Minutes of the Work Session of September 9, 2024
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
30739 characters
Meeting Minutes
City Council Work Session
September 9, 2024 | 4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers Conference Room
88 E. Chicago St., Chandler, AZ
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kevin Hartke at 4:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Council Attendance
Appointee Attendance
Mayor Kevin Hartke
Joshua Wright, City Manager
Vice Mayor OD Harris
Kelly Schwab, City Attorney
Councilmember Angel Encinas
Dana DeLong, City Clerk
Councilmember Christine Ellis
Councilmember Mark Stewart
Councilmember Matt Orlando
Councilmember Jane Poston
Staff in Attendance
Tadd Willie, Assistant City Manager
Dawn Lang, Deputy City Manager / Chief Financial Officer
Andy Bass, Deputy City Manager
Alexis Apodaca, Mayor & Council Public Affairs Senior Manager
Matt Burdick, Communications & Public Affairs Director
Kevin Snyder, Development Services Director
Kevin Mayo, Planning Administrator
Lauren Schumann, Principal Planner
Amy Jacobson, Housing & Redevelopment Senior Manager
Ryan Peters, Strategic Initiatives Director
Thomas Allen, Assistant City Attorney
Leah Powell, Neighborhood Resources Director
Micah Miranda, Economic Development Director
David De La Torre, Planning Manager
Page 2 of 17
Discussion
1.
Coordination Presentation and Discussion of the City of Chandler's Strategies to Provide
Diverse Housing, Including Overview of Recent State Legislation Mandating Code Updates
Related to Adaptive Reuse, Multi-family Development, Accessory Dwelling Units, Middle
Housing, Development Review Deadlines, and Administrative Plat Review
MAYOR HARTKE called for a staff presentation.
JOSHUA WRIGHT, City Manager, introduced the discussion item.
KEVIN MAYO, Planning Administrator, presented the following presentation.
• Housing Updates
• Agenda
o Recent Housing Bills
▪ Upcoming City Actions
o Approved But Not Built Projects
▪ What are developers saying?
o What’s Chandler Doing?
▪ Ongoing / upcoming actions to encourage housing development
• Agenda
o City Council Strategic Framework
▪ Neighborhoods
▪ ‘Innovative Programs that preserve neighborhood quality and streamline
processes to approve housing options that meet residents’ diverse needs’
o 2016 General Plan Update
▪ Strategic Community Building
▪ ‘Provide a variety of housing choices for all income levels’
▪ ‘Increase capacity for and coordination of affordable housing programs and
projects’
▪ ‘Promote a compatible mix of housing types in infill areas’
• Where have we been?
o Zoning Code Amendments March 2024
▪ Accessory Dwelling Units
▪ Single Family by-right
▪ Home Occupation
o Neighborhoods Subcommittee May 7, 2024
▪ Housing briefing: Market update, Initiatives, Housing Division update
▪ Received direction to proceed with Comprehensive Housing Plan, seek
consultant
▪ Bring back additional ideas for City Council to consider
• HB 2297 commercial buildings; adaptive reuse
Page 3 of 17
o Multi-family or Adaptive Reuse allowed on 10% of commercial buildings
▪ Methodology: Identify 10% or exclude 10%
▪ Establish objective criteria which must require but not exceed the following:
• Site plan review process
• Infrastructure analysis
• Buildings/parcels functionally obsolete >1 acre <20 acres
• Set aside 10% of total units for low-moderate income minimum of 20
years
o * Deadline: 01/01/2025
o Resolution anticipated to City Council on 11/7/2024
MAYOR HARTKE asked about the bullet point on methodology of identify or exclude 10%.
MR. MAYO said the bill indicates out of an inventory of existing commercial buildings, to identify
10% of the buildings that the multi-family or adaptive reuse will apply to, or to exclude 10% of the
buildings to not allow multi-family or adaptive reuse. Staff has started from a point of excluding
10% of the buildings such as in airport or employment corridors, as it would not be appropriate
to consider mixed use in these areas. The proposal will be brought forward to Council to
determine the methodology.
MAYOR HARTKE asked about the thresholds for multi-family or adaptive use in the inventory of
existing commercial buildings.
MR. MAYO explained that whatever buildings are left after exclusions are made, 10% of the
remaining buildings is the threshold for multi-family or adaptive reuse.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked if adjustments can be made to these criteria after the January
2025 deadline.
MR. MAYO said if the state amends the bill, changes may be made.
THOMAS ALLEN, Assistant City Attorney, clarified that the bill reads that exclusion zones can be
adjusted every five years.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked if there has been any contact with interested developers.
MR. MAYO said not yet as the city resolution is still being drafted to determine exclusion zones
and methodology. There would be some community education program for these and future
related bills.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if the market is currently more profitable towards commercial
or residential buildings.
Page 4 of 17
MR. MAYO said the state’s intention was to reduce regulatory oversight for these properties. It is
a case-by-case decision.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART said it is at the owner’s decision.
MR. MAYO said it is an option at the owners’ discretion.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if the owners must get permission from neighbors for a multi-
family or adaptive reuse flip.
MR. MAYO said it bypasses a public hearing process including neighborhood notification.
MR. WRIGHT added that the language of the bill says that criteria can be revisited every ten years,
not every five years.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if there is a plan for public input before or after the exclusion zones are
set.
MR. MAYO said all bills discussed today will be brought to Council as either ordinances or
resolutions through a public hearing process.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the city would reach out to properties and let them know that this is
happening.
MR. MAYO said yes.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• HB 2720 accessory dwelling units
o Permit accessory dwelling units by right
▪ At least 1 attached and 1 detached ADU + 1 additional if lot is greater than 1
acre
▪ ADU is 75% of gross floor area of primary unit or 1,000 square feet, whichever
is less
▪ Precludes municipalities from:
• Setbacks greater than 5’ for side/rear
• Design match the primary unit
• Require additional parking on-site
• Some restrictions of short-term-rentals
o * Deadline: 01/01/2025
o Ordinance anticipated to Planning & Zoning 10/2024 and City Council on 11/7/2024
• HB 2720 accessory dwelling units
Page 5 of 17
o Permit accessory dwelling units by right
o * Deadline: 01/01/2025
o Ordinance anticipated to Planning & Zoning 10/2024 and City Council on 11/7/2024
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the attached and detached unit may have up to 1000 square feet between
them, or if they each may be up to 1000 square feet.
MR. MAYO said the text of bill reads like the attached unit may have up to 1000 and the detached
unit may have up to 1000.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the attached unit is limited in room design to the interior.
MR. MAYO explained that is up to the user, the attached unit could be any type of room. It is
separate but physically attached to the house.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked if there has been an increase in permit applications for
accessory dwelling units since Chandler’s code updates in March 2024.
MR. MAYO said there has been some applications received.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if HOAs must comply with this as well.
MR. MAYO said he is unsure.
MR. ALLEN said the bill does not preempt HOAs, but HOAs could still enforce CC&Rs that do not
allow for accessory dwelling units.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked what short term rentals do in a housing crisis.
MR. MAYO said in the city code updates earlier this year, short term rentals are prohibited in
accessory dwelling units.
RYAN PETERS, Strategic Initiatives Director, said that cities made a strong argument against this to
the legislature when drafting the bill.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said this does not help the goal of putting people in homes.
MR. PETERS said if more short-term rentals are available, then presumably there is a downstream
effect with other homes manifesting availability and more long-term rental scenarios, but this logic
has fallen short.
COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS asked how this will come into effect with HOAs.
Page 6 of 17
MR. MAYO said traditional neighborhoods can take advantage of accessory dwelling units
permitted by right.
MAYOR HARTKE noted that the state legislature did not draft this bill with HOAs in mind.
COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS asked if the examples of accessory dwelling units shown on the slide
could be permitted for use.
MR. MAYO said the images are concepts of what accessory dwelling units may look like. The city
can establish minimum objective design standards for units.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked how many permitting requests have come in.
MR. MAYO said less than ten permitting requests have been received. Each piece of legislation
that comes down will not fix the housing crisis, but each piece will contribute towards a wider
solution.
VICE MAYOR HARRIS commented that Chandler’s community is mostly HOA-governed.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked if there is a deadline for HOAs to make relevant changes to their
CC&R pertaining to accessory dwelling units.
KELLY SCHWAB, City Attorney, said she will look into that.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO hoped to promote long term rentals rather than short term rentals
in accessory dwelling units.
MAYOR HARTKE said there has been a national conversation about accessory dwelling units for
the aging population.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• HB 2721 municipal zoning; middle housing
o Permit townhouse, duplex, triplex, fourplex on any single-family lot within 1 mile of
central business district
▪ No public hearing required
▪ Precludes municipalities from:
• Restricting to 2 floors
• Restricting to less than 50%
• Requiring owner occupancy
• Requiring compliance with commercial building code or requiring fire
sprinklers
Page 7 of 17
• Require more than 1 parking space/unit
o * Deadline: 01/01/2026
o Ordinance anticipated to Planning & Zoning mid 2025 and City Council late 2025
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the one mile of central business district means one square mile or a
larger radius.
MR. MAYO said the business district will have a one-mile boundary. The business center will be
the center.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said some projects have come back for permitting. There is an issue
when it comes to safety concerns.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if safety concerns from cities were brought up in the legislature.
MR. PETERS said these concerns are raised every time these bills arise.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if there is any change anticipated for parking allowance.
MR. PETERS said the challenge is more buildable square footage lessens the cost. It is a balance
between parking and housing square footage.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked to gather information on how this is affecting Chandler and
propose an amendment to the bill to mitigate the parking issue.
MR. PETERS said that is an option.
MAYOR HARTKE asked to clarify if the parking meant one parking space per unit.
MR. MAYO said yes, one parking space per unit.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON commented that requiring different development guidelines will
reduce continuity across the city.
MR. MAYO this is a possibility, depending on market demands and builder process.
VICE MAYOR HARRIS noted concern about parking on the streets potentially reducing the
pavement quality.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• SB 1162 zoning shot clock; housing assessment
Page 8 of 17
o Establish zoning application shot clock for administrative completeness and
processing timelines
▪ Timelines must include:
• Determination of administrative completeness within 30 days
• Resubmittal for administrative completeness 15 days
• Approved or denied within 180 days
• Allows 30 days extension for extenuating circumstance or applicant
request
▪ Housing needs assessment every 5 years
▪ City to submit an annual report to AZ Department of Housing
o * Deadline: 01/01/2025
o Ordinance anticipated to PZ 10/2024 and City Council 11/7/2024
MAYOR HARTKE asked if a zoning submission is incomplete, how does this go through the
application process.
MR. MAYO said this was intended to help the development community, but it will have unintended
consequences. The department has been proactive working with clients. If an application is not
administratively complete, it can face challenges in approval.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked what the city can do to help achieve administrative
completeness before an application is submitted.
MR. MAYO said there is a static public checklist, and users can view application checklists in their
account online.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if it is a lack of due diligence.
MR. MAYO said the process is fluid and allows for some flexibility in communication. This will
change how clients submit applications.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• Approved But Not Built Projects
o By the numbers:
o 16 total projects
o 2,149 multi-family units
o 129 single-family units
o Staff contacted representatives for all 16 projects
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if one of the dates of approval on the slide was 2016.
MR. MAYO said yes, there are some older dates on there.
Page 9 of 17
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• Approved But Not Built
o What are we hearing ? Market issues
▪ High interest rates, projects become difficult to underwrite
▪ Lack of project financing
▪ Construction loan rates have doubled
▪ Large valley-wide infrastructure projects driving up steel/concrete costs
(impacts structured parking)
▪ Demand side: market shift from not offering renter concessions to offering
significant renter concessions
• Residential Completions
o 01/2020 – Present By the numbers:
o 5,369 total units
o 3,082 multi-family units
o 2,287 single-family units
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if any developers are beginning projects for the current
approved but not built projects.
MR. MAYO said no permits have been received.
VICE MAYOR HARRIS asked if the city can issue a bond to help builders complete projects.
MAYOR HARTKE said there would be some difficulty with that.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• What’s Chandler Doing? Chandler Industrial Development Authority
o Chandler Industrial Development Authority (CIDA) provides tax-exempt financing
through industrial revenue bonds for financing or refinancing the cost of acquisition,
construction, improvement, rehabilitation or equipping of a project. Bond proceeds
fund eligible activities, such as the purchase or lease of land, buildings, machinery or
equipment suitable for (as it relates to housing);
▪ Multifamily rental housing with units reserved for low and moderate income
persons
▪ Rehabilitation of residential buildings located in a registered historic
neighborhood
• What’s Chandler Doing? Chandler Public Housing
o City Affordable Rentals (11 units)
o Habitat For Humanity (15 units)
o ARM Save the Family Rentals (16 units)
o Newtown CLT Homeownership (71 units)
Page 10 of 17
o Public Housing Rentals (363 units)
o Housing Choice Vouchers (558)
o Villas on McQueen
▪ Under construction-complete in May 2026
▪ 157 total units
o Site 3
▪ Finalize Development Agreement October 2024
▪ Submit Site plan to City November 2024
▪ Submit LIHTC Financing Application April 1, 2025
o Issue RFP for Site 2
▪ RFP and Developer Selection-December 2024
• What’s Chandler Doing? Chandler Industrial Development Authority
o Why isn’t this incentive being utilized?
▪ Interest Rates are currently too low, IDA incentives provide greater return
when interest rates are higher (Set by A.R.S. 35-701-733 (the “IDA statute”)
• e.g. Southpark Springs LLP ($5,925,000) Financed the construction of
River Ranch Apartments, a 186-unit multifamily housing complex
configured in 11 buildings (1988)
▪ Affordable Housing Developers typically already have another Industrial
Development Authority utilized (e.g. Gorman & Company – Villas on McQueen)
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if there is a percentage of the development that then is
dedicated for affordable housing.
MR. MAYO said yes, it is negotiated by the IDA. There is a requirement for some percentage of
affordable housing.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if the reason this is not happening is the IDA bond interest
rates are close to a commercial loan.
MICAH MIRANDA, Economic Development Director, answered that there is a certain percentage
of affordable housing required by participation in the IDA. Many developers prefer market rate
because the ROI is greater. The spread in interest rates between IDA and commercial funding does
not make enough of a difference, it does not provide enough of a financial benefit. Many IDAs
have existing relationships with developers.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• What’s Chandler Doing? Chandler Infill Incentive Plan
o Council updated in November 2023
▪ Expanded to all areas north of Loop 202
▪ Now includes Class C Office space
o Facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized retail and Class C office space
Page 11 of 17
o Requires a Development Agreement approved by City Council
▪ Fee waivers up to 100 percent of building permit fees, building plan review
fees, and City of Chandler development impact fees
▪ Expedited building plan review
▪ Reimbursement of public infrastructure costs such as roads, sidewalks, public
utilities – water & wastewater, streetscape improvements – landscaping, shade
structures, public seating areas, decorative lighting, public art ($250,000 cap)
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked about other location options previously mentioned that are
available for multifamily housing.
MR. MAYO said there has been action in meeting with affordable housing developers and sharing
these different sites for potential developments, but none have moved forward with
development.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said there are many pieces of property Chandler owns and asked if
the city can use these pieces of land for affordable housing in the downtown area.
MR. WRIGHT said staff has been looking into this possible solution.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• What’s Chandler Doing? Chandler Planning
o Planned Area Development (PAD) zoning since 1980’s allows for:
▪ Density bonuses
▪ Lot coverage increases
▪ Parking reductions
▪ Mixed-use integration
▪ Setback encroachments
▪ Increased height (Mid-Rise Overlay)
o Encourage affordable housing component with each pre-application meeting (no
takers yet)
• New Ideas
• New Ideas – Chandler Planning
o Preliminary/Final Plat Process
▪ SB 1103, ‘Administrative reviews; approvals; developments’
• Allows administrative review and approval of Final Plats without Council
approval
• City code currently requires a technical reason for denial of a plat
• Phoenix & Queen Creek amended Code to align
• HBACA letter in support
o Options:
Page 12 of 17
▪ Amend City Code to allow Final Plat approval by Development Services
Director or designee
▪ Amend City Code to no longer require Planning & Zoning Commission
recommendation for Preliminary Plats
▪ Amend City Code to allow Preliminary Plat approval by Development Services
Director or designee
MAYOR HARTKE asked when the last time a plat was not approved for a technical reason.
MR. MAYO said it has not occurred - a plat would not be scheduled for a Council meeting until it
was ready to be approved.
MAYOR HARTKE said this is a process Council currently follows because it is in the City Code. This
may slow things down and does not serve a purpose in review.
MR. MAYO explained that the final plat is the document that ultimately defines and dedicates the
right of ways and easements of a property. The process was intended to include City Council in
the process of approving plats.
MAYOR HARTKE said Council could act as a first review rather than the pre plat and final plat
approval both coming through Council.
MR. MAYO said correct, the Senate bill offers that choice among others.
MAYOR HARTKE asked what municipalities have a Council that approves plats twice.
MR. MAYO said every city is subject to this, but not every city may require it in their City Code.
Phoenix and Queen Creek have amended their codes to not require it in line with the Senate bill.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if it helps builders build faster, and if it is part of PAD review
for the public to be involved.
MR. MAYO said PAD zoning will include neighborhood meetings and public input and public
hearings. At the point of plat approval, it is an executive decision to approve it based on technical
reasons. PAD zoning input occurs before plats.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if the Planning and Zoning Commission reviews the final plat.
MR. MAYO said the Planning and Zoning Commission only reviews the pre plat.
Page 13 of 17
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said making the final plat approval an administrative choice by the
Development Services Director was a beneficial move for expediting the process but requested
more information on the pre plat process.
MR. MAYO said if a zoning case will require a pre plat to develop, that will be brought forward with
the zoning case or the final plat to reduce duplication in the process. A zoning case is not brought
forward until it is technically complete.
COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS asked if everything must be complete in the preliminary process before
Council sees it.
MR. MAYO said that is correct.
MAYOR HARTKE summarized if public process remains for residents’ ability to provide input on
zoning cases, Council approval to approve a pre plat is appropriate.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO restated that City Council would not perform final plat approval at
a Council meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART asked if this would be for all development types.
MR. MAYO noted that the pre plat process would remain unchanged. A draft ordinance will be
brought forward for a change in City Code to no longer require final plat approval by Council,
instead by Development Services Director or designee.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• New Ideas – Chandler Planning
o Option:
▪ Amend City Code to allow by-right residential development on religious
institution-owned property within residential areas
• No public hearing required
• Objective design standards
• Community outreach
• Exclude religious institutions within employment areas
• Can provide financial benefits to houses of worship with stagnant or
declining participation
o *Consider adding to HB2721 Middle Housing Code amendment, (i.e. single,
townhouse, duplex, triplex, fourplex)
• New Ideas – Chandler Planning
o Many houses of worship have vacant/underutilized land.
▪ Proposed state bill in 2024 to allow by-right residential development on
religious institution-owned property (did not pass).
Page 14 of 17
▪ Bill may be reconsidered in the future.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked about how this proposed state bill would affect neighborhoods.
Organizations might sell to the developer, which may have the consequence of losing
neighborhood input.
MR. MAYO said this idea is open for discussion by Council.
MAYOR HARTKE said he would prefer to include resident input.
MR. MAYO said there would be some stipulations included for community outreach and include
compatibility studies for new development to match the existing neighborhood.
MAYOR HARTKE said this idea would be fine to work on but requested more information moving
forward.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked who the property owner would be in this case.
MR. MAYO said the properties lie within the jurisdiction of the city, but the city would not have
ownership of the property.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if property tax would be levied.
MS. SCHWAB answered that staff is looking into if property tax would be assessed based upon a
change in use.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked to consider how these developments may impact Chandler’s
parcel water designation and emergency service districts. Councilmember Orlando asked if any
houses of worship are doing this today.
MS. SCHWAB added that this would only apply to properties within city limits.
MAYOR HARTKE asked staff to come back with more information about this idea.
MR. MAYO said staff will come back with options.
COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS asked to research the financial implications of this idea.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART commented that it is a good idea and wished to know more.
VICE MAYOR HARRIS emphasized the importance of hearing input from the faith community about
this idea.
Page 15 of 17
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• New Ideas
o General Plan Update 2026
▪ RFP issued July 2024
▪ State Statute required every 10-years
▪ 17 Elements required
▪ Housing identified as focus area
o Comprehensive Housing Plan
▪ RFP issued July 2024
▪ Housing needs assessment
▪ Multi faceted approach addressing housing needs
▪ Affordable, Workforce and Market-Rate strategies
▪ Anticipated 12-month process
▪ Refer and incorporate elements into the General Plan Update
MAYOR HARTKE asked if after the contract there will be a better understanding of a timeline.
MR. MAYO said yes, after the contract is approved work will begin.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• New Ideas
o Utilize city-owned properties and community partners to meet community housing
needs
o Work with affordable housing partners, such as Newtown, ARM Save the Family,
Habitat for Humanity, or private developers via RFP.
o Each site will be analyzed to determine most appropriate partner/solution.
VICE MAYOR HARRIS requested a map of the city-owned properties.
MR. MAYO said yes, information will be provided to Council.
MR. MAYO continued the presentation.
• Summary and Next Steps
o Bring state-mandated and new idea ordinance changes to Council within the
recommended timelines
o Continue to promote the Chandler IDA and Infill Incentive Program as financial tools
for affordable housing developers
o Consultant contract for General Plan and Comprehensive Housing Strategy in
October 2024
▪ Housing Strategy Stakeholder Group Established in November 2024
o Villas on McQueen
Page 16 of 17
▪ Open waitlist January 2026
▪ Complete Construction and move public housing residents Fall 2026
o Site 3
▪ Finalize Development Agreement October 2024
▪ Submit Site plan to City November 2024
▪ Submit LIHTC Financing Application April 1, 2025
o Issue RFP for Site 2
▪ RFP and Developer Selection December 2024
▪ Finalize Development Agreement February 2025
▪ Develop Site plan and financing plan June 2025
o Identify city lots and community partners to meet community housing needs
• Questions?
VICE MAYOR HARRIS said partnership is needed to solve the housing crisis. Vice Mayor Harris
asked about a resource list for funding.
COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS said the work is being done, but Chandler cannot do it alone. These
processes have been in the city, and new ideas are considered every day. Chandler is ready to
move forward.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON thanked staff for the presentation. Councilmember Poston requested
information if any municipalities are having success with new housing ideas.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO hoped to hear good news from the legislature and Chandler sharing
their success.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS looked forward to seeing solutions for housing in the downtown area.
Councilmember Encinas asked about PAD zoning and affordable housing.
MR. MAYO explained that PAD zoning has been in place in Chandler since the 1980s, which does
not specific market rate or affordable housing, but it is a tool to provide to developers.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked about different strategies to attract affordable housing.
MR. MAYO said other financial implications are not within Chandler’s control. Chandler’s culture
is open to working together to create affordable housing.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked if any faith organizations have reached out about land use for
housing.
MR. MAYO mentioned there was a zoning case in Chandler come up recently. There has been
some interest.
Page 17 of 17
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS looked forward to hearing more.
COUNCILMEMBER STEWART said this is a complex issue, and Chandler has approved projects to
attempt to solve this issue. Councilmember Stewart thanked staff.
Public Comment
BARBARA QUIJADA, 6400 W. Del Rio St., spoke about the Valley Interfaith Project (VIP) leaders
united to address housing that will meet the needs of those in Chandler. VIP clergy are pleased to
see new ideas regarding zoning residential development on religious institution owned property.
Project leaders worked with legislators to introduce the bill and looks forward to hearing it read
again with amendments with input from cities and towns. Over the past two years, VIP has worked
with many parties in support of a 55+ housing development in a county island in south Chandler.
Chandler congregation members want to see an aggressive approach to solving the housing crisis.
Ms. Quijada thanked staff for the presentation on existing housing development. The city should
continue to plan for and support diverse housing options in Chandler.
Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
ATTEST: _______________________
______________________________
City Clerk Mayor
Approval Date of Minutes: October 14, 2024
Certification
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work
Session of the City Council of Chandler, Arizona, held on the 9th day of September 2024. I further
certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
DATED this _______ day of October, 2024.
__________________________
City Clerk