spoke in favor of the proposal, noting that she would be in favor of something new at the site and that it would be very expensive to fix what is there now. Ricky Aulds introduced himself and stated he was in favor of the proposal, stating that he sees the blight every day and looks forward to the improvements on the site and that it would be very expensive to keep the site as-is. Skyler Cook introduced himself and spoke in favor of the proposal, noting that the church cannot afford to maintain the existing buildings on site. Jack Marks introduced himself and spoke in opposition to the proposal, stating that although the church was not determined historic by the HPC, it is still significant with architecture related to a building in Encanto Park. Mr. Marks stated that the church could be blended into the design of the existing building and that he is concerned that the project doesn’t integrate with the neighborhood. Ashley Harder introduced herself as the Interim Executive Director of Preserve Phoenix and spoke in opposition to the proposal. Ms. Harder stated that the determination made by the HPC is related to eligibility for the Phoenix Historic Register and does not preclude a project from incorporating elements of the existing building and asked the Committee to vote for a continuance. Roger Brevoort introduced himself as a board member of Preserve Phoenix and spoke in opposition to the proposal. Mr. Brevoort stated that there are people within the preservation community who do not agree with the determination that the existing building is not eligible, adding that it is a significant building with unique features and the applicant’s proposed design is not adequate, as he believes a portion of the existing building should be retained. Margarete Moffett introduced herself and spoke in favor of the proposal, noting that she lives on the property and sees blight that she believes is a safety issue if the building is maintained. Beatrice Moore introduced herself as the Director of Grand Avenue Arts and Preservation and spoke in opposition to the proposal. Ms. Moore stated that the church is responsible for keeping the building in good repair and the applicant’s proposal for 4 stories is too tall and doesn’t include enough activation of the ground floor, adding that the opposition came to the table to negotiate with the developer to improve the project and incorporate preservation of a portion of the existing building. She stated she does not support the rezoning because the developer has not agreed to any preservation. DeeDee Garcia Blase provided additional background information on the Grand Avenue Members Association. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 January 9, 2023 Page 4 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Ellie Lambert introduced herself and spoke in favor of the proposal, noting that it will enable the church to serve more people. Benjamin Hall introduced himself and spoke in opposition to the proposal, stating that the opposition’s request is not to restore the building, simply to preserve it. Mr. Hall stated that he did not agree with the WU Code zoning and would rather see the setbacks of the existing R-5 district. Dillon Moffett introduced himself and spoke in support of the proposal, stating that he has concerns with the existing building, as there are active leaks. Mark Daus introduced himself as a nearby business owner and spoke in favor of the proposal, stating that it will be a beautiful project and will bring in new residents to the area while also benefiting the church. APPLICANT RESPONSE Shane Essert stated that the church is not eligible for historic preservation designation and that retaining the portion under discussion poses design challenges, noting that the building is not functional and has maintenance issues. Mr. Essert further stated that there are tall buildings in the surrounding area and that the while original building was designed by Mahoney, every wall has been changed since then, meaning the building should not be considered a 1956 construction. MOTION Ash Uss made a motion to recommend a continuance to the February 13, 2023 meeting. Cyndy Gaughan seconded the motion. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Cyndy Gaughan stated that she believes concessions could be made to preserve portions of the building. Zach Burns agreed that some of the sanctuary and bell tower could be preserved. Ash Uss stated that she would like to see if someone from the City could follow up to meet the church’s needs. Wayne Rainey stated that he supports the continuance to allow further discussion. Dana Johnson agreed with the continuance and asked for clarification on the process. Mr. Grande clarified that the item could be continued at the Planning Commission meeting. Vice Chair O’Grady questioned whether anything would change in the next month, adding that there is pressure for housing in Phoenix and this income band is one that’s needed. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 January 9, 2023 Page 5 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Nate Sonoskey stated that he believes the Committee has all the information it needs, adding that it appears the development team is the right team for the project and that he recognizes there is community support and a need for housing. Rachel Frazier Johnson stated that she supports the continuance, noting that many people care about this area and that she believes more discussion between the developer and the community would be helpful. Ms. Johnson stated that she would like to see elements of the existing building preserved and that this could be a beneficial project for the area. VOTE 12-3-1, motion to recommend a continuance to the February 13, 2023 meeting passes; Committee Members Burns, Gaughan, Johnson, R. Johnson, Lockhart, Martinez, Nervis, Rainey, Sherman, Starks, Uss, and Vargas in favor; Committee Members Sonoskey, O’Grady, and Gonzales opposed; Committee Member Colyer recused. STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION: None. City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Date of VPC Meeting February 13, 2023 Request From C-3 CMOD, P-1, and R-5 RI Request To WU Code T5:5 CMOD, WU Code T5:5 Proposed Use Multifamily residential Location Southeast corner of 9th Avenue and Fillmore Street VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation VPC Vote 8-6 VPC DISCUSSION: Twenty-five members of the public registered in support of the item, 10 of which wishing to speak. Thirty-nine members of the public registered in opposition, six of which wishing to speak. STAFF PRESENTATION Sarah Stockham, staff, briefly noted the updated hearing dates for the case and did not provide a full presentation since the item was heard last month. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Shane Essert, representing the applicant with Trumont Group, provided an overview of the proposal. Mr. Essert identified the project location and noted the site is currently zoned for high density apartments. Mr. Essert added the property operates as a church and that there were structures on the site which had maintenance costs which were a financial burden. Mr. Essert shared that the proceeds from the sale of the site would allow the church to build a new campus in the neighborhood and would also bring much needed housing. Mr. Essert concluded that the project received 110 letters of support in the Triangle Neighborhood with 16 properties that directly neighbor this site. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE Cyndy Gaughan commented about the controlled joint cracks under the structural study, stating those are intentionally placed on the property. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Page 2 of 6 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Eva Olivas asked for clarification that the property was already zoned for the proposed use, asked if it was going to get built one way or the other, and commented that the report did not say the structure is going to fall down. Mr. Essert replied that he was just reporting the findings of the structural engineer. Jeff Sherman said from a sustainability standpoint the building is not designated as historic and the applicant has a demolition permit, but that it was a waste of resources to demolish the church and rebuild one across the street and questioned if there would be stipulations on how the proposed church project across the street would be developed in the future. Mr. Essert stated the church wants to sell the entire site to fulfill their mission across the street, which will include a sanctuary and office space. Mr. Sherman asked what the zoning was on the property across the street. Ms. Stockham, staff, shared that churches are generally allowed in residential districts and are sometimes subject to conditions or use permits. Nate Sonoskey asked if the church could be demolished today, and if the site was already zoned for high-density housing. Mr. Essert said yes, the church could be demolished as they went through the 30-day demolition hold process and have a demolition permit, and the Historic Preservation Commission deemed it not eligible for designation. Edward Vargas shared concern that there had been several residents living on site and asked if it is unsafe and dangerous. Mr. Essert replied it was a legitimate concern but a better question for the church to answer, whose representatives are registered to speak. Darlene Martinez asked if the applicant was willing to preserve the bell tower existing on site. Mr. Essert said yes, they are committed to saving the bell tower and it would remain in place as part of the apartment building. Rachel Frazier Johnson shared she attended the meeting at the church and appreciated the opportunity to attend. Zach Burns asked for clarification regarding the proposal to build a new sanctuary and office across the street, commented that the lot across the street is much smaller and asked if they had a feasibility study. Mr. Essert said they had a feasibility study. Vice Chair Ian O’Grady inquired about the possible remedy for historic preservation and funding availability to keep the church in its original location. Mr. Essert stated the church owns the land and needs the funding to build a new, safer church that includes office space and a sanctuary. PUBLIC COMMENTS Robert Graham introduced himself as a former Central City VPC member and Chair, and as President of Grand Avenue Members Association (GAMA). Mr. Graham stated his opposition to the proposal and that the site is a landmark for the Triangle Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Page 3 of 6 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Neighborhood. Mr. Graham added that he believed it was important to preserve the sanctuary, it is a reasonable request, and that while he was thankful for the continuance there was no discussion or back and forth with the applicant. Mr. Graham added that he provided the developer with a potential plan to preserve the sanctuary and maintain the required parking spaces and units. Mr. Graham concluded that if the building was demolished, they should construct a quality building with modern architecture rather than a project that is built to look like the historic church and concluded that the developer is not a creative place maker and does not think outside the box and that many neighborhood groups were united in opposition to this proposal. Cheryl Fulford said she was in support and that the church would go under if it did not get rezoned. Ms. Fulford invited people to come to the church and she would show how the church facilities were not sustainable, sharing that the site only has one groundskeeper. Ms. Fulford concluded by reiterating her support. Anthony Cox introduced himself as one of the pastors of the church and stated that he was a part of the public outreach, and he’s thankful for the overwhelming support and for the hard work of Mr. Essert. Mr. Cox stated the church wants to remain a part of the community and move across the street to the site they own, and the church needs major improvements with no funding availability. Beatrice Moore introduced herself as Director of the Grand Avenue Arts and Preservation (GAP) group and a property owner in the area, and that when the church came into the area eight years ago, there was a conversation about affordable housing and that this proposal has no affordable housing. Ms. Moore added that the developer did not allow a meeting to explore solutions and to find common ground, this proposal sets a troubling precent and that she felt the lack of affordable housing units was notable and unacceptable. Ms. Moore added that she would like to see the bell tower, sanctuary, and colonnades be preserved as she felt they were character defining and asked that the request be denied so they could continue working on a solution. Ryan Phillips introduced himself and his family who live across the street from the subject site. Mr. Phillips said he signed the petition but is speaking in support, and that they feel the developer has listened to their concerns and has reached out many times. Mark Daus introduced himself as the neighbor directly south on Taylor Street. Mr. Daus shared that as a good neighbor he supports the proposal, it looks nice, and that everyone has the right to make decisions in favor of their business. Med Skeens said he was in support of the developer who he believed was a very good listener, noted the support letters were in Spanish and English, the proposal preserves the bell tower and that they need to build a new facility across the street that can serve not only the church but the ministry offices. Ashley Harder with Preserve Phoenix, a preservation advocacy organization, introduced herself and shared that they want to be supportive of the church and its Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Page 4 of 6 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 transition, they do not oppose housing or density, and the primary requests are to preserve the bell tower, sanctuary, and colonnade. Ms. Harder added a demotion permit does not determine what is or is not of value to the community, it is just saying if the site is eligible for historic designation or not. Ms. Harder added that if the owner was willing to preserve the property, they could be eligible to receive grant funding, more work should be done to consider preservation, and that she did not support the current plan. Ms. Harder requested the committee dig in to saving the building, and that they would like to get to a place where they can support the plan with adequate stipulations to address their concerns. Ricky Aulds shared he was one of the pastors of the church and was thankful for all the neighbors, the comments, and support the church and proposal has received. Mr. Aulds shared he and his wife live on site, and only one pastor gets paid currently due to the church’s financial situation, and that it was time for something to be done since they had a developer willing to listen. Skyler Cook mentioned that most developers would have closed and moved forward with demolishing the site since it is not eligible for historic designation, that it is a beautiful building but not feasible to maintain and noted that the church had a vision for growth and development of the community, and they wanted help to create a new landmark at the corner. Gail Skeens introduced herself as a member of the church who helps with the church’s financial administration, who has lived and worked downtown for 25 years. Ms. Skeens shared that the applicant has gone above and beyond, and that the church spends a large portion of their budget on repairs, but they have a small congregation and limited funds. Ms. Skeens added that it would be a huge blessing if they did not have to worry about the needs of the building such as plumbing, leaking roofs, and gas leaks daily and that a new church building would provide wrap around services and would be more efficient. Dillon Moffett stated he has lived in the community for several years and was the music leader at the church. Mr. Moffett shared that many of the issues with the church building have been inherited, they have done the best they can in serving and giving back, and that he liked the proposal to preserve the bell tower. Margarete Moffett said she lived on the property with her husband and that they want to be good neighbors and serve the community. Ms. Moffett shared that she felt the new proposal was honoring and beautiful and she is excited for the project to move forward and continue being part of this neighborhood. Benjamin Hall said he has lived in the neighborhood for many years and that the community just started to scratch the surface on the impacts of the WU Code. Mr. Hall reiterated the request to preserve the bell tower, sanctuary, and colonnade. Mr. Hall added that the community has mixed feelings of what the zoning would provide. Mr. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Page 5 of 6 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Hall said the project would act more like a gated community and he wanted to make sure the developer would have a long-term interest in the community. Mollie McCurdy shared that the applicant must have nefarious reasons for requesting to rezone the site if he already has a demolition permit and exiting zoning that allows the use. Ms. McCurdy shared that they already demolished a single-story dwelling to make way for a parking lot, asked that the committee oppose the request and as the rezone does not make sense, and to see what the developer can build by-right. APPLICANT RESPONSE Shane Essert replied that it was sad that it was stated he was up to nefarious activity in the rezoning case. Mr. Essert concluded that there was a lot of heartfelt testimony, and it was wonderful to work with everyone since 2020. FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Nate Sonoskey stated that he appreciated the applicant and the public comments, shared that he made a list of pros and cons and shared that if the committee supports the proposal the applicant will demolish the site and build a new building that we have seen, and if they oppose the proposal the applicant can still demolish the site and it will be a vacant lot and they do not know who the developer will be. Mr. Sonoskey added if they support the project there will be 126 new apartments, if they oppose the project the site will remain as is which the church does not want, if they support the project the church will remain solvent and if we oppose, the church could go bankrupt, and they have heard mixed comments regarding support, opposition, and sharing that the developer should just demolish the building. Darlene Martinez shared she also had a pros and cons list and indicated she visited the church and saw the demo of a building nearby, and that it is the church’s property, and this is what they want. Vice Chair O’Grady shared the proximity of the support, the liability for the church to maintain the property, the housing crisis and that this will provide missing-middle housing at around 80%-100% AMI made this a compelling project. Darlene Martinez added that she liked the proposal to keep the bell tower, and the design with the arches and colonnades. Eva Olivas commented that the rent of $1,400 a month might be acceptable to some but people who currently live at the church cannot afford that, there is no commitment to keep the rents at that affordable rate, it is the church’s property, and this is what they want, the Downtown RDA should incorporate neighborhood vision so that the public feels that they are being heard and committees can act on recommendations that support community vision, and that she was happy to hear about preserving the belltower. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-61-22-7 Page 6 of 6 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Patrick Panetta said that he tries to stick with what the request focuses on, it is not a design review or historic preservation case, and the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and TOD Plan and has staff’s recommendation of approval. Chair Nick Gonzales said there is a need for housing in addition to preserving history and this project would help solve the need for housing and help with the housing crisis. Cyndy Gaughan stated she liked that more housing would be provided, the historic structure is important, and she looked forward to projects including a more affordable component. Rachel Frazier Johnson shared that it was a tough decision, and she wishes there was better dialog between the applicant and the neighbors, and that while she will be voting know she wanted to see the church to do well and continue to serve the community. Darlene Martinez shared that she also wished there was more dialog and interaction with the applicant and opposition, and she liked that this was bringing more housing to this area but wishes it would be more affordable. Ali Nervis stated his concern that the church did not incorporate affordable housing into the plan, and will be voting no. Nate Sonoskey said this was not the end of the road and encouraged both sides to continue the dialogue. Janey Pearl Starks shared that she has been voting no on projects that do not include affordable and work-force housing, so she will be voting no. Edward Vargas shared that he will also be voting no, and that he would have liked to see language about affordable housing. MOTION Chair Nick Gonzalez made a motion to recommend approval of Z-61-22-7 per the staff recommendation. Darlene Martinez seconded the motion. VOTE 8-6, motion to recommend approval of Z-61-22-7 per the staff recommendation passes with Committee Members Gaughan, Lockhart, Martinez, Panetta, Sherman, Sonoskey, O’Grady and Gonzales in favor; and Committee Members Burns, R. Johnson, Nervis, Olivas, Starks, and Vargas opposed. STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION: No comment.