Z2021051 BOS REPORT_PART1.PDF

Maricopa County — Formal (2022-02-09)

View PDF Item 7 Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 119188 characters
February 9, 2022 
Z2021051 
Page 1 of 3 
Report to the Board of Supervisors 
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department 
 
 
 
Board Hearing Date: 
February 9, 2022 
 
Case #/Title:   
 
 
Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road      
 
Supervisor District: 
3 
 
Applicant/Owner:  
Kurt Waldier Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC/ Bungalows at 
Norterra LLC  
 
Request: 
Zone change from Rural-43 to R-2 
 
Site Location: 
Generally located on the SEC of 19th Ave. and Parsons Rd. in 
the Phoenix area 
 
Site Size: 
Approx. 17 acres 
 
County Island Status: 
Yes, City of Phoenix 
Additional 
Comments: 
The applicant is requesting to rezone approx. 17 acres from 
Rural-43 to R-2 within a City of Phoenix county island. The 
applicant has been in annexation discussions with the City of 
Phoenix in order to develop the site within the City of Phoenix 
once the site is rezoned. The applicant has provided 
correspondence from Phoenix noting that the city is amicable 
to the annexation request. Staff has contacted the City of 
Phoenix and has confirmed the city is aware of the request 
and has no concerns.  
 
Staff has received 31 letters of opposition from 18 residents of 
the area, one petition with 69 signatures, 2 speakers in 
opposition at the Planning and Zoning hearing, and 3 appeals 
of the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. 
The opposition’s concerns center on the changing character 
of the area, and the potential increase in traffic and noise. 
Staff has verified that there are 7 parcels in opposition within 
300’ of the site; however, a supermajority vote has not been 
triggered for either total parcel area opposition or number of 
parcels. There are no outstanding concerns from reviewing 
agencies. 
 
 
 
Commission  
 
Recommendation: 
On 1/13/22, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend 
approval of Z2021051 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘h’:

February 9, 2022 
Z2021051 
Page 2 of 3 
 
a. 
Development of the site shall be in conformance with the Zoning Exhibit entitled 
“Bungalows at Norterra”, consisting of 1 full-size sheet, stamped received October 
12, 2021, except as modified by the following conditions. 
 
b. 
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative 
Report entitled “Bungalows at Norterra”, consisting of 5 pages, dated October 8, 
2021, and stamped received October 12, 2021, except as modified by the 
following conditions. 
 
c. 
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:  
 
1. 
Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development 
approval is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to drainage 
design, access and roadway alignments. These items will be addressed as 
development plans progress and are submitted to the County for further 
review and/or entitlement.  
 
2. 
The applicant will be responsible for coordinating with the City of Phoenix 
to review any traffic impact, right-of-way dedication, permitting or 
roadway improvement requirements for 19th Avenue in conjunction with 
this and future entitlement(s).  
 
3. 
Design for site development must ensure that historic drainage patterns are 
maintained at the up and downstream limits of development.  
 
4. 
A traffic impact study must be submitted with any future entitlement 
application (i.e. plan of development).  
 
5. 
Design for site development must provide for at least two (2) paved points 
of access to existing and improved public roads.  
 
6. 
The site is encumbered by Federal Patent easements which must be 
abandoned 
prior 
to 
site 
development. 
https://www.maricopa.gov/775/Abandonment-of-Patent-Easements  
 
7. 
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with 
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies 
and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT 
Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and 
best practices at the time of application for construction.  
 
d. 
Prior to approval of the initial final plat or precise plan of development approval, 
the applicant shall provide the Maricopa County Planning and Development 
Department with an executed pre-annexation service agreement with the City of 
Phoenix that identifies the detail for when the proposed project will be annexed 
and the provision of water and sewer service.  In lieu of pre-annexation service

February 9, 2022 
Z2021051 
Page 3 of 3 
agreement, the developer must provide a ‘will serve’ letter from the certificated 
water and sewer providers. 
 
e. 
Administrative approval of a Plan of Development will be required prior to 
approval and issuance of construction permits to develop and establish use of the 
site. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation will be required from 
the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has 
been designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that 
emergency fire protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance 
of the certificate of occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and 
approval will be required. 
 
f. 
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for 
initiating a revocation of this Zone Change as set forth in the Maricopa County 
Zoning Ordinance.  
 
g. 
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if 
the County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with 
conditions.  
 
h. 
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the 
applicant, with the consent of the landowner.  The granting of this approval allows 
the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on 
the date of application, subject to conditions.  In the event of the failure to comply 
with any condition, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date 
of application.  It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due 
to the failure to comply with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that 
existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and 
that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held 
on the date of application due to such revocation of the Zone Change.  The Zone 
Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the 
Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value 
of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted. 
 
 
Presented by: 
 
Jose Castañeda, Planner 
Reviewed by: 
 
Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager   
 
Attachments: 
 
1/13/21 P&Z Packet (80 pages)  
 
 
1/13/21 PZ Handout Memo – City of Phoenix (9 pages) 
 
 
1/13/21 PZ Handout Opposition (2 pages) 
 
 
1/13/21 PZ Handout – Signed Petition (17 pages) 
 
 
PZ Appeal Forms (9 pages) 
 
 
 
Note: 
1/13/22 Draft P&Z Minutes are not available as of the writing of this report, but can 
be provided upon request later when available.

Z2021051 
Page 1 of 7 
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department 
 
 
 
Case: 
Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road 
 
 
 
 
Hearing Date: 
January 13, 2022 (Cont. from December 9, 2021) 
 
Supervisor District: 
3 
 
 
 
  
 
 * Denotes changes from the December 9, 2021 PZ Report 
 
Applicant: 
Felipe Zubia, Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC 
 
Owner: 
Bungalows at Norterra LLC 
   
Request: 
Zone change from Rural-43 to R-2 
 
  
 
Site Location: 
Generally located on the SEC of 19th Ave. and Parsons Rd. in the 
Phoenix area 
 
  
Site Size: 
Approx. 17 acres 
 
Density: 
11 d.u./ac. 
 
County Island:  
Yes, City of Phoenix 
 
 
County Plan: 
Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan - Rural Development Area 
(0-1 d.u./ac)  
 
Municipal Plan: 
City of Phoenix General Plan / 3.5 to 5 du/acre - Traditional Lot 
 
Municipal Comments: 
Yes, City of Phoenix 
 
Support/Opposition: 
* 28 letters of opposition 
 
Recommendation: 
* Indefinite Continuance

Z2021051 
Page 2 of 7 
Project Summary: 
 
1. 
The property owners’ agent Felipe Zubia, Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC is proposing to 
rezone approx. 17 acres comprising 5 contiguous parcels from Rural-43 to R-2 prior to an 
in-progress annexation into the City of Phoenix in order to develop the subject site into a 
multi-family residential development. The applicant has provided correspondence from 
the City of Phoenix council meeting noting that Phoenix is amicable to the request.  It 
was noted during that meeting that the subject site is located within a City of Phoenix 
county island and that annexation would be required in order for the City to provide 
certain municipal services.  
 
2. 
The applicant has not proposed any development with the subject application, however 
the table below shows the existing and proposed zoning along with the associated 
development standards. No deviation to the R-2 zoning district development standards 
is proposed. 
 
Regulation 
Existing Rural-43 
Standards 
Proposed R-2 
Standards 
Height 
30-feet 
30-feet 
Front Yard  
40-feet 
20-feet 
Side Yard 
30-feet 
5-feet 
Street-Side Yard 
20-feet 
10-feet 
Rear Yard  
40-feet 
25-feet 
Lot Area 
43,560 sq. ft.  
6,000 sq. ft.  
Lot Width 
145-feet 
60-feet 
Average Lot Area 
Per Dwelling Unit 
43,560 sq. ft.  
4,000 sq. ft.  
Lot Coverage 
25% 
60% 
 
3. 
The aerial photo on the next page highlights recent development within the City of 
Phoenix adjacent to the subject site. This photo shows development patterns that are of 
similar density to the proposed project, and may be complimentary to the type of 
development that would be allowed in the proposed R-2 zoning. Staff highlighted two 
developments on the aerial image (Pinnacle at Union Park in Blue, and Norterra Parcels 
7,8, and 9 in green) that have an average lot area less than or equal to what would be 
allowed in the proposed R-2 zoning district. As such, staff is of the opinion that the R-2 
zoning would provide a suitable gradual transition between the higher density 
development to the west of the subject site and the rural densities to the east of the site.

Z2021051 
Page 3 of 7 
2021 Aerial  
 
 
Zoning Exhibit

Z2021051 
Page 4 of 7 
Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use: 
 
4. 
On-site: 
 
Rural-43 / Vacant 
North: 
Parsons Rd. alignment then Rural-43 / Single-Family Residence  
South: 
Desert Hollow alignment then City of Phoenix / Vacant 
East: 
Rural-43 / Single-Family Residence 
West: 
19th Ave. then City of Phoenix PUD / Multi-Family Residential 
 
 
Utilities and Services: 
 
5. 
Water: 
 
City of Phoenix 
Wastewater: 
City of Phoenix 
School District: 
Deer Valley Unified School District 
Fire: 
Daisy Mountain Fire Department  
Police:  
MCSO 
 
Right-of-Way: 
 
6. 
The following table includes existing right-of-way and notes the roadway is within the 
City of Phoenix Jurisdiction.    
 
Street Name 
Existing 
Classification 
Half-width Proposed 
R/W 
Existing 
Jurisdiction  
19th Avenue 
Major Arterial  
N/A 
City of Phoenix 
 
Adopted Plans: 
 
7. 
Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan - Vison 2030 (adopted 2016): The subject site is 
located outside of a county area plan, and as such is designated as Rural Development 
Area (0-1 d.u./ac.). the subject site is also located within the City of Phoenix municipal 
planning area. 
 
8. 
* City of Phoenix General Plan 2015 (adopted 2015): The subject site is designated for  
single-family residential development 3.5 to 5 du/acre - Traditional Lot. Staff notes that 
the City of Phoenix has been working with the applicant to annex the site.  
 
Public Participation Summary: 
 
9. 
The applicant complied with the Maricopa County Public Participation Process with the 
required posting of the property and notification to the adjacent property owners within 
300’ of the subject site and the area of interest groups. In addition, per staff 
recommendation the applicant has begun the annexation process with the City of 
Phoenix. 
 
10. * 
Staff has received twenty-seven (27) letters of opposition from eighteen (18) residents of  
the area and one (1) letter of opposition from the City of Phoenix. Staff notes that some 
of the parcels in opposition are within 300’ of the subject site however; a supermajority 
has not been reached. The nature of the opposition consists of concerns over the change 
in character to the area, higher density proposed within this rural area, impacts of

Z2021051 
Page 5 of 7 
increase in traffic to the subject area, excessive noise, and the potential negative 
impacts on property values. 
 
11. * 
Staff received two (2) letters from areas of interest ADOT and Daisy Mountain Fire District  
noting they had no concerns. The applicant provided correspondence from the City of 
Phoenix noting the city supports the requested annexation noting that annexation is 
necessary in order for the City to provide certain services for the site. Staff provided an 
additional notification on November 30, 2021 to the City of Phoenix regarding the subject 
request and received one letter from the City of Phoenix dated December 8, 2021 noting 
that the City has concerns regarding the pending annexation and the inconsistency of 
the proposed development with their General Plan Land Use Map. The City of Phoenix 
has requested that the case not proceed to public hearing in order to allow the 
applicant to address these concerns with the City of Phoenix. 
 
Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies: 
 
12. 
N/A. 
 
Staff Analysis: 
 
13. * The proposed rezone of the site from Rural-43 to R-2 is inconsistent with the Maricopa 
County Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site. The area to the east of the 
site is typical rural character (0-1d.u./ac.) with single-family housing which is consistent 
with the Rural-43 zoning district and the land use designation outlined in the County Plan. 
Staff is of the opinion that the subject application should be continued until such a time 
that the applicant has addressed the concerns from the City of Phoenix. Staff notes that 
the area west of 19th Ave. within the City of Phoenix has urbanized with residential uses of 
similar character and an average lot area that is equal to or less than what is required 
with the proposed rezoning to R-2. Without the support of the City of Phoenix and 
subsequent annexation of the site, the proposed development is unlikely to gain access 
to the necessary services that support the proposed to R-2 zoning.  
 
Recommendation: 
 
14. * For the reasons outlined in this report, staff recommends the Commission motion for an 
Indefinite Continuance of Z2021051. 
 
15. * However, should the Commission consider a recommendation for approval, then staff  
offers the following conditions ‘a’ – ‘h’ for Commission consideration: 
 
a. 
Development of the site shall be in conformance with the Zoning Exhibit entitled 
“Bungalows at Norterra”, consisting of 1 full-size sheet, stamped received October 
12, 2021, except as modified by the following conditions. 
 
b. 
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative 
Report entitled “Bungalows at Norterra”, consisting of 5 pages, dated October 8, 
2021, and stamped received October 12, 2021, except as modified by the 
following conditions. 
 
c. 
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:

Z2021051 
Page 6 of 7 
 
1. 
Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development 
approval is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to drainage 
design, access and roadway alignments. These items will be addressed as 
development plans progress and are submitted to the County for further 
review and/or entitlement.  
 
2. 
The applicant will be responsible for coordinating with the City of Phoenix 
to review any traffic impact, right-of-way dedication, permitting or 
roadway improvement requirements for 19th Avenue in conjunction with 
this and future entitlement(s).  
 
3. 
Design for site development must ensure that historic drainage patterns are 
maintained at the up and downstream limits of development.  
 
4. 
A traffic impact study must be submitted with any future entitlement 
application (i.e. plan of development).  
 
5. 
Design for site development must provide for at least two (2) paved points 
of access to existing and improved public roads.  
 
6. 
The site is encumbered by Federal Patent easements which must be 
abandoned 
prior 
to 
site 
development. 
https://www.maricopa.gov/775/Abandonment-of-Patent-Easements  
 
7. 
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with 
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies 
and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT 
Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and 
best practices at the time of application for construction.  
 
d. 
Prior to approval of the initial final plat or precise plan of development approval, 
the applicant shall provide the Maricopa County Planning and Development 
Department with an executed pre-annexation service agreement with the City of 
Phoenix that identifies the detail for when the proposed project will be annexed 
and the provision of water and sewer service.  In lieu of pre-annexation service 
agreement, the developer must provide a ‘will serve’ letter from the certificated 
water and sewer providers. 
 
e. 
Administrative approval of a Plan of Development will be required prior to 
approval and issuance of construction permits to develop and establish use of the 
site. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation will be required from 
the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has 
been designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that 
emergency fire protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance 
of the certificate of occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and 
approval will be required.

Z2021051 
Page 7 of 7 
f. 
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for 
initiating a revocation of this Zone Change as set forth in the Maricopa County 
Zoning Ordinance.  
 
g. 
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if 
the County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with 
conditions.  
 
h. 
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the 
applicant, with the consent of the landowner.  The granting of this approval allows 
the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on 
the date of application, subject to conditions.  In the event of the failure to comply 
with any condition, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date 
of application.  It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due 
to the failure to comply with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that 
existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and 
that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held 
on the date of application due to such revocation of the Zone Change.  The Zone 
Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the 
Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value 
of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted. 
 
Presented by: 
Jose Castañeda, Planner 
Reviewed by: 
Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Services Manager 
 
Attachments: 
Case Map (1 page) 
 
Zoning Exhibit (1 page) 
 
Narrative Report (5 pages) 
 
MCESD comments (1 page) 
 
ENG comments (2 pages) 
 
*City of Phoenix (9 pages) 
 
Correspondence from applicant (3 pages) 
 
Area of Interest Correspondence (4 pages) 
 
*Map of Support/Opposition (2 pages) 
 
*Letters of Opposition (45 pages)

M
ARICO
PA CO
UN
TY
/
M
aricopa County Planning & Developm
ent - Phoenix, AZ
3
G
ross Acres: 17.6 approx.
G
enerated Novem
ber 21, 2021 20:36 PM
Z2021051
Application Nam
e:
Legal Description
Bungalow
s at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road EDR
Applicant
Case Address
T04N R03E 6, T4N R03E 06
Felipe Zubia for Beus G
ilbert M
cG
roder PLLC
Applicant Phone/Em
ail
Parcel Prim
ary:210-10-031A
480.429.3065
fzubia@
beusgilbert.com
M
ap scale 1:2,488
Supervisor District No.
210-10-010, 210-10-020C, 210-10-020D
ZO
NE CHANG
E FRO
M
 RU-43 TO
 R-2
5.3585 in

Bungalows at Norterra Narrative Report 
 
4 
 
12/14/2020
  RECEIVED
10/12/2021

Bungalows at Norterra Narrative Report 
1 
Bungalows at Norterra 
Southeast Corner of 19th Avenue and Parsons Road 
 
Narrative Report 
Zone Case #: Z2021051 
Revised: October 8, 2021 
 
 
 
 
12/14/2020
  RECEIVED
10/12/2021

Bungalows at Norterra Narrative Report 
 
2 
Purpose of Request 
Beus Gilbert McGroder PLLC is representing Bungalows at Norterra LLC, the property owner of the 
properties in subject at the southeast corner of 19th Avenue and Parsons Road (APN 210-10-010, 210-10-
020C, 210-10-020D, 210-10-027A, and 210-10-031A), in pursuing a zone change from the current 
Rural-43 zoning designation to R-2 in support of a “bungalow” style multifamily development.  
Description of Proposal 
The Bungalows at Norterra is proposed as a small-scale multifamily rental community composed of 
“bungalow” style dwelling units. Bungalow style dwelling units are gaining in popularity, and include 1-, 
2-, and 3- bedroom, single-story units. The 2- and 3-bedroom units are freestanding, detached, dwelling 
units with no adjoining walls. The 1-bedroom units are designed as duplexes with only one common wall 
per structure. All units include small, private, fenced-in backyards.  
The proposed density of for the Bungalows at Norterra is approximately 11 dwelling units per acre. This 
includes 64 one-bedroom units (or 32 duplexes), 73 two-bedroom units, and 33 three-bedroom units, 
which is 170 units total across approximately 17 acres. As a rental community, the property will not be 
further subdivided for each unit. 
Although each unit will have a private backyard, the community will further include semipublic 
amenities for residents, including dog parks, fire pit and sitting areas, outdoor dining and cooking, 
meeting areas, and a pool. The incorporation of these amenities enhances the community character, 
sense of place, and overall quality of life. 
Relationship to Surrounding Properties 
There are two distinct characteristics surrounding the site, east and west of 19th Avenue. East of 19th 
Avenue is within the City of Phoenix, and includes the growing Union Park at Norterra residential 
community, which includes a variety of housing types. Currently under construction in this community 
are townhomes that back up to 19th Avenue across from the site. West of 19th Avenue is unincorporated 
Maricopa County, which is predominately single-family residential uses.   
Location and Accessibility 
The site is located to the east of 19th Avenue and between Parsons Road and Desert Hollow Drive. The 
ingress and egress from the proposed Bungalows at Norterra is anticipated to occur along the two 
collector roads – Parsons Road and Desert Hollow Drive. 
Circulation System 
The internal circulation system is privatized to residents. Right-of-way dedications are provided for 
external boundary streets, including a 70-foot dedication for 19th Avenue, 40-foot dedication for Parsons 
Road, and a 25-foot dedication for Desert Hollow Drive.

Bungalows at Norterra Narrative Report 
 
3 
Conclusion and Justification 
The bungalow-style housing option adds to the high-quality housing diversity in the region. The 
proposed Bungalows at Norterra appropriately fits the surrounding area and delivers an alternative 
high-quality housing typology to the region. The bungalow style multifamily development will provide a 
smooth transition and buffer between the high-density townhomes under construction as part of the 
Union Park at Norterra community across 19th Avenue in the City of Phoenix and the single-family 
homes east of 19th Avenue in unincorporated Maricopa County.

Bungalows at Norterra Narrative Report 
 
4

Subdivision Infrastructure & 
Planning Program 
1001 N. Central Avenue #150 
Phoenix, Arizona 85004 
Phone: (602) 506-1058 
Fax: (602) 506-5813  
TDD 602 506 6704 
 
 
Maricopa County 
Environmental Services Department  
Water and Waste Management Division 
DATE: 
September 27, 2021  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TO : 
Jose Castaneda, Planning & Development Dept. 
 
 
Planner 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
FROM: 
Souren Naradikian, P.E. 
 
 
Senior Civil Engineer 
 
SUBJECT:  
Bungalows at Norterra - zone change. Z2021051 
 
The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) has reviewed 
revised documents received from the Maricopa County Planning and Development 
Department for the above referenced project. This project is a zone change for 
Bungalows at Norterra at APN# 210-10-020C, D, 210-10-031A, 210-10-027A & 210-
10-010. Water and Sewer information is not provided. MCESD has concerns, 
ATC/NOID must be obtained prior to construction permit approval. 
 
Based on the above, MCESD raised no objections to the Planning & Development 
Department in Accela: on September 27, 2021 and will allow the project to proceed 
at this time subject to the following stipulations 
 
Stipulations:  
None. 
 
It should be noted that this document does not approve the referenced project.  
Comments are provided only as advisory to Maricopa County Planning and 
Development Department to assist staff to prepare a staff report.  Other Maricopa 
County agencies may have additional requirements. Final review and approval will be 
made through Planning and Development Department procedures. Applicant may 
need to submit separate applications to the Maricopa County Environmental Services 
Department for approval of proposed facilities regulated by the Department.  Review 
of any such application will be based on regulations in force at the time of application.

Robert Fedorka, P.E. 
Planning & Development 
301 W. Jefferson Ave., Suite 170 
Phoenix, Arizona 85003 
Phone: (602) 506-7151 
Fax: (602) 506-8762 
www.maricopa.gov/planning 
Email address: 
Bob.Fedorka@Maricopa.gov 
  
Maricopa County 
Planning & Development Department 
Engineering Plan Review 
  
 
 
 
Date:   
 
September 29, 2021 
 
Memo To: Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager, Department of Planning & 
Development 
 
Attn: 
Jose Castaneda, Planner, Planning & Development Services 
 
 
From: 
Robert Fedorka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor, Planning & Development 
Services 
 
cc: 
Michael Norris, P.E., Engineering Manager, Planning & Development 
 
Subject:   
Z2021051 Zone Change for Bungalows at 19th Ave. and Parsons Rd. 
Without a Plan of Development 
 
 (E1 Memo) 
 
Job Site  
Address: 
East Side of 19th Ave., Between W. Desert Hollow Dr. & W. Parsons 
Rd. 
 
APN(s): 
210-10-010, 020C, 020D, 027A & 031A 
 
This application is to specify zoning for future development areas and does not include 
a Plan of Development. 
 
PND engineering plan review (DPR, FCD and PND Transportation) has reviewed the 1st 
submittal of the Zone Change application routed for review on September 21, 2021 
and has no objections subject to the following conditions: 
 
1. Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development approval 
is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to drainage design, access and 
roadway alignments. These items will be addressed as development plans 
progress and are submitted to the County for further review and/or entitlement. 
 
2. The applicant will be responsible for coordinating with the City of Phoenix to 
review any traffic impact, right-of-way dedication, permitting or roadway 
improvement requirements for 19th Avenue in conjunction with this and future 
entitlement(s). 
 
3. Design for site development must ensure that historic drainage patterns are 
maintained at the up and downstream limits of development.

4. A traffic impact study must be submitted with any future entitlement application 
(i.e. plan of development). 
 
5. Design for site development must provide for at least two (2) paved points of 
access to existing and improved public roads. 
 
6. The site is encumbered by Federal Patent easements which must be abandoned 
prior to site development. https://www.maricopa.gov/775/Abandonment-of-
Patent-Easements  
 
7. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; 
Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; 
and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of 
application for construction. 
 
Please contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information.

City Council Formal Meeting
Report
Agenda Date: 6/16/2021, Item No. 39
Proposed 19th Avenue and Parsons Road Annexation - Public Hearing
A public hearing, as required by Arizona Revised Statutes section 9-471, on the
proposed 19th Avenue and Parsons Road Annexation. This public hearing allows the
City Council to gather community input regarding this annexation proposal. The City
Council will not act on the proposed annexation at this public hearing. Formal adoption
of this proposed annexation will be considered at a later date.
Summary
This annexation was requested by Paul E. Gilbert, with Beus Gilbert McGroder, PLLC
for the purpose of receiving City of Phoenix services. The proposed annexation
conforms to current City policies and complies with Arizona Revised Statutes section 9
-471 regarding annexation. Additionally, the annexation is recommended for adoption
per the attached Task Force Analysis Report (Attachment A).
Public Outreach
Notification of the pubic hearing was published in the Arizona Business Gazette
newspaper, and was posted in at least three conspicuous places in the area proposed
to be annexed. Also, notice via first-class mail was sent to each property owner within
the proposed annexation area.
Location
The proposed annexation area includes parcels 210-10-020C, 210-10-020D, 210-10-
031A, 210-10-027A and 210-10-010 and is located at 19th Avenue and Parsons Road
(Attachment B). The annexation area is approximately 15.73 acres (0.0239 sq. mi.)
and the population estimate is zero individuals.
Council District: 1
Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Toni Maccarone and the City Clerk
Department
Page 154

CITY COUNCIL REPORT 
TO: 
Mario Paniagua 
Deputy City Manager 
FROM: 
Alan Stephenson 
Planning Director 
SUBJECT: 
 Request for Task Force Analysis: 19th Avenue and Parsons Road Annexation 
This report recommends the approval of the proposed annexation of 15.73 acres located at east of 
19th Avenue and south of Parsons Road, Parcels: APN # 210-10-020C, 210-10-020D, 210-10-010, 
210-10-031A, 210-10-027A
THE REQUEST: 
The applicant is requesting annexation to access city services and proposes to rezone the parcels to 
develop a multifamily residential rental complex. 
OTHER INFORMATION: 
Planning Village: Deer Valley 
General Plan Designation: Traditional Lot, 3.5 to 5 dwelling units per acre 
Current Zoning District: RU-43 
Equivalent Zoning District: S-1 
Current Conditions 
   Current Land-Use: Vacant 
   To the North: Single-family dwelling and ranch properties, zoned RU-43, Maricopa County jurisdiction 
   To the South: Undeveloped. Properties rezoned to Commercial Office/Major Office Option Restricted 
Commercial (C-O/M-O), City of Phoenix jurisdiction 
   To the West: Residential and mixed uses (Norterra), zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), City of 
Phoenix jurisdiction 
   To the East: Single-family dwelling, zoned RU-43, Maricopa County jurisdiction 
…Maricopa County Non-Conformities Present? None 
   Parcel (s) History: None 
ALTERNATIVES: 

Option A - Annex the land as requested:
The city of Phoenix will control rezoning requests in this area to ensure conformance with the
General Plan Land Use Map. The city of Phoenix will capture property tax, utility tax, state shared
revenue, and impact fees.
ATTACHMENT A
Page 155

Option B - Deny the request for annexation: 
 
If annexed later, this site would have been developed under County zoning and development 
standards that may not be consistent with the General Plan, Land Use Map, zoning, and 
development standards.  
RECOMMENDATION: 
Located adjacent to City of Phoenix lands, this annexation is supported by the 2015 General Plan, 
particularly the Land Use goal for land uses and development standards for unincorporated land, under 
Policies 1 and 2.  
This annexation is recommended for approval. Approval of annexation does not constitute 
recommendation for future rezoning actions. 
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: 
I.  Water and Sewer Service 
Parcels currently fall within Water Pressure Zone Area 4A. 
There are both water and sewer infrastructure within the area. There is a 12-inch DIP water 
distribution main within 19th Avenue, along with a 54-inch PCCP transmission water main. There is 
also a 24-inch DIP sewer force main within 19th Avenue.  
The proposed parcels can likely be served by the City’s water and/or sewer system pending capacity 
review and approval. This review will be done at the time of preliminary site plan approval. Design 
and construction of any infrastructure will be the responsibility of the developer. Specifics regarding 
potential main extension requirements would be discussed and determined at a pre-app meeting 
after annexation. 
II.  Fire Protection 
 
Servicing Station: Fire Station #5, 26700 N 27th Avenue 
 
Station Capacity Level, Unknown 
 
Station Capacity Level, After Annexation:Unknown 
 
Current Response Time: 3 Min. 0 Sec. 
 
City Average Response Time: 5 Min. 2 Sec. 
 
Difference From Typical Response Time: -2 Min. 2 Sec. 
 
Number Of Service Calls Expected: 
21 
 
Average Cost Per Service Call:   
 
 
$466 
 
 
Estimated Total Annual Fire Service Costs:  
 
$9,820 
III.  Police Protection 
 
Servicing Station: Black Mountain Precinct, 33355 North Cave Creek Rd 
 
Number Of New Officers Required: 0.22 
 
Number Of New Patrol Cars Required: 0.10 
 
Estimated Total Annual Police Service Costs: 
 
$28,745 
IV.  Refuse Collection 
 
Number of New Containers Required: 0   
Page 156

Public refuse container costs not applicable for apartments and non-residential uses which require 
private refuse services or contractual agreements with the City that are not determined at this time. 
 
Total Start-Up Costs For Refuse Collection:  
 
$0 
 
V.  Street Maintenance 
 
Average Cost Per Acre For Street Maintenance: 
 
$85 
 
 
Estimated Total Annual Street Maintenance Costs:  
$1,342 
VI.  Public Transit 
 
Servicing Routes: here are no servicing routes to the proposed annexation area. 
VII. Parks and Recreation 
 
Neighborhood Park Demand In Acres: 0.82 
 
Community Park Demand In Acres: 
0.44 
 
District Park Demand In Acres:  
0.44 
 
Total Park Demand In Acres: 
 
1.70 
 
Cost Per Acre, Annual Maintenance: 
 
 
 
$11,000 
 
Total Annual Parks and Recreation Costs:  
 
$18,655 
VIII. Schools 
 
Elementary School District:  
Deer Valley Unified 
 
High School District: Deer Valley Unified 
 
Total Expected Elementary School Students: 55 
 
Total Expected High School Students: 32 
 
Total Expected New Students: 87  
IX. Revenues 
 
This annexation is not in an Impact Fee area 
 
Expected Total Impact Fees At Buildout: 
 
 
$0 
 
 
 
Tax Revenue, Year One 
 
 
Property Tax Income: 
 
 
 
 
$1,026  
 
Utility Fee Income: 
 
 
 
 
$9,831  
 
State Shared Revenue: 
 
 
 
 
$63,780 
 
Solid Waste: 
 
 
 
 
$32,542 
 
Sales Tax Generated: 
 
 
 
 
$0  
 
 
Total Tax Related Income, Annually: 
 
 
$107,179 
 
 
 
 
Page 157

Tax Revenue, Year Two and Beyond 
 
Property Tax Income: 
 
 
 
 
$1,026  
 
Utility Fee Income: 
 
 
 
 
$9,831  
 
State Shared Revenue: 
 
 
 
 
$63,780 
 
Solid Waste: 
 
 
 
 
$32,542 
 
Sales Tax Generated: 
 
 
 
 
$0 
 
 
Total Tax Related Income, Annually: 
 
 
$107,179 
 
 
X. Total Costs 
 
Revenue, First Year Only: 
 
 
 
 
$107,179 
 
Revenue, Year Two and Beyond 
 
 
 
$107,179 
 
 
 
Expenses, First Year Only: 
 
 
 
 
$58,563 
 
Expenses, Year Two and Beyond: 
 
 
 
$58,563 
 
 
XI. Total Annual Revenue 
 
Total Annual Revenue, First Year Only: 
 
 
$48,616 
 
Total Annual Revenue, Year Two and Beyond: 
 
$48,616 
 
The above referenced Property Tax Income figures are based on vacant parcels only, it does not not 
refer to future development which will vary depending on number of lots and individual square footage.  
Total Tax Related Income and Total Annual Revenues will vary depending on project scope and size, 
the timing of permit issuance and build-out.  
 
Page 158

ATTACHMENT B
Page 159

1
Kurt Waldier
Subject:
RE: 19th Ave & Parsons Annexation
From: Megan Rosenberger <megan.rosenberger@phoenix.gov>  
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 4:34 PM 
To: Paul E. Gilbert <pgilbert@beusgilbert.com> 
Subject: 19th Ave & Parsons Annexation 
 
Hi Paul, 
 
   Council held your annexation’s Public Hearing today with no public concerns. The next step is to mail out petitions to 
the property owners and utility companies for their signatures. Per legal deadlines, this will be done Monday, June 28. 
Once all original signed petitions are received, then we can schedule your annexation’s ordinance to go before Council. I 
will keep you updated. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.  
 
Thanks,  
__________________________________________________________________________ 
 
 
Megan Rosenberger │ElecƟons Coordinator- Early Voting & 
Annexations 
City Clerk Department - City of Phoenix 
200 West Washington Street, 15th Floor 
Ph: 602.256.3245 
phoenix.gov/cityclerk   
Follow us on Twitter @PHXClerk 
 
 
 
 
This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If it has been sent to you in error, please 
reply to advise the sender of the error and then immediately delete this message.

From:
Kurt Waldier
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Cc:
Felipe Zubia; Paul E. Gilbert
Subject:
RE: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
Date:
Tuesday, November 9, 2021 5:40:06 PM
Attachments:
image003.png
image004.png
Parsons Annexation Council Agenda 6-16-21 Formal Agenda - Final.pdf
City of Phoenix Annexation 19th Ave and Parsons 2021 06 16.pdf
Jose,
 
I hope you’ve been well. I am following up from our last correspondence in regards to the rezoning
case Z2021051 located at 19th Avenue and Parsons Road. Specifically, I’d like to address the
outstanding City of Phoenix Annexation related to the Bungalows at Norterra development:
We do not have an assigned annexation number yet. But, please see the attached staff report
supporting the rezoning.
We spoke to Josh Bednarek, City of Phoenix Planning Deputy Director, and he stated he has
no objections to the annexation or completing the rezoning in the County. However, he
cannot provide a letter of support as you requested as this is outside of protocol.
The Phoenix City Council has already voted in support of the annexation case (see attached
correspondence from Megan Rosenberger with the City Clerk’s office), indicating they are
willing to service the property with water/sewer utilities.
We have already submitted a preliminary site plan to the City and have received comments
back, but we are waiting on the annexation to proceed.
 
I hope this appropriately addresses your annexation concern from the Technical Advisory Meeting
on October 5.
Please give me a call if you have any further questions.
 
Kurt Waldier, AICP
Planning Consultant
BEUS GILBERT MCGRODER PLLC
701 North 44th Street | Phoenix, AZ  85008
Direct: 480.429.3061 | Main: 480.429.3000 | Fax: 480.429.3100
Email: kwaldier@beusgilbert.com  
Assistant: Wendy Peterson | 480.429.3138 | wpeterson@beusgilbert.com
 
From: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 12:18 PM
To: Kurt Waldier <kwaldier@beusgilbert.com>
Cc: Felipe Zubia <fzubia@beusgilbert.com>
Subject: RE: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
 
Hello,
 
I have uploaded the 2nd submittal of the subject application. Once you have that letter or case

number please send it to me and we can possibly proceed to hearing.
 
Jose Castañeda
Planner
Planning & Development
Desk: 602-506-8358
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
 
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.
 
From: Kurt Waldier <kwaldier@beusgilbert.com> 
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 3:54 PM
To: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Felipe Zubia <fzubia@beusgilbert.com>
Subject: RE: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
 
Hi Jose,
 
Thank you for the detailed comments on the Bungalows at Norterra project at 19th Avenue and
Parsons Road.
 
Please see attached response letter with revised Zone Change Application, Narrative Report, and Site
Plan. These attachments can be provide via a separate email upon request.
 
Also attached is an updated Affidavit of Citizen Review Process identifying the two new sign postings
on the site along Parsons Road and Desert Hollow Drive.
 
We will provide the information the City of Phoenix Annexation request via a separate email.
 
Thank you again for your feedback. Please let us know if there is anything else you need from us.
 
From: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 11:49 AM
To: Felipe Zubia <fzubia@beusgilbert.com>; Kurt Waldier <kwaldier@beusgilbert.com>
Subject: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
 
Hello,
 
I have revised the TAC comments to reflect comments made during the TAC meeting. To clarify
some of the comments we are requesting the case number for the annexation request. Along with
the case number we need a letter of support from Phoenix. With both of these I could stipulate to
the annexation. However, without either of these items indicating the annexation I will need the will
serve letters for water and sewer.

Thank you,
 
 
  
Jose Castañeda
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8358 | Fax: 602-506-3282
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
 
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.
 
This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If it has been sent to you in
error, please reply to advise the sender of the error and then immediately delete this message.
This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If it has been sent to you in
error, please reply to advise the sender of the error and then immediately delete this message.

From:
Bernadette Martinez
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Cc:
Peggy Fehlman
Subject:
Re: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
Date:
Friday, September 24, 2021 11:14:57 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
              
Thank you for your notice of the above referenced item.
After review, the above referenced location is more than 1/2 mile from any ADOT proposed or 
existing highway facility and is not anticipated to cause impacts to ADOT facilities .  As such, ADOT 
has no comment regarding the request associated with this case.
ADOT reserves the right to review any future plans, additions and/or changes to this development as 
to any impact they may have on the State Highway System.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions. We appreciate the 
opportunity to review and comment. Thank you.
Bernadette Martinez
Right of Way Coordinator Assistant
Transportation Construction Technician IV
Central District
2140 W. Hilton Ave, MD 700
Phoenix, AZ  85009
602.712.2086
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:25 AM Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov>
wrote:
Greetings,
 
Maricopa County Planning and Development has received the subject Rezoning application.
County staff has scheduled a meeting with the applicant on October 5, 2021.  You have been
identified as a stakeholder in the area of the subject application. You  or your authorized
representative are invited to submit written recommendations/comments for the subject
application which may be discussed at the upcoming meeting.
 
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you may have related to this
case.

Best Regards,
 
  
Jose Castañeda
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development
Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix,
AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8358 | Fax: 602-506-3282
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
 
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.

From:
Dave Nielsen
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
RE: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
Date:
Thursday, September 23, 2021 9:58:00 AM
Attachments:
image004.png
image005.png
Hello Jose,
 
Daisy Mountain Fire has no comments or concerns with this rezoning.
 
 
Respectfully,
Dave Nielsen
Assistant Chief - Fire Prev.
DaisyMountainFire.org
623-465-7400 x119
 
 
 
 
From: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 11:25 AM
To: Foothill Focus foothills <focus@qwest.net>; Fire Marshal <fire.marshal@dmfd.org>; Dove Valley
Coalition <dovevalley@lycos.com>; District 3 Advisory Committe <saravannucci@worldnet.att.net>;
Anthem Community Council <tsmith@AnthemCouncil.com>; Maricopa Association of Governments
<swilken@azmag.gov>; Maricopa Association of Governments <VWolfley@azmag.gov>; New
River/Desert Hills Community Association, Inc <Plan-dev@NRDHCA.com>; New River/Desert Hills
Community Association, Inc <George@NRDHCA.com>; New River/Desert Hills Community
Association, Inc <4DaisyMountain@gmail.com>; Anthem Community Council
<dgreenstein@AnthemCouncil.com>; New River/Desert Hills Community Association, Inc
<John@NRDHCA.com>; New River/Desert Hills Community Association, Inc <Ed@NRDHCA.com>;
City of Phoenix <alan.stephenson@phoenix.gov>; Eileen Baden (PRK)
<Eileen.Baden@maricopa.gov>; Maricopa Association of Governments <kcotner@azmag.gov>; Deer
Valley Unified School District <sandy.kube@dvusd.org>; ADOT <redletter@azdot.gov>
Subject: Z2021051 - Bungalows at 19th Ave. & Parsons Road
 
Greetings,
 
Maricopa County Planning and Development has received the subject Rezoning application. County
staff has scheduled a meeting with the applicant on October 5, 2021.  You have been identified as a
stakeholder in the area of the subject application. You  or your authorized representative are invited
to submit written recommendations/comments for the subject application which may be discussed
at the upcoming meeting.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you may have related to this case.
 
Best Regards,
 
  
Jose Castañeda
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8358 | Fax: 602-506-3282
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
 
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.

PHOENIX
PHOENIX
W Desert
Hollow Dr
W Parsons Rd
W Desert Hollow Dr
N 17th Ave
19th Ave
210
10
012A
210
10
012D
210
10
014E
210
10
014F
210
10
012A
210
10
012D
210
10
014E
210
10
014F
210
10
008F
210
10
018B
210
10
010
210
04
021
210
04
022
210
10
031A
210
04
480
210
10
012E
210
04
245
210
04
206
210
04
478
210
10
030B
210
10
007C
210
10
008D
210
10
008G
210
10
018A
210
04
485
210
10
008B
210
10
014C
210
10
020C
210
04
334
210
10
012C
210
10
016A
210
10
020D
210
10
018C
210
10
021E
210
04
752
210
10
009B
210
10
003
210
10
027A
210
10
007A
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: G:\shiloh.johnson\PlanningandDevelopment\OppositionCases\Z2021051\Z2021051.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 12/8/2021
140
0
140
70
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2021051
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcel
Supporting Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels
300' Buffer Interior
300' Buffer Selection
Eligible parcels: 54
Supporting parcels: 0
Opposition parcels: 4
Supporting parcels sq ft: 0
Opposition parcels sq ft: 201,141.6
Subject parcels sq ft: 697,606.5
All area inside the 300' buffer:
2,046,795.6
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels:
1,035,243.0
No-response parcels sq ft: 834,101.4
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
19%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
7%

19th Ave
210
11
010C
210
10
012A
210
10
012D
210
10
014E
210
11
021F
210
10
026E
210
10
026C
210
10
011C
210
11
021H
501 North 44th Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85008, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: G:\shiloh.johnson\PlanningandDevelopment\OppositionCases\Z2021051\Z2021051.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 12/8/2021
250
0
250
125
Feet
All Responses
Z2021051
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels - None Identified

From:
Julie Burns
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Case Z 2021051
Date:
Monday, November 29, 2021 4:48:39 PM
Hello,
I would like to speak at the following case.
Whom do I address my letter of opposition to?
Stay Safe,
--
Julie Burns,
Corporate Secretary Hawkeye Landscaping Inc. Office 623-582-1122 fax
623-434-1814 hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com Mailing Address: 1717 W
Yearling
Rd Phoenix AZ 85085 Physical Address: 24401 N 15th Ave Phoenix AZ 85027

From:
Julie Burns
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Re: Case Z 2021051
Date:
Tuesday, November 30, 2021 2:53:28 PM
Thank you.
---
Julie Burns,
Corporate Secretary Hawkeye Landscaping Inc. Office 623-582-1122 fax
623-434-1814 hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com Mailing Address: 1717 W
Yearling
Rd Phoenix AZ 85085 Physical Address: 24401 N 15th Ave Phoenix AZ 85027
On 2021-11-30 13:03, Jose Castaneda (PND) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please use the following link to read registration details and
> register for the hearing:
> https://www.maricopa.gov/Calendar.aspx?EID=2481
>
> Jose Castañeda
> Planner
> Planning & Development
> Desk: 602-506-8358
> Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
>
> P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process
> here.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julie Burns <julieb@hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 12:09 PM
> To: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov>
> Subject: Re: Case Z 2021051
>
> How do I register to speak?
>
> ---
> Julie Burns,
>
> Corporate Secretary Hawkeye Landscaping Inc. Office 623-582-1122 fax
> 623-434-1814 hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com Mailing Address: 1717 W
> Yearling Rd Phoenix AZ 85085 Physical Address: 24401 N 15th Ave
> Phoenix AZ 85027
>
> On 2021-11-30 08:35, Jose Castaneda (PND) wrote:
>> Good morning,
>>
>> The opposition has been noted and added to the casefile.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Jose Castañeda

>> Planner
>> Planning & Development
>> Desk: 602-506-8358
>> Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
>>
>> P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process
>> here.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julie Burns <julieb@hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com>
>> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 4:49 PM
>> To: Jose Castaneda (PND) <Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov>
>> Subject: Case Z 2021051
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>> I would like to speak at the following case.
>>
>> Whom do I address my letter of opposition to?
>>
>> Stay Safe,
>> --
>> Julie Burns,
>>
>> Corporate Secretary Hawkeye Landscaping Inc. Office 623-582-1122 fax
>> 623-434-1814 hawkeyecustomlandscaping.com Mailing Address: 1717 W
>> Yearling Rd Phoenix AZ 85085 Physical Address: 24401 N 15th Ave
>> Phoenix AZ 85027

From:
Julie Burns Office
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Z 2021 051
Date:
Tuesday, November 30, 2021 7:20:15 AM
Dear City of Phoenix, Deer Valley Council Members, Maricopa County Council Members, Mayor Gallego,
My name is Julie Burns. I live one house and block from the numerous high density planned development’s in our
area.
We have met with Toll Brothers attorney’s several times. We dispute the traffic report. They want to characterize
the residence as “not for development,” “not for building,” “not for infrastructure,” “not wanting change,” “Not
knowing how good this would be for our neighborhood,” “not knowing what’s good for the community, City of
Phoenix or State of Arizona.”   Let me tell you who we are in your community, City of Phoenix, and State of
Arizona. We are your business owners, entrepreneurs and hard workers that depend on the construction economy.
WHO WE ARE:
We are your Registered Nurses, BSN’s who take care of our community, your Anesthetist who makes sure you
wake up during a procedure, your landscape construction company to give great outdoor spaces owner, your realtor
to sell you homes, your granite slab installation company owner, your drinking water purifier owner, your plumber
owner, your electrician owner, TWO well drill owners, TWO pest control company owners, TWO Turf Paradise
Race track owners and trainers, your FedEX driver, your tree trimer owner, your landscape maintenance owner,
your Post Master who delivers your mail, your custom car restoration owner/Professional Race Care Driver, your
Professional World Wakesurfer, your cheerleader coach, your school teacher, your retired Veteran’s who bought the
land when first offered by the government, your Veteran’s widower, your marshal arts studio owner, assisted living
home owner, your high level corporate professional for a publicly traded company, ect
So, if you think we can’t do change, let me tell you what we have been through and changes made to make it
through the Great Recession, COVID, and now inflation. We want and need change, development, growth and
population for our lively hoods.  However, the above neighbors are united in preserving the character of our
neighborhood.
KEEP CURRENT ZONING
First and foremost, I want to say I’m sorry to our four neighbors (zoned R-43) that are under escrow with the
developer. I do not intend to do them harm by opposing the high density development. However, maybe I’m doing
you a favor. By now, you see that you can not buy a home similar to our area for any price.  Not even one million
dollars… I’m sorry to go against your wishes. However, I will not throw in the towel for our lifestyle and character
of our neighborhood.
Now, to express to DV staff my desire to deep the current zoning Medical offices and General Comerance (5 ac) and
R-43 (10 ac) just how it is. I don’t think the proposed R-43 should be changed to any type of commercial zoning.
With the current zoning, this will allow the proper buffer that is needed for our county island neighborhood. The
current zoning will allow a proper buffer and keep our character of the rural neighborhood.
Please, consider all the comment’s you received from the residences of our  little county island. This high density 
development is not wanted in our area and will not fit the character of the area. We just want the existing
commercial buffer and no more. We love the rural character of our neighborhood. We hope you too, can look past
what the developers want to turn our neighborhood into. We love our lifestyle. Please DON’T recommend this high
density development in are area. KEEP the CURRENT ZONING.
NOTES of Letter- Meeting City of Phoenix Annexation
My name is Julie Burns. I have three separate one acre lots on Yearling. The first acre is one lot in from the subject
property on the North side of Yearling. The second acre is three lots from the subject property on the North side of

Yearling. The third acre is two lots down from the subject proper on the South side of Yearling. One house is
currently being built by my Son contracted with NextGen builders, I live in the other house and the third acre has a
beautiful shed, I’m using for my horse barn. So, I have a lot invested in this immediate area.
When the state land sold to USSA, they worked with the neighborhood to get our input in the development. We
agreed to have a walk around the whole development for horses/runners, bikers etc. We worked on agreeing to have
commercial focused on Happy Valley/Jomax and agreed to have houses on 19th Ave. Guess what…? USSA and
their developers didn’t change anything along the way. USSA was respectful for our needs to keep our
neighborhood character. And I thank them tremendously, because, I now see how easy it is for changes to happen
along the way out of sight of the neighbor’s.
So this round of developers wants high density development in our neighborhood and has no concern for the
character of our area. We have new homeowners and original homeowners with residences in this area that want to
keep things rural. Not changing the rural feel is the main goal our neighborhood want and need for development.
The developers have ignored, lied and disregard our desires during their community outreach.
This little annexation to the City of Phx is just a “baby step” to use a quote from Dave Ramsey. It will lead to more
high density development with this developer that doesn’t listen to the neighborhood and a lack of respect for our
lifestyle.
All services that is desired can be done within Maricopa County. A water well can supply up to 4 homes. We have
fire service, sheriff’s and anything else a homeowner would want.
I’m opposed to the City of Phoenix encroaching on our rural living. And I’m opposed to the developers not listening
to the homeowners that have lived here for 50 years to only 6 months. We should have a voice…? KEEP ZONING
AS IS.
Our main goal is to keep commercial on Happy Valley. One acre lot in. It is slowly encroaching more into our
neighborhood by the developers silencing our neighbor’s by making offers and being in escrow with the
homeowners. Low balling them with offers that cannot replace their current lifestyle.
Please listen to our desires. We know this is a baby step for this developer. We DO NOT WANT City of Phx in a
random spot in our R-43 neighborhood and We Do Not Want high density zoning R2
--
Julie Burns,

From:
wmags@aol.com
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
[SUSPECTED SPAM]Bungalows Z2021051 and Toll Brothers GPA-DV-2-21-1 and Z-48-21-1
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 8:49:19 AM
I am greatly opposed to the developments on N. 19th Ave. I Martha Tallant, 25814 N. 17th Ave, Phoenix,
Az 85085 have lived at this address since 1972  along with my husband James (now deceased).I do not
oppose to single family homes being built on 1 Acre parcels. I have watched as the city limits moved
north which was expected, however apartments and bungalow type home was never anticipated. These
developments will have a great impact on our daily lives. (not in a good way). What will this do to our
property 
values? On our school districts? We already have seen traffic problems which will only get worse.
Thank you for listening.
Mrs Martha Tallant
wmags@aol.com

From:
Courtney Hamby
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Case number Z 2021 051.
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 11:23:35 AM
Good morning Jose,
Our names are Wayne Butler and Courtney Hamby. Our address is 1707 W Yearling Rd,
Phoenix, AZ 85085.
We are writing this email to inform you that we are still opposed to the development. We are
very concerned about the traffic issues this will create. We have yet to see a plan that has been
put in place to handle the amount of traffic this is going to create. It is very hard to pull out of
our streets already during rush hour traffic. We are also concerned that traffic will start
diverting through our neighborhood, we have young children that walk to friends or play in the
neighborhood and we have been very concerned, especially when I 17 was having work done,
this very same thing happened, traffic started diverting through our neighborhood, there were
people flying down 17th Avenue, not even stopping to see if traffic was coming etc. This
raises a lot of concern for us! We have truly enjoyed our county island and we feel this
development will forever change this area in a negative way. 
Thank you,
Courtney Hamby 
Wayne Butler

From:
Laura B
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
case number Z 2021 051
Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 8:15:28 PM
I am Laura Bates and own 1744 west parsons road.
We bought this property because we were enchanted with the characteristics of the neighborhood.   We could have 
animals and had a fresh water well! 
We did our homework and found out the lots across from us were zoned 1 home per acre like our home.  The lot
behind (the now KT) was zoned for medical office.  This was a buffer zone from the commercial lot on happy
valley.
We did this homework to make certain we would not have an eyesore out our front windows.
I am very concerned with the proposed changes of hundreds of small houses.  My view will become a 6 or 7 foot
wall. 
Even more concerning is the plan to exit out on to our road.  This a private road that homeowners maintain.
The residents have been talking about creating a gated community to eliminate traffic we already see.
Riding horses on this road would no longer be safe.  My chicken will no longer be able to wonder on our land.
What happens when residents complain about flies and smell of the country. 
This will significantly reduce our property value or at least potential buyers. I know I would not buy it had I known I
would be looking at a brick wall and have hundreds of cars going up and down the road.  Who would pay premium
price for this.
I noticed the developers asking for the general plan to be charged.  What changes are the looking for and why?
I would also like to speak at the meeting.
Regards,
Laura Bates

From:
Travis Burke
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
case number z 2021 051
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 8:00:06 AM
Dear Jose Castaneda,
 
I live at 26215 N. 17th drive Phoeniz az 85085 in the county island.
 
My wife and I specially sought out this area because of its unique zoning of 1 acre parcels per home. 
This ensures that the area will remain large estates and not be over run with town homes or
apartments or even cookie cutter new builds you see all over the valley.
 
We are totally against the rezoning of the county land to allow these types of apartments. 
 
Thank you for you consideration on this matter
 
Travis Burke - Owner
NurtureScape Landscape Company
Cell- 602.621.3355
Nurturescapeaz.com
ROC 331593

From:
Wayne Hudgeons
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Case number Z2021051 Zoning of R-43 to R-2
Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 1:54:03 PM
Jose,
My name is Wayne Hudgeons and I live at 25406 N 17th ave. 
I am writing to let you know that I am opposed to the rezoning of the 17 acres case number
Z2021051.  I feel that this community is great with the zoning that we have and that is why we
purchased a place to call home. The rezoning to multi family dwellings does not go with the
character of our neighborhood.  Another reason would be the extra noise and light pollution
that would not go with the existing homes.  The extra traffic that would come through our
private community maintained roads would also be a major burden.
Best Regards,
Wayne Hudgeons
623-340-0579

From:
dave beaver
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Case Z 2021 051
Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 8:48:36 PM
Dear Mr. Castaneda,                                                                                                  
 My name is David Beaver, residing at  1732 W. Yearling Rd., Phoenix, AZ
85085.  This is regarding case number Z 2021 051.  I am opposed to the rezoning
and the Toll Brothers project, cases GPA-DV-2-21-1 and Z-48-21-1.
      My family have been residents here for 10 years. We enjoy this community.
It’s a perfect place to retire because of the convenience of our daily necessities,
such as shopping, pharmacies, eateries, etc. 
There are plenty of other properties off Happy Valley where they can develop
multi-family zoning and build apartment complexes. I am not in favor of a re-
zoning nor the Toll Brothers multi-family apartment complex. Please respect our
desire to keep this Happy Valley island a single-family community. 
Sincerely, 
David Beaver

From:
Valerie King
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Case Z 2021 051
Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 5:23:34 PM
Dear Mr. Castaneda,
My name is Valerie King, and my address is: 1732 W. Yearling Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85085.  I am writing you
regarding case number Z 2021 051.  I am strongly opposed to the rezoning and the Toll Brothers proposed
development, (cases GPA-DV-2-21-1 and Z-48-21-1).
Please let our voices be heard so we can keep our neighborhood to a single-family not multi family zoning!
Smiles,
Valerie King

From:
Alison McKee
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
CASE Z 2021051
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 12:36:39 PM
Attachments:
County Case Z 2021051.pdf
Jose, 
I just learned of the re-zoning meeting for the 17 acre parcel off of 19th Ave & Parsons Rd,
case Z 2021051.  Please see the attached letter with my concerns on this matter.  We are a
rural county island with special animal rights.  High density apartments are not going to mesh
well with our community and way of life.  Please share the letter with the council and ask for a
no vote on the rezoning to help preserve our rural way of life.  My husband and I wish the
zoning to remain as is.
Kind regards,
 
Alison McKee
1219 W Parsons Rd
Phoenix, AZ 85085
602-702-3676

From:
Stephen Murphy
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
CASE Z 2021051
Date:
Monday, December 6, 2021 8:39:20 PM
I am a resident in the Happy Valley Island at 1647 W Briles Road for the last 4 years.  I would
like to speak at the meeting December 9 regarding case Z 2021051 
I would also like to put on record my opposition to the rezoning and Toll Brothers proposed
build.  I will be short and succinct as possible.
First I believe this build is not consistent with the existing immediate neighborhood.  No
where in our little island is there a 4 story complex.  We are a small neighborhood of single
family homes with a few businesses on Happy Valley and 19th, of which none are multiple
story complexes of this size. 
Secondly, is R43 is the current zoning.  Rezoning to R2 will change the neighborhoods
character.  We moved here with a certainty of certain characters.  This change will alter this
certainty, more condensed living will increase living, the stress on the livestock including
horses which there are at least 20 in the neighborhood.  To build a dense living area will
inevitably result in complaints from the new residents about the smell and flies associated with
horse properties.
Thirdly, I moved here with the understanding of the current zoning.  I accepted that.  Now it is
being proposed to change that against my opposition and others.  Do we as, a community, not
have a say in the changes that occur in our community for something that directly affects us? 
We are not asking for change on this zone only to honor the current zoning.
Fourthly, there are plenty of other sights in the surrounding area for apparent complexes to be
built to support the dense housing needs. I don’t see a justification for this build on this
particular site when other areas are available to support an apparent complex.  To support this
build is to ignore our wishes to preserve the community in which we live in.  The current
zoning does not support the Toll Bothers proposed build and the zoning should remain as is
for development.  That has clearly been the voice of the immediate neighborhood.  
Fifthly, this will without question decrease the value of our house and ever single person’s
house in the neighborhood.
 I sincerely hope that the voices of our community are heard and respected.  We love our
neighborhood and want to preserve it and keep with the current zoning.  The apartment
complex is in now way consistent with the neighborhood.
 Please add my comments to the meeting.
I would also like to register to speak at the meeting Dec 9th. 
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.  
Stephen B Murphy
(219) 308-8516

From:
James Wh
To:
David O Simmons
Cc:
Jose Castaneda (PND); mayor.gallego@phoenix.gov
Subject:
Concerning GPA-DV-2-21-1 Z-48-21-1 &. Z-2021051
Date:
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 7:09:08 AM
Hello,
My name is James Whatley and I’m writing to have my statements put on file and to register to speak at the
upcoming meetings this Thursday for both projects involving the area north of Happy Valley road  along 19th Ave
all the way to Parsons rd.
I am aresident and relative of one of the first homes built in this county island. These new planned apartment and
“bungalow” housing projects do not fit in with the original character of our neighborhood.
The residents of this county island including myself have gotten together to fight these new builds and we all are in
agreement that our Zoned R-43 properties need to remain so!
The land connecting to Parsons road is zoned R-43 ( 1 house per acre)  and should remain that way. The builder is
trying to build apartments conveniently renamed as “bungalows” . We are only “ok” with one house per acre!  This
county island is relatively small and the residents chose to live here because we all enjoy our privacy and our horses
and other large stock animals. We are all connected by private and quiet roads. The families that live here, live off of
water supplied by wells  and we all have  beautiful homes. We all enjoy our space and the peace and quiet that was
guaranteed to us when we purchased the Character of this area.
The parcel just north of Happy Valley is zoned Commercial Business. Toll Brothers wants to rezone this  and build
an original 470 unit apartment complex there. They have accumulated more land so they will want to build even
more units. We  are fine with businesses moving in, this area needs more businesses, not more apartments! This area
is not set up nor can it handle the type of development that is trying to move in this area.
These builders are targeting our area thinking they can come in and change the character and life style of this area
for their profit. They can easily go somewhere else in the “city” and  obtain land that is already zoned for there
needs. Currently, there are multiple other apartments being built around us. There are more than 5 complexes being
built within a mile radius of our county island. The growth in this area is beyond exponential at this time and this
area is not prepared. All of the main feeder roads around us are 2 lane roads, except for Happy Valley road. There is
already a huge influx of vehicle traffic and and traffic accidents that are occurring everyday, in an area not meant to
handle such growth. Not to mention the excessive noise, light and air pollution that we are experiencing from the
already over burdened surrounding communities. The next thing to get polluted is our  ground water that all of us
county islanders rely on to keep our families and our animals alive and healthy.
Please, take my words into consideration during these and all future meetings concerning this area and share these
statements with your colleagues and meeting goers.
Thank you all for your time and understanding in this matter.
Sincerely,
James Whatley
Sent from my iPhone

From:
Rachel Applegate (PND)
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
FW: Online Form Submittal: Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 7:13:05 AM
 
From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 2:23 PM
To: PND PZAppeal <PNDPZAppeal@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
 
Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Appeal Form 
If the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of a particular case it
will be placed on a consent agenda for the Board of Supervisors hearing.
However, if this appeal form is received within 15 calendar days following
Commission hearing, then the agenda item will be placed on the regular agenda
for the Board of Supervisors hearing.
Name
Julie Burns
Email Address
hawkeyestables@gmail.com
Address
1717 w yearling Road
City
phoenix
State
AZ
Zip Code
85085
Phone Number
6026953903
Fax Number
Field not completed.
Case Number / Project
Name
Z2021051
Planning & Zoning
Commission Hearing Date
December 9, 2021
Reason for the Appeal of
the Subject Case
Exit is off Parsons and will cause dust and health issues related
to the dirt roads not maintained by Maricopa County. Neighbors
will get dust complaints.
Would like single family and not multi family zoning.

Electronic Signature
Agreement
Field not completed.
Electronic Signature
Julie Burns
 
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

From:
Rachel Applegate (PND)
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
FW: Online Form Submittal: Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 7:12:53 AM
 
From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 4:07 PM
To: PND PZAppeal <PNDPZAppeal@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
 
Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation
Appeal Form 
If the Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of a particular case it
will be placed on a consent agenda for the Board of Supervisors hearing.
However, if this appeal form is received within 15 calendar days following
Commission hearing, then the agenda item will be placed on the regular agenda
for the Board of Supervisors hearing.
Name
Melissa Crawford
Email Address
tryitonjewels@aol.com
Address
1736 W Parsons Rd
City
Phoenix
State
AZ
Zip Code
85085
Phone Number
6236067248
Fax Number
Field not completed.
Case Number / Project
Name
Z2021051
Planning & Zoning
Commission Hearing Date
12/09/2021
Reason for the Appeal of
the Subject Case
Our neighborhood opposites changing the zoning from R43 to
R2. This zoning changes our lives and the lives of our animals. It
decreases our property values, causes insane amounts of traffic
and impacts our ANIMALS!

Electronic Signature
Agreement
I agree.
Electronic Signature
Melissa D Crawford
 
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

December 7, 2021 
 
RE:  Maricopa County Case # Z2021051 -OBJECTION 
 
ATTN:  
Rachel Applegate 
Senior Planner 
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Desk: 602-372-0318 
Rachel.Applegate@maricopa.gov 
 
Jose Castañeda 
Planner 
Planning & Development 
Desk: 602-506-8358 
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov 
 
Bill Gates  
Chairman, District 3 
district3@mail.maricopa.gov  
 
 
To All It May Concern; 
 
At What Point in time was it decided that Investors get priority over Owner Occupied 
Residential entities no matter what. If you don't know how this feels, wait until they 
come for your backyard.  
 
I wish I could be short and to the point, but thats very difficult to do when there are so 
many points. I truly am not trying to filibuster your time, but there are a multitude of 
aspects to object to and there are lifetimes/styles/dreams/realities and more that are 
at stake, so I respectfully ask that you read this slowly, and in its entirety and 
remember that your decisions really will only have a lasting effect on those of us who 
RESIDE within the boundaries of this County Island that we are trying to defend. 
Others will never know if they didn't get to live in an apartment that was never built. 
(but they might someday get to be a homeowner with horse privileges and more) That 
btw being one of the multiple aspects to our objections. One of the greatest things 
about the Phoenix metropolitan area is the diversity of options when it comes to 
housing. Within the "city" aspects there are many areas where you can feel/be  "rural" 
and very few big Cities can boast that.  
 
We have dealt with and been surrounded by growth for many years now, but this 
proposed development will not surround us, they will invade, envelop,  and 
suffocate us and our animals . They are stepping directly within our borders,  and it is 
sad that you would allow that to happen to your constituents. How long before you 
start getting complaints because of horses, donkeys bees, etc.  The density is the 
biggest issue for us all - why not a small gated community with 1/3 acre (even better

1/2 acre) homes that would temper and flow very readily into our community.  We are 
a small landlocked county island with numerous residents that desire to leave it that 
way. What right does anyone have to buy Land zoned R-43, and identified multiple 
times by government entities as an area that would be retained as rural, and destroy 
it's character simply for the fact that it was cheap (compared to already zoned and 
appropriate parcels). Over the years we believed what we were told from the Deer 
Valley Planning Commission (who we were lead to believe carried the most weight), 
multiple times, this area was meant to remain low density , and we took them at their 
word  
 
So to be clear, we have no objections nor issues with people or companies buying 
vacant land on the off chance that at some point in their investment lifetime this will 
pay off for them. And in some instances that might make sense. Within the boundaries 
of our land locked County (partially Phoenix) Island however, this does 
not.  Therefore WE OBJECT. Parcel sizes to build homes in our area have always (for 
decades) required 1.00 acre (or more) of land for (1) single family home. That is how 
it should remain as the people who did buy and build in our area relied upon those 
decade old reassurances.   Many of us invested much more than money in building 
homes and helping to maintain this area to retain core amenities that most people 
were seeking when they chose to build their lives here.  
 
We personally bought our land in the 1970's and built our homes in the late 1980's, 
we did not ask for the "progress" that came to this area in the form of businesses, 
traffic etc. but we also weren't naive enough to think that we could stop many aspects 
of it. But all indications had still been (until most recently)  that most business entities 
would be minor and only allowed on the South side of HV and High Density 
Residential wasn't even on the radar. It was not until very recently that residential 
was even a part of that mix and now we are being bombarded ( City Of Phoenix Z-48-21-
1 (Companion Case GPA-DV-2-21-1)) at a very rushed and increased pace.  Development 
Reps have been canvasing our neighborhood, misrepresenting the desires of the 
majority and doing their best to strong arm and coerce support for something that has 
NO BENEFITS to the neighborhood, only to the developers themselves. Most all agree 
we would prefer the commercial zoning in place allowing for medical and small 
businesses from which we could benefit with local business entities and Dr's, with 
minimal traffic and increased crime risks. These "Developers" are making a conscious 
choice to purchase land that is not zoned compatible with their original intent, 
obviously with the belief that they can buy their way in, which was obviosly cheaper 
than buying land already zoned for their intent purposes, as that land is currently in 
abundance throughout this area. Instead they are choosing to encroach upon us, 
hoping to plow and bully their way around to get their way. We implore you please do 
not allow this to happen.

We were lulled into believing that the land-locked area we occupied would be mainly 
immune to density changes for several reasons. First and foremost, I'll site the DV 
Planning Committee again and their written assurances of 19th Ave being the dividing 
line for maintaining the existing low density profile to the East of 19th Ave,  along with 
the County zoning plan of R-43 and by 2 other facts. that I believe should also still play 
very big into this decision by you;  19th Ave Northbound from Happy Valley Rd (HV)  is 
essentially a road to nowhere,  as is HV Eastbound from 19th Ave. These 2 facts also 
led us to believe that there was never an intention on increasing density onto roads 
that can not handle the traffic increase that comes with it, even with modifications.  
 
So please consider these traffic issues aspects carefully; 
 
Happy Valley Rd. on our South Boundary,  is a road to and from nowhere and I can't 
imagine that ever changing (ooops there I ago again) due to the topography east of 7th 
St. and the fact that homes are built directly in the path where HV comes out on Cave 
Creek Rd.   
 
Our West Boundary, 19th Ave northbound is also a road to nowhere. At Jomax it 
ceases to exist and all traffic heading west is mainly bound for the extensive SINGLE 
FAMILY RESIDENTAL DEVELOPMENTS that are in the other basically landlocked areas 
of  Jomax, Norterra Parkway and North Valley Parkway.  19th Ave turns into North 
Valley Parkway which within less than 2 miles also has Norterra Parkway meld into it 
which then in approximately one mile ceases to exist completely as a road that can 
handle "traffic", so encouraging anyone along that route is ludicrous as I'm sure most 
residents in that area will agree. Very few businesses or high density devlopments 
exist in that area and yet the traffic is already extensive due to the physical size of the 
area and the lack of of direct access from the east, west and North sides of this area. 
 
USAA's development was difficult enough for our R-43 zoning to have to accept but at 
least this was tempered by mainly single family homes with easy access to the main 
Roads such as Happy Valley (which holds mainly businesses) , Jomax  or Norterra 
Parkway,  again mainly businesses until  Jomax.  The small stretch of 19th Avenue 
from Happy Valley to Jomax is already way overloaded with traffic during peak hours, 
and that wouldn't change even if they expanded that section to 4 lanes. On weekday 
mornings, southbound traffic coming from North Valley onto 19th is ridiculous and 
has a high amount of speeders and red light runners.  This is already soon to change as 
Union Park will soon be building its Northside which will greatly increase that 19th 
Avenue traffic once again.  The only saving grace we currently have is the fact that the 
East side of 19th Ave between HV & Jomax are all single family residences on 
minimum 1.00 acre parcels. There are NO businesses and NO high density 
residences.  If you change that demographic,  you will create an even more dangerous 
traffic pattern than what already exists.  The two developments are requesting 
extreme changes to the current density requirements, and neither one will have ANY 
access in or out other than that onto 19th Avenue and (as proposed in this 
development) directly across from Union Parks access to 19th Ave. In the mornings it 
is already impossible to turn onto 19th Ave south, so I've no doubt those residences

will then choose to drive into our Rural dirt road neighborhood in order to access 
Happy Valley Road.  
 
Union Park has direct access to Happy Valley Road, that helps with the traffic in and 
out of the Southern part of that development but as they also have access to 19th 
Avenue,  traffic is generated at Parsons Rd. The same will happen with their Northern 
part of development now underway, they will have access to Jomax (which will create 
another traffic nightmare for those neighborhoods to the North, but again will also 
have access to 19th Avenue which will generate more traffic at Briles Rd..  Adding any 
more density developments that require access from 19th Ave between Happy Valley 
and Jomax is insane.  There has been reliance for many years within our 
neighborhood of large (minimum 1.00 acre parcels) and the Deer Valley planning 
commission has always identified our little triangular County Island to retain that low 
density zoning as anything else would be a major disruption on many many levels.      
 
To encourage any more traffic onto this pathway (19th between HV and Jomax ) to go 
North or south,  or onto HV (east of 19th) is disruptive to ALL of the residents located 
within the boundaries of Happy Valley, 7th St., Norterra Parkway,  up to Dixleta on the 
North side, not just our Island. 
 
Essentially we feel it is critical to reject  ANY High Density development  (or any 
Commercial development that would attract a high traffic volume)  on the East side of 
19th Avenue between Happy Valley and Jomax - If we had to accept some reduction in 
the R-43 footprint the preference would be a minimum .5 acre (.33 if pushed) single 
home footprint to blend in with the existing 1.00 acre parcels.   There is still plenty of 
money for developers to make from that.  
 
ADDED to the above nightmares, If you Approve this request,  there are several other things 
I can state with certainty that I hope you consider carefully,  as we also have vested interests in 
this area; 
 
The Home we just finally paid off after 33 years will immediately DECREASE in value  
 
The lifestyle that we worked so hard to achieve and maintain and enjoy will be now 
LOST just as we are starting our retirement years. The homes our children were 
raised in and hoped they might raise their children in will be no more.  
 
The livestock/animals/fowl we have will likely be in more danger now from humans 
than any other natural predators we currently have. These residents will be right up 
against properties with horses/livestock, flocks, hives etc,  and who knows how 
anyone offended by the environment that comes with that will react.

You didn't do this to Sunburst Farms, You didn't do this to Western Meadows,  You 
didn't do this Longhorn Ranch or Thunderbird North, please DO NOT do this to our 
small landlocked County Island. Allowing ANY developments within our borders with 
a density greater than our current zoning is a death sentence to the lifestyles we have 
carefully cultivated and sacrificed for over the years.    
 
Our small land-locked County Island has always allowed for us to maintain that rural 
lifestyle that has been here since we bult in 1988, we've watched the Walmarts come, 
the Circle K's and even a large residential development, yet none of those even came 
close to threatening our rural lifestyle the way these two proposed developments are 
now doing  
 
I would also like it noted for the record that you state you only have one letter of 
opposition, that would likely be due to the fact that No dates were posted for meetings 
until quite recently and we do all have lives in order to pay our bills taxes etc,  taxes so 
please do not persist in the scenario that you do not have a significant number of 
people opposed to this project 
 
Respectfully and with Hope that for once the little guy can win on principal alone, not 
through drained bank accounts as obviously we don't have the $$'s to fight these 
battles just simple faith that sometimes the bigger picture can win out.  
 
 
Laurel & Richard Brodie  
25657 N. 17th Ave 
Phoenix, AZ 85085 
 
 
CC: Maricopa County District 3 - Bill Gates  
https://www.maricopa.gov/247/District-3

December 7, 2021 
 
RE:  Maricopa County Case # Z2021051 -OBJECTION 
 
ATTN:  
Rachel Applegate 
Senior Planner 
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Desk: 602-372-0318 
Rachel.Applegate@maricopa.gov 
 
Jose Castañeda 
Planner 
Planning & Development 
Desk: 602-506-8358 
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov 
 
Bill Gates  
Chairman, District 3 
district3@mail.maricopa.gov  
 
 
To All It May Concern; 
 
At What Point in time was it decided that Investors get priority over Owner Occupied 
Residential entities no matter what. If you don't know how this feels, wait until they 
come for your backyard.  
 
I wish I could be short and to the point, but thats very difficult to do when there are so 
many points. I truly am not trying to filibuster your time, but there are a multitude of 
aspects to object to and there are lifetimes/styles/dreams/realities and more that are 
at stake, so I respectfully ask that you read this slowly, and in its entirety and 
remember that your decisions really will only have a lasting effect on those of us who 
RESIDE within the boundaries of this County Island that we are trying to defend. 
Others will never know if they didn't get to live in an apartment that was never built. 
(but they might someday get to be a homeowner with horse privileges and more) That 
btw being one of the multiple aspects to our objections. One of the greatest things 
about the Phoenix metropolitan area is the diversity of options when it comes to 
housing. Within the "city" aspects there are many areas where you can feel/be  "rural" 
and very few big Cities can boast that.  
 
We have dealt with and been surrounded by growth for many years now, but this 
proposed development will not surround us, they will invade, envelop,  and 
suffocate us and our animals . They are stepping directly within our borders,  and it is 
sad that you would allow that to happen to your constituents. How long before you 
start getting complaints because of horses, donkeys bees, etc.  The density is the 
biggest issue for us all - why not a small gated community with 1/3 acre (even better

1/2 acre) homes that would temper and flow very readily into our community.  We are 
a small landlocked county island with numerous residents that desire to leave it that 
way. What right does anyone have to buy Land zoned R-43, and identified multiple 
times by government entities as an area that would be retained as rural, and destroy 
it's character simply for the fact that it was cheap (compared to already zoned and 
appropriate parcels). Over the years we believed what we were told from the Deer 
Valley Planning Commission (who we were lead to believe carried the most weight), 
multiple times, this area was meant to remain low density , and we took them at their 
word  
 
So to be clear, we have no objections nor issues with people or companies buying 
vacant land on the off chance that at some point in their investment lifetime this will 
pay off for them. And in some instances that might make sense. Within the boundaries 
of our land locked County (partially Phoenix) Island however, this does 
not.  Therefore WE OBJECT. Parcel sizes to build homes in our area have always (for 
decades) required 1.00 acre (or more) of land for (1) single family home. That is how 
it should remain as the people who did buy and build in our area relied upon those 
decade old reassurances.   Many of us invested much more than money in building 
homes and helping to maintain this area to retain core amenities that most people 
were seeking when they chose to build their lives here.  
 
We personally bought our land in the 1970's and built our homes in the late 1980's, 
we did not ask for the "progress" that came to this area in the form of businesses, 
traffic etc. but we also weren't naive enough to think that we could stop many aspects 
of it. But all indications had still been (until most recently)  that most business entities 
would be minor and only allowed on the South side of HV and High Density 
Residential wasn't even on the radar. It was not until very recently that residential 
was even a part of that mix and now we are being bombarded ( City Of Phoenix Z-48-21-
1 (Companion Case GPA-DV-2-21-1)) at a very rushed and increased pace.  Development 
Reps have been canvasing our neighborhood, misrepresenting the desires of the 
majority and doing their best to strong arm and coerce support for something that has 
NO BENEFITS to the neighborhood, only to the developers themselves. Most all agree 
we would prefer the commercial zoning in place allowing for medical and small 
businesses from which we could benefit with local business entities and Dr's, with 
minimal traffic and increased crime risks. These "Developers" are making a conscious 
choice to purchase land that is not zoned compatible with their original intent, 
obviously with the belief that they can buy their way in, which was obviosly cheaper 
than buying land already zoned for their intent purposes, as that land is currently in 
abundance throughout this area. Instead they are choosing to encroach upon us, 
hoping to plow and bully their way around to get their way. We implore you please do 
not allow this to happen.

We were lulled into believing that the land-locked area we occupied would be mainly 
immune to density changes for several reasons. First and foremost, I'll site the DV 
Planning Committee again and their written assurances of 19th Ave being the dividing 
line for maintaining the existing low density profile to the East of 19th Ave,  along with 
the County zoning plan of R-43 and by 2 other facts. that I believe should also still play 
very big into this decision by you;  19th Ave Northbound from Happy Valley Rd (HV)  is 
essentially a road to nowhere,  as is HV Eastbound from 19th Ave. These 2 facts also 
led us to believe that there was never an intention on increasing density onto roads 
that can not handle the traffic increase that comes with it, even with modifications.  
 
So please consider these traffic issues aspects carefully; 
 
Happy Valley Rd. on our South Boundary,  is a road to and from nowhere and I can't 
imagine that ever changing (ooops there I ago again) due to the topography east of 7th 
St. and the fact that homes are built directly in the path where HV comes out on Cave 
Creek Rd.   
 
Our West Boundary, 19th Ave northbound is also a road to nowhere. At Jomax it 
ceases to exist and all traffic heading west is mainly bound for the extensive SINGLE 
FAMILY RESIDENTAL DEVELOPMENTS that are in the other basically landlocked areas 
of  Jomax, Norterra Parkway and North Valley Parkway.  19th Ave turns into North 
Valley Parkway which within less than 2 miles also has Norterra Parkway meld into it 
which then in approximately one mile ceases to exist completely as a road that can 
handle "traffic", so encouraging anyone along that route is ludicrous as I'm sure most 
residents in that area will agree. Very few businesses or high density devlopments 
exist in that area and yet the traffic is already extensive due to the physical size of the 
area and the lack of of direct access from the east, west and North sides of this area. 
 
USAA's development was difficult enough for our R-43 zoning to have to accept but at 
least this was tempered by mainly single family homes with easy access to the main 
Roads such as Happy Valley (which holds mainly businesses) , Jomax  or Norterra 
Parkway,  again mainly businesses until  Jomax.  The small stretch of 19th Avenue 
from Happy Valley to Jomax is already way overloaded with traffic during peak hours, 
and that wouldn't change even if they expanded that section to 4 lanes. On weekday 
mornings, southbound traffic coming from North Valley onto 19th is ridiculous and 
has a high amount of speeders and red light runners.  This is already soon to change as 
Union Park will soon be building its Northside which will greatly increase that 19th 
Avenue traffic once again.  The only saving grace we currently have is the fact that the 
East side of 19th Ave between HV & Jomax are all single family residences on 
minimum 1.00 acre parcels. There are NO businesses and NO high density 
residences.  If you change that demographic,  you will create an even more dangerous 
traffic pattern than what already exists.  The two developments are requesting 
extreme changes to the current density requirements, and neither one will have ANY 
access in or out other than that onto 19th Avenue and (as proposed in this 
development) directly across from Union Parks access to 19th Ave. In the mornings it 
is already impossible to turn onto 19th Ave south, so I've no doubt those residences

will then choose to drive into our Rural dirt road neighborhood in order to access 
Happy Valley Road.  
 
Union Park has direct access to Happy Valley Road, that helps with the traffic in and 
out of the Southern part of that development but as they also have access to 19th 
Avenue,  traffic is generated at Parsons Rd. The same will happen with their Northern 
part of development now underway, they will have access to Jomax (which will create 
another traffic nightmare for those neighborhoods to the North, but again will also 
have access to 19th Avenue which will generate more traffic at Briles Rd..  Adding any 
more density developments that require access from 19th Ave between Happy Valley 
and Jomax is insane.  There has been reliance for many years within our 
neighborhood of large (minimum 1.00 acre parcels) and the Deer Valley planning 
commission has always identified our little triangular County Island to retain that low 
density zoning as anything else would be a major disruption on many many levels.      
 
To encourage any more traffic onto this pathway (19th between HV and Jomax ) to go 
North or south,  or onto HV (east of 19th) is disruptive to ALL of the residents located 
within the boundaries of Happy Valley, 7th St., Norterra Parkway,  up to Dixleta on the 
North side, not just our Island. 
 
Essentially we feel it is critical to reject  ANY High Density development  (or any 
Commercial development that would attract a high traffic volume)  on the East side of 
19th Avenue between Happy Valley and Jomax - If we had to accept some reduction in 
the R-43 footprint the preference would be a minimum .5 acre (.33 if pushed) single 
home footprint to blend in with the existing 1.00 acre parcels.   There is still plenty of 
money for developers to make from that.  
 
ADDED to the above nightmares, If you Approve this request,  there are several other things 
I can state with certainty that I hope you consider carefully,  as we also have vested interests in 
this area; 
 
The Home we just finally paid off after 33 years will immediately DECREASE in value  
 
The lifestyle that we worked so hard to achieve and maintain and enjoy will be now 
LOST just as we are starting our retirement years. The homes our children were 
raised in and hoped they might raise their children in will be no more.  
 
The livestock/animals/fowl we have will likely be in more danger now from humans 
than any other natural predators we currently have. These residents will be right up 
against properties with horses/livestock, flocks, hives etc,  and who knows how 
anyone offended by the environment that comes with that will react.

You didn't do this to Sunburst Farms, You didn't do this to Western Meadows,  You 
didn't do this Longhorn Ranch or Thunderbird North, please DO NOT do this to our 
small landlocked County Island. Allowing ANY developments within our borders with 
a density greater than our current zoning is a death sentence to the lifestyles we have 
carefully cultivated and sacrificed for over the years.    
 
Our small land-locked County Island has always allowed for us to maintain that rural 
lifestyle that has been here since we bult in 1988, we've watched the Walmarts come, 
the Circle K's and even a large residential development, yet none of those even came 
close to threatening our rural lifestyle the way these two proposed developments are 
now doing  
 
I would also like it noted for the record that you state you only have one letter of 
opposition, that would likely be due to the fact that No dates were posted for meetings 
until quite recently and we do all have lives in order to pay our bills taxes etc,  taxes so 
please do not persist in the scenario that you do not have a significant number of 
people opposed to this project 
 
Respectfully and with Hope that for once the little guy can win on principal alone, not 
through drained bank accounts as obviously we don't have the $$'s to fight these 
battles just simple faith that sometimes the bigger picture can win out.  
 
 
Laurel & Richard Brodie  
25657 N. 17th Ave 
Phoenix, AZ 85085 
 
 
CC: Maricopa County District 3 - Bill Gates  
https://www.maricopa.gov/247/District-3

December 7, 2021 
 
RE:  Maricopa County Case # Z2021051 -OBJECTION 
 
ATTN:  
Rachel Applegate 
Senior Planner 
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Desk: 602-372-0318 
Rachel.Applegate@maricopa.gov 
 
Jose Castañeda 
Planner 
Planning & Development 
Desk: 602-506-8358 
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov 
 
Bill Gates  
Chairman, District 3 
district3@mail.maricopa.gov  
 
 
To All It May Concern; 
 
At What Point in time was it decided that Investors get priority over Owner Occupied 
Residential entities no matter what. If you don't know how this feels, wait until they 
come for your backyard.  
 
I wish I could be short and to the point, but thats very difficult to do when there are so 
many points. I truly am not trying to filibuster your time, but there are a multitude of 
aspects to object to and there are lifetimes/styles/dreams/realities and more that are 
at stake, so I respectfully ask that you read this slowly, and in its entirety and 
remember that your decisions really will only have a lasting effect on those of us who 
RESIDE within the boundaries of this County Island that we are trying to defend. 
Others will never know if they didn't get to live in an apartment that was never built. 
(but they might someday get to be a homeowner with horse privileges and more) That 
btw being one of the multiple aspects to our objections. One of the greatest things 
about the Phoenix metropolitan area is the diversity of options when it comes to 
housing. Within the "city" aspects there are many areas where you can feel/be  "rural" 
and very few big Cities can boast that.  
 
We have dealt with and been surrounded by growth for many years now, but this 
proposed development will not surround us, they will invade, envelop,  and 
suffocate us and our animals . They are stepping directly within our borders,  and it is 
sad that you would allow that to happen to your constituents. How long before you 
start getting complaints because of horses, donkeys bees, etc.  The density is the 
biggest issue for us all - why not a small gated community with 1/3 acre (even better

1/2 acre) homes that would temper and flow very readily into our community.  We are 
a small landlocked county island with numerous residents that desire to leave it that 
way. What right does anyone have to buy Land zoned R-43, and identified multiple 
times by government entities as an area that would be retained as rural, and destroy 
it's character simply for the fact that it was cheap (compared to already zoned and 
appropriate parcels). Over the years we believed what we were told from the Deer 
Valley Planning Commission (who we were lead to believe carried the most weight), 
multiple times, this area was meant to remain low density , and we took them at their 
word  
 
So to be clear, we have no objections nor issues with people or companies buying 
vacant land on the off chance that at some point in their investment lifetime this will 
pay off for them. And in some instances that might make sense. Within the boundaries 
of our land locked County (partially Phoenix) Island however, this does 
not.  Therefore WE OBJECT. Parcel sizes to build homes in our area have always (for 
decades) required 1.00 acre (or more) of land for (1) single family home. That is how 
it should remain as the people who did buy and build in our area relied upon those 
decade old reassurances.   Many of us invested much more than money in building 
homes and helping to maintain this area to retain core amenities that most people 
were seeking when they chose to build their lives here.  
 
We personally bought our land in the 1970's and built our homes in the late 1980's, 
we did not ask for the "progress" that came to this area in the form of businesses, 
traffic etc. but we also weren't naive enough to think that we could stop many aspects 
of it. But all indications had still been (until most recently)  that most business entities 
would be minor and only allowed on the South side of HV and High Density 
Residential wasn't even on the radar. It was not until very recently that residential 
was even a part of that mix and now we are being bombarded ( City Of Phoenix Z-48-21-
1 (Companion Case GPA-DV-2-21-1)) at a very rushed and increased pace.  Development 
Reps have been canvasing our neighborhood, misrepresenting the desires of the 
majority and doing their best to strong arm and coerce support for something that has 
NO BENEFITS to the neighborhood, only to the developers themselves. Most all agree 
we would prefer the commercial zoning in place allowing for medical and small 
businesses from which we could benefit with local business entities and Dr's, with 
minimal traffic and increased crime risks. These "Developers" are making a conscious 
choice to purchase land that is not zoned compatible with their original intent, 
obviously with the belief that they can buy their way in, which was obviosly cheaper 
than buying land already zoned for their intent purposes, as that land is currently in 
abundance throughout this area. Instead they are choosing to encroach upon us, 
hoping to plow and bully their way around to get their way. We implore you please do 
not allow this to happen.

We were lulled into believing that the land-locked area we occupied would be mainly 
immune to density changes for several reasons. First and foremost, I'll site the DV 
Planning Committee again and their written assurances of 19th Ave being the dividing 
line for maintaining the existing low density profile to the East of 19th Ave,  along with 
the County zoning plan of R-43 and by 2 other facts. that I believe should also still play 
very big into this decision by you;  19th Ave Northbound from Happy Valley Rd (HV)  is 
essentially a road to nowhere,  as is HV Eastbound from 19th Ave. These 2 facts also 
led us to believe that there was never an intention on increasing density onto roads 
that can not handle the traffic increase that comes with it, even with modifications.  
 
So please consider these traffic issues aspects carefully; 
 
Happy Valley Rd. on our South Boundary,  is a road to and from nowhere and I can't 
imagine that ever changing (ooops there I ago again) due to the topography east of 7th 
St. and the fact that homes are built directly in the path where HV comes out on Cave 
Creek Rd.   
 
Our West Boundary, 19th Ave northbound is also a road to nowhere. At Jomax it 
ceases to exist and all traffic heading west is mainly bound for the extensive SINGLE 
FAMILY RESIDENTAL DEVELOPMENTS that are in the other basically landlocked areas 
of  Jomax, Norterra Parkway and North Valley Parkway.  19th Ave turns into North 
Valley Parkway which within less than 2 miles also has Norterra Parkway meld into it 
which then in approximately one mile ceases to exist completely as a road that can 
handle "traffic", so encouraging anyone along that route is ludicrous as I'm sure most 
residents in that area will agree. Very few businesses or high density devlopments 
exist in that area and yet the traffic is already extensive due to the physical size of the 
area and the lack of of direct access from the east, west and North sides of this area. 
 
USAA's development was difficult enough for our R-43 zoning to have to accept but at 
least this was tempered by mainly single family homes with easy access to the main 
Roads such as Happy Valley (which holds mainly businesses) , Jomax  or Norterra 
Parkway,  again mainly businesses until  Jomax.  The small stretch of 19th Avenue 
from Happy Valley to Jomax is already way overloaded with traffic during peak hours, 
and that wouldn't change even if they expanded that section to 4 lanes. On weekday 
mornings, southbound traffic coming from North Valley onto 19th is ridiculous and 
has a high amount of speeders and red light runners.  This is already soon to change as 
Union Park will soon be building its Northside which will greatly increase that 19th 
Avenue traffic once again.  The only saving grace we currently have is the fact that the 
East side of 19th Ave between HV & Jomax are all single family residences on 
minimum 1.00 acre parcels. There are NO businesses and NO high density 
residences.  If you change that demographic,  you will create an even more dangerous 
traffic pattern than what already exists.  The two developments are requesting 
extreme changes to the current density requirements, and neither one will have ANY 
access in or out other than that onto 19th Avenue and (as proposed in this 
development) directly across from Union Parks access to 19th Ave. In the mornings it 
is already impossible to turn onto 19th Ave south, so I've no doubt those residences

will then choose to drive into our Rural dirt road neighborhood in order to access 
Happy Valley Road.  
 
Union Park has direct access to Happy Valley Road, that helps with the traffic in and 
out of the Southern part of that development but as they also have access to 19th 
Avenue,  traffic is generated at Parsons Rd. The same will happen with their Northern 
part of development now underway, they will have access to Jomax (which will create 
another traffic nightmare for those neighborhoods to the North, but again will also 
have access to 19th Avenue which will generate more traffic at Briles Rd..  Adding any 
more density developments that require access from 19th Ave between Happy Valley 
and Jomax is insane.  There has been reliance for many years within our 
neighborhood of large (minimum 1.00 acre parcels) and the Deer Valley planning 
commission has always identified our little triangular County Island to retain that low 
density zoning as anything else would be a major disruption on many many levels.      
 
To encourage any more traffic onto this pathway (19th between HV and Jomax ) to go 
North or south,  or onto HV (east of 19th) is disruptive to ALL of the residents located 
within the boundaries of Happy Valley, 7th St., Norterra Parkway,  up to Dixleta on the 
North side, not just our Island. 
 
Essentially we feel it is critical to reject  ANY High Density development  (or any 
Commercial development that would attract a high traffic volume)  on the East side of 
19th Avenue between Happy Valley and Jomax - If we had to accept some reduction in 
the R-43 footprint the preference would be a minimum .5 acre (.33 if pushed) single 
home footprint to blend in with the existing 1.00 acre parcels.   There is still plenty of 
money for developers to make from that.  
 
ADDED to the above nightmares, If you Approve this request,  there are several other things 
I can state with certainty that I hope you consider carefully,  as we also have vested interests in 
this area; 
 
The Home we just finally paid off after 33 years will immediately DECREASE in value  
 
The lifestyle that we worked so hard to achieve and maintain and enjoy will be now 
LOST just as we are starting our retirement years. The homes our children were 
raised in and hoped they might raise their children in will be no more.  
 
The livestock/animals/fowl we have will likely be in more danger now from humans 
than any other natural predators we currently have. These residents will be right up 
against properties with horses/livestock, flocks, hives etc,  and who knows how 
anyone offended by the environment that comes with that will react.

You didn't do this to Sunburst Farms, You didn't do this to Western Meadows,  You 
didn't do this Longhorn Ranch or Thunderbird North, please DO NOT do this to our 
small landlocked County Island. Allowing ANY developments within our borders with 
a density greater than our current zoning is a death sentence to the lifestyles we have 
carefully cultivated and sacrificed for over the years.    
 
Our small land-locked County Island has always allowed for us to maintain that rural 
lifestyle that has been here since we bult in 1988, we've watched the Walmarts come, 
the Circle K's and even a large residential development, yet none of those even came 
close to threatening our rural lifestyle the way these two proposed developments are 
now doing  
 
I would also like it noted for the record that you state you only have one letter of 
opposition, that would likely be due to the fact that No dates were posted for meetings 
until quite recently and we do all have lives in order to pay our bills taxes etc,  taxes so 
please do not persist in the scenario that you do not have a significant number of 
people opposed to this project 
 
Respectfully and with Hope that for once the little guy can win on principal alone, not 
through drained bank accounts as obviously we don't have the $$'s to fight these 
battles just simple faith that sometimes the bigger picture can win out.  
 
 
Laurel & Richard Brodie  
25657 N. 17th Ave 
Phoenix, AZ 85085 
 
 
CC: Maricopa County District 3 - Bill Gates  
https://www.maricopa.gov/247/District-3

December 7, 2021 
 
RE:  Maricopa County Case # Z2021051 -OBJECTION 
ATTN:  
Rachel Applegate                                                                                                Jose Castañeda 
Senior Planner                                                                                                     Planner 
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department                           Maricopa County Planning & Development 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Desk: 602-372-0318                                                                                           Desk: 602-506-8358 
Rachel.Applegate@maricopa.gov                                                                   Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov 
 
Bill Gates  
Chairman, District 3 
district3@mail.maricopa.gov  
 
To All It May Concern; (Revised 12/8/21) 
 
It was pointed out to me by neighbors and husband alike that my long-winded, 
redundant response likely lost my target audience, so I’d like to do my best to restate 
using bullet points for our most critical objections to this re-zoning request; 
  
Main Objections;  
Density  
Traffic (specifically in regards to 19th Avenue access creating a internal gridlock 
within our neighborhood) 
Out of Character with the R-43 land it would border, encroach  and intrude upon   
Reduction in Home Values 
 
I can State with Certainty that allowing any zoning change that increases the density 
beyond (1) single family home on no less than .33 acres is not within the scope of the 
below statements when it comes to our Land-locked County Island; 
 
Quoting from the Daisy Mountain/New River Area Plan 2019 as published by 
Maricopa County; 
 
Principle 1: Preserve and Respect the Rural Lifestyle; 
 Future land use decisions should preserve and enhance the existing rural lifestyle. 
  
Principle 2: Support Low-density, Rural Residential Land Use Patterns; 
Land use decisions should promote rural development that preserves natural 
features.  
 
Principle 3: Balance Responsible Land Use Decisions with Private Property Rights; 
Future growth should respect private property rights while applying sound planning 
principles.

Principle 4: Preserve and Enhance Natural Features and Open Space; 
Preserve natural features and promote open space connectivity for trails, wildlife, and 
natural desert ecosystems.  
 
Principle 5: Protect Scenic Corridors; 
Support key roadways as scenic corridors by utilizing a sensitive design approach. 
 
These are the principals we are respectfully asking you to apply to Our County Island. 
Granting this zoning change request would be out of character to the purported goals 
of Maricopa County.  Anything less would be disingenuous to the Statements 
published by Maricopa County.  
 
Please realize that your decisions will not only have a lasting effect on those of us who 
currently RESIDE within the boundaries of this County Island that we are trying to 
retain  but also on others that might someday get to be a homeowner in a unique 
desert area with horse privileges and more. 
 
I’d appreciate this being entered into the record if you would.  
 
 
 
Laurel & Richard Brodie  
25657 N. 17th Ave 
Phoenix, AZ 85085

From:
Courtney Hamby
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Re: Case number Z 2021 051.
Date:
Wednesday, December 8, 2021 1:43:44 PM
Sorry for my continued email! I was rushing between client's earlier. One other thing I wanted
to touch on.
Being that we are R43 one house per acre and we would prefer a single housing versus multi
family. This does not fit the character of our neighborhood. We would be very sad to see our
county island go this direction of the multi family housing. 
Thank you for your time and consideration!
Courtney Hamby & Wayne Butler 
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021, 11:26 AM Courtney Hamby <courtneyhamby29@gmail.com> wrote:
Good morning Jose,
Our names are Wayne Butler and Courtney Hamby. Our address is 1707 W Yearling Rd,
Phoenix, AZ 85085.
We are writing this email to inform you that we are still opposed to the development. We are
very concerned about the traffic issues this will create. We have yet to see a plan that has
been put in place to handle the amount of traffic this is going to create. It is very hard to pull
out of our streets already during rush hour traffic. We are also concerned that traffic will
start diverting through our neighborhood, we have young children that walk to friends or
play in the neighborhood and we have been very concerned, especially when I 17 was
having work done, this very same thing happened, traffic started diverting through our
neighborhood, there were people flying down 17th Avenue, not even stopping to see if
traffic was coming etc. This raises a lot of concern for us! We have truly enjoyed our county
island and we feel this development will forever change this area in a negative way. 
Thank you,
Courtney Hamby 
Wayne Butler