Minutes of the Work Session held on August 11, 2025
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
31067 characters
Meeting Minutes
City Council Work Session
August 11, 2025 | 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
John Pombier, Acting City Manager
Vice Mayor Christine Ellis
Kelly Schwab, City Attorney
*Councilmember Angel Encinas
Dana DeLong, City Clerk
Councilmember Jane Poston
Councilmember Matt Orlando
Councilmember OD Harris
Councilmember Jennifer Hawkins
*Councilmember Encinas arrived at 4:08 p.m.
Staff in Attendance
Tadd Wille, 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 Mayo, Planning & Urban Design Service Administrator
Kevin Snyder, Development Services Director
Leah Powell, Neighborhood Resources Director
Amy Jacobson, Housing and Redevelopment Senior Manager
John Knudson, Public Works & Utilities Director
Riann Balch, Community Resources Senior Manager
Kim Moyers, Cultural Development Director
Lauren Schumann, Principal Planner
Page 2 of 15
David De La Torre, Planning Manager
Tawn Kao, Deputy City Attorney
John Sefton, Community Services Director
Ryan Peters, Strategic Initiatives Director
Alisa Petterson, Senior Planner
Consultants
Jim Heid, FASLA, Founder CRAFT DnA
Rick Merritt, President, Elliott D. Pollack & Co.
Lorenzo Perez, Founder, Venue Projects
Discussion
1.
Presentation and Discussion of Housing Study and Increasing Housing Strategies including:
• Housing as an Economic Development Strategy
• Comprehensive Housing Study Findings
• Infrastructure and Land Use Planning Considerations
• Downtown Region Area Plan Overview
• Opportunities for Small-Scale Housing Development
• Next Steps and Implementation Strategies
MAYOR HARTKE called for a staff presentation.
JOHN POMBIER, Acting City Manager, introduced the discussion item.
KEVIN SNYDER, Development Services Director, presented the following presentation.
• Council Work Session
• Today’s Agenda
• What is Housing
• It is referred to by many names:
o Affordable Housing
o Attainable Housing
o Workforce Housing
o Missing Middle Housing
o Market Rate Housing
• National State of Housing – 2025
o High home prices and elevated interest rates reduced homebuying to its lowest
level since the mid – 1990s
o Despite an abundance of new apartments, high rents have left more people that
ever cost burdened and have contributed to a sharp rise in homelessness.
o Increases in both insurance premiums and property taxes have heightened
financial stress on homeowners and landlords
Page 3 of 15
o Federal housing support is lessening, creating uncertainty regarding the
availability of crucial assistance programs
• Housing IS an Economic Development Strategy
• Reasons for Housing as an Economic Development Strategy
o Reliable Workforce
o Talent Attraction
o Poverty reduction
o Mixed Income Neighborhoods
o Increased Community Diversity
o Enhanced Economic Mobility
o Increased Property Values and Tax Base
o Increased Disposable Income
o More Business Tax Revenues
RICK MERRITT, President with Elliott D. Pollack Company, presented the following slides.
• Comprehensive Housing Study
• Housing Assessment Process
o Data Collection & Analysis
o Stakeholder Interview & Public Engagement
o Housing Gap Analysis
o Housing Needs Assessment
o Policy & Regulatory review
o Strategy Development
• Commuting Flow
• Apartment Flow
• Chandler Home Price History
o Resale home prices increased by 63% between 2022 and 2019.
o New homes prices increased by 51% between 2022 and 2020.
• Chandler Housing Gap
• Renter Gap
• A household earning the City median income can afford a $366,000 home with a 10%
down payment.
• Targeted Housing Strategy
o Low & Moderate-Income Households earning less than $50,000 per year.
o Workforce Households:
▪ Market – rate renter housing to address the right market for renters
earning between $50,000 and $75,000 (affordable rent $1,125 to $1,725).
▪ Homeownership opportunities directed at workforce households earning
between $75,000 to $100,000.
• Tools for Affordable Housing Development
Page 4 of 15
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO agreed with the concerns raised. He said when the city asks
developers to include 20% workforce housing in new multi-family projects, the response is often
no, due to financial challenges and bank restrictions. He noted this is not a new issue and is
considering how the city can help make that 20% feasible. Developers also say investors prefer all
market-rate units because they bring in more revenue, especially with current rental credits.
Councilmember Orlando said this remains a key challenge for him, and he hasn’t yet found a
solution.
MR. MERRITT said the current housing situation requires a new approach, beyond traditional
public housing and tax credits. With rising costs, especially for land and development, he
suggested the city may need to help fill financial gaps possibly through a housing trust fund or
support from the Industrial Development Authority (IDA).
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO added that while some actions are allowed by law, others may not
be. He stressed the need to review those legal limits.
MR. MERRITT responded that, to his knowledge, everything being discussed is legal, with the
exception of voluntary inclusionary zoning, which could be uncertain. However, he noted that
cities like Sedona and Flagstaff have implemented it successfully.
KEVIN MAYO, Planning & Urban Design Service Administrator, presented the following slides.
• Infrastructure and Land Use Planning
• Infrastructure and Land Use Planning
• 2008 General Plan
o Historically Land Use Planning lead Infrastructure Planning
o Plan the Land Use, then Plan the Infrastructure
o Potential Colorado River cuts not eminent
o Abundance of Reclaimed Water supply
o Water Allocation Policy
• 2016 General Plan
o Moving closer to Build-Out
o Reclaimed Water supply becoming a more valuable asset
o Urban Residential Density/Infill Area
o Update to Water Allocation Policy
• Infrastructure and Land Use Planning
• 2026 General Plan Update
o Existing and Future Infrastructure capacities will influence update
o On-Project vs. Off-Project land differences
o Colorado River cuts eminent
o Infill and Re-Development can’t always pay for off-site improvements – i.e.: install
larger wastewater pipe 2-3 miles away
o Anticipate future CIP projects to accommodate Infill and Re-Development
Page 5 of 15
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO said that while the city welcomes new development, it also needs to
find a way to bridge the gap between growth and infrastructure capacity.
MR. MAYO responded that the city is closely studying existing infrastructure. He said John's team
is carefully assessing the capacity along utility lines to guide development to areas that can handle
it now, while planning future upgrades.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS asked how the city will monitor capacity as development continues,
especially with the upcoming state code changes in 2026 that will allow for increased residential
density. He questioned how the city will know when an area has reached its limit.
MR. MAYO said the city is still figuring that out. He explained they are currently reacting to new
state legislation and will need to review projects on a case-by-case basis. In the future, broader
infrastructure plans may be developed for areas such as downtown, north Chandler, or west
Chandler to better manage growth.
ALISA PETTERSON, Senior Planner, presented the following slides.
• Downtown Region Area Plan
• Downtown Region Area Plan Update (DRAP)
• Guide future development within the region that aligns with the community
• Create a vision for the future built environment
• Primary Goals:
o Adaptive reuse
o Mixed-uses
o Alley activation
o Downtown gateways
o Character area guidelines
o Commerce routes
• DRAP is consistent with recommendations from AzTAP and the Washington Street
Alignment Study
• Downtown Region Area Plan Update (DRAP)
• Area:
o Ray Rd to 202 & McQueen to Alma School Rd
o 5 unique districts
• Replace & combine existing area plan:
o Chandler Redevelopment Element (blue)
o South AZ Ave Corridor Area Plan (yellow)
• Expand area from prior plans to add “gateways”
o San Marcos District
o Arizona Ave north of Chandler Blvd
o Chandler Blvd east of Arizona Ave
o AZ Ave from 202 north to Pecos Rd
Page 6 of 15
• DRAP Future Land Use Map
• Housing Land Uses
o Neighborhood Residential
o Mixed Use; Commercial/office/residential *
o High Density Residential
• Key Benefits;
o Support development of more housing
o Allow redevelopment & adaptive reuse
o Greater flexibility & creativity
• Approval will consider design, water & sewer demand, traffic & parking impact &
neighborhood compatibility
• 1995 & 2006 Housing Land Uses
• 1995 Redevelopment Element
o Medium & High Density Residential
o Low-Density Residential
o Commercial/Residential
• 2006 SAZACAP (downtown core)
o Medium & High Density Residential
o Low Density Residential
o Mixed uses (High Density Residential/Commercial/Office)
o Largely, development under these plans did not occur as anticipated
• Upcoming State Mandates Related to Housing
• HB 2720 – Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)
o 2 ADUs allowed on single family lots by right
o A 3rd ADU allowed on 1+ acre lots if rented as ‘affordable’
o Effective Dec 9, 2024
• HB 2721 – Middle Housing
o Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes & townhomes allowed by right on single-family
lots within 1 mile of central business district
o Chandler will apply this to a larger area than mandated
o Effective Jan 1, 2025
• HB 1529 – Preapproved Design
o Requires standard preapproved housing designs
o Includes single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes & ADUs
o Effective July 1, 2026 & Jan 1, 2027
• A Housing ‘Infusion’
• Zoning changes to support DRAP housing:
o More areas zoned for housing
o ADUs allowed by right
o Middle housing types allowed by right
o Pre-approved plans to expedite approvals
Page 7 of 15
KIM MOYERS, Cultural Development Director, presented the following slides.
• Washing ton Street Area vision
• Development to the South
o Smaller lot development
o Adaptive reuse
o Neighborhood uses
o Use of alleys
o South AZ Corridor Study –
▪ High & medium density residential development
▪ Assemblage of small parcels
▪ Revision of neighborhood streets to facilitate traffic for new growth
• 2023 Washington Street Alignment – Lokahi
o Research 3 options for the re-alignment of Washington Street
• Community Input
o 100% consensus opening to Pecos Rd
o Allow for neighborhood traffic circulation
o Right only lane on Fairview Avenue
o Traffic calming
o Minimize on-street parking from businesses on Arizona Ave
• Washington Street Alignment Stakeholder Meetings Feedback
• Stakeholder Meetings
o November 2021 – Overall Neighborhood Meeting – Kickoff
o January 2023 – Southside Village Reunion at Harris Park
o August 2025 – Washington Street Alignment Update
• ULI AZ TAP
o April 2022 – ULI AZ Tap Meeting Stakeholder Meeting (Harris Park)
o May 2022 – Panel Day
o Individual Stakeholder interviews chosen by
o Over 72 residents attending the various meetings with community leaders
assisting with communication on all meetings
• Washington Street Meeting
o August 2023 – Meeting with Southside Village Stakeholder Meeting
o November 2023 – Washington Street Kick Off Meeting (Community Input Meeting
Mt. Olive with Southside Village Stakeholder Meeting)
o December 2023 – Salvation Army Stakeholder Meeting
o March 2024 – Southside Village Stakeholder Meeting
o January 2024 – Light and Life Church Stakeholder Meeting
o June 2024 – Salvation Army Leadership Board Meeting
o August 2024 – Southside Village Stakeholder Meeting
• Downtown Region Area
o August 2024 – Multiple meetings throughout the month
• Preferred Option
Page 8 of 15
JIM HEID, FASLA, Founder CRAFT DnA, presented the following slides.
• Small Development Housing Product Opportunities
• “Building Small brilliantly captures all the moving parts of the development process that
need to be coordinated, changed and re-tooled to turn loose the entrepreneurial spirit
necessary for great communities to grow” Tom Murphy, former three term Mayor of
Pittsburgh
• As of 2022, 19% of all housing units produced in CA is an ADU
• Housing Prototypes Assuming 50’ x 150’ Lot Size
• As-of-Right + HB2829
o 10 Detached Duplex
o 2 Single Family
o 32 Single Family w/ ADU
o 44 Units
• Current Holdings
o 16 Detached Duplex/Live-Work
o 36 Row Homes
o 45 Garden-Style Courtyard
o 97 Units
• Closing the Gap for MMH
• Ultimately good development is about Managing Risk. To the extent Chandler can
partner with Developers to reduce entitlement and financial risk the better it will attract
the kind of development it wants.
LORENZO PEREZ, Founder, Venue Projects, presented the following slides.
• Why Chandler?
RICK MERRITT, President – Elliott D Pollack, presented the following slides.
• Key Recommendations
• Prime the pump with infrastructure
• Create an ‘Open for Business’ culture
• Streamline approvals and single cost clarity
• Develop Financial tools to support delivery
• Convene local Small Developers Forum, and share the opportunity
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if homes could be built at the same time that infrastructure
work was being done on Hamilton.
MR. MERRITT explained that while it could be done, the ideal approach would be first to complete
the public infrastructure to create a strong foundation for the street. Homes could then be added
to enhance the area. Building homes first would make it more difficult, as physical connections
Page 9 of 15
would have to be added later. He noted that accelerating the infrastructure project would be the
best way to support development.
MAYOR HARTKE asked about the Washington Street project that Councilmember Orlando had
mentioned. He noted it would go through the normal bid process, with proposals considered and
neighborhood input gathered as part of the design phase.
LEAH POWELL, Neighborhood Services Director, said the city could explore using a community
land trust under the nonprofit PHA and partner with a development team through an RFP process.
She emphasized that infrastructure and neighborhood feedback would be critical, along with
financial feasibility. Ms. Powell described this as a demonstration project that could highlight the
uniqueness of the neighborhood and potentially be replicated in other areas of Chandler.
MAYOR HARTKE added that some projects may not fit certain sites but could work in others,
depending on the neighborhood and conditions.
MS. POWELL agreed, noting the goal was to be creative and adaptable.
MAYOR HARTKE said the project could serve as a template for future development.
MS. POWELL confirmed, adding that both the city and developers could use it, and stressed the
importance of also considering current property owners, especially in Southside Village.
VICE MAYOR ELLIS supported the idea, calling it a strong prototype. She said doing it right the first
time would make replication faster and more cost-effective across the city.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked if the project aimed to create paths to homeownership.
MS. POWELL confirmed, explaining that the community land trust could make housing affordable
by separating land costs from the purchase price, ensuring long-term affordability for future
buyers.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked about timelines for Hamilton or Washington Street
improvements.
KIM MOYERS, Cultural Development Director, said funding was allocated in the CIP budget for
fiscal year 2027–2028.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if there was a way to expedite the housing project by
encouraging collaboration between the builder and the city. He emphasized the desire to avoid a
four-year wait before the first homes are built and suggested that concurrent efforts, such as
neighborhood outreach and early planning, could help shorten the timeline.
Page 10 of 15
MAYOR HARTKE stated that significant infrastructure work still needs to be completed in the
neighborhood before housing construction can commence.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO reiterated the need to explore options to accelerate progress,
acknowledging the strong interest in moving the project forward and questioning whether waiting
years is necessary if certain steps can be taken earlier.
COUNCILMEMBER HAWKINS asked how infrastructure costs would be addressed, especially if the
city is considering offering property discounts. She expressed concern about how these expenses
would fit into the overall plan.
MS. POWELL explained that further research is needed. While the current capacity may support a
small number of units, the aging infrastructure, particularly the pipes, needs to be addressed. She
noted that it is often difficult for small developers to shoulder these costs, and alternative funding
sources would need to be explored. She mentioned a bipartisan bill in the U.S. Senate that could
provide funding for small developments and for cities that reduce barriers to affordable housing.
Although the bill has not yet been passed, it presents a potential opportunity to help fund and
speed up the project.
KEVIN SNYDER, Development Services Director, said that the city is shifting its approach to land
use planning by prioritizing infrastructure first. Unlike most communities that plan land use before
infrastructure, the city is now focusing on assessing existing infrastructure capacity and
deficiencies upfront. This helps create plans through city projects, public-private partnerships, or
creative financing to address infrastructure needs before finalizing land use decisions.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON asked how the current infrastructure plans differ from those in
previous general plans, which had anticipated more business development in the area.
MS. MOYERS responded that earlier plans assumed larger developments that would remove alleys
and consolidate infrastructure along Washington Street. With smaller developments now
planned, some infrastructure is already in place, so adjustments will differ, and less infrastructure
work will be needed along Washington.
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS asked about streamlining development approvals, especially regarding
water infrastructure complexities in mixed-use areas.
KEVIN MAYO, Planning & Urban Design Service Administrator, said the required infrastructure
changes for mixed-use are minimal. While some commercial uses like restaurants may need
grease interceptors, the pipe sizes won’t increase significantly. However, the number of housing
units has increased two to four times compared to previous expectations, creating capacity
challenges, especially with aging pipes.
Page 11 of 15
MR. SNYDER added that the development approval process has been streamlined to better assist
smaller developers, who often have limited resources compared to large firms. The goal is to
simplify procedures, reduce redundancies, and provide strong customer support from start to
finish, recognizing the city’s changing developer profile.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if they are working on addressing the issues previously raised
about development challenges.
MR. SNYDER confirmed they are actively working on those concerns, including feedback from local
developers, to ensure the city remains the preferred place to develop and avoids losing projects
to neighboring cities. Mr. Snyder said the city will implement an annual code amendment process,
bringing incremental updates regularly rather than large, infrequent packages. This approach
aims to reduce barriers steadily.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO asked if the city will push these changes forward soon.
MR. SNYDER confirmed work is already underway.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the city’s "pre-tech" process for early development meetings is common
elsewhere.
MR. SNYDER explained that the city’s pre-tech process is unique but evolving toward a more
formal pre-application process, involving multiple meetings with applicants. This aims to identify
issues early and provide clear guidance, helping developers avoid fatal flaws and reduce delays.
LEAH POWELL, Neighborhood Resources Director, presented the following slides.
• How This Approach Reduces Gentrification Risk
o Gradual Change: Incremental development allows neighborhoods to evolve
slowly, preventing sudden demographic shifts
o Affordable Options: Smaller projects typically create more diverse price points,
maintaining housing accessibility
o Local Ownership: Small-scale development often involves local developers or
existing residents who understand community needs
o Economic Integration: Mixed-income housing prevents the displacement of
existing residents
o Community Voice: Smaller projects are more responsive to resident input and
neighborhood planning
o Capturing & Preserving Uniqueness:
▪ Architectural Harmony: Small infill projects can complement existing
building styles and scale
Page 12 of 15
▪ Local Character: Preserves walkability, street life, safety, and neighborhood
gathering spaces
▪ Cultural Continuity: Supports and incubates local businesses and
community institutions that define neighborhood identity
▪ Historic Preservation: Adaptive reuse of existing structures maintains
neighborhood heritage
• Three Potential Delivery Models
o Public-Private Partnerships
o City-owned land and vacant lots developed through public-private partnerships
or community land trusts
o Purpose: Maintain affordability through Income Qualifications, Deed Restriction,
or Community Land Trust
o Potential Products: Duplex, triplex, and cottage court on vacant lots along Morales
and Washington Streets
o Existing Residents
o Current residents and their families adding units, renovating, or developing
accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
o Purpose: Encourage existing residents to invest in their properties
o Potential Products: Small single unit to be used for rental income or building on
vacant land, microbusinesses
o Small Developers
o Local entrepreneurs and small-scale builders creating infill housing and mixed-
use projects
o Purpose: Attract development that is a compliment to the neighborhood
o Potential Products: Duplex, triplex, cottage court and live-work spaces
MAYOR HARTKE noted that many vacant properties exist beyond the Washington Street corridor
and asked if those could be included in the current development plans.
MS. POWELL said they would like to explore acquiring adjacent properties, including one owned
by another party, to expand the project area.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if the city could offer incentives to property owners similar to programs on
the west side, that encourage improvements while the city retains ownership.
MS. POWELL agreed and mentioned potential funding programs to assist homeowners with
repairs and yard improvements, even if they are not ready to develop. She also noted ongoing
use of housing rehab and emergency repair funds in the neighborhood.
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS raised concerns about community trust, highlighting that some
residents fear that engagement may lead to code enforcement actions and feel the city’s
Page 13 of 15
intentions are misunderstood. Councilmember Harris asked how the city plans to address trust
issues and cultural or language barriers while promoting improvements.
MS. POWELL said that the city maintains a strong stakeholder group in the South Side Village
neighborhood, including long-term residents and nonprofits, to build trust through ongoing
communication and programming. They offer initiatives like dumpster days and neighborhood
cleanups to support beautification and engagement. She emphasized respecting the
neighborhood’s history and priorities, such as affordable homeownership, and involving residents
early in the planning process to ensure their voices are heard.
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS expressed appreciation for the efforts but stressed the importance of
balancing the city’s plans with the community’s cultural identity and feelings, to avoid unintended
negative impacts.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO acknowledged the concerns and noted that community
engagement has been ongoing for decades. However, he emphasized the need to complete
essential groundwork, like infrastructure planning, before seeking broader resident input on
neighborhood design and use.
KEVIN SNYDER, Development Services Director, presented the following slides.
• Next Steps
• Next Steps – Policy Actions
o Council Adoption of Downtown Region Area Plan – Scheduled for September 2025
o Completion of Comprehensive Housing Study – October 2025
o Implementation of HB 2447 (Objective Design Standards) and HB 2721 (Middle
Housing) by December 2025
o Completion of General Plan Update - February 2026 (City Council); August 2026
(voter ratification)
• Next Step – Strategies
o Continue neighborhoods communication and outreach
o Research Alternate Products/Materials
o Evaluate Community Land Trust Formation
o Identify RFP Elements for City Properties
o Receiving Capacity Analysis (General Plan)
o Continue Discussions with Salvation Army on Winn School Site
o Develop Building Models/Design Prototypes
o Utility Needs Assessment
o Public Housing Authority – Continued Redevelopment Planning
o Downtown Development Summit
o Annual Code Amendments (e.g. Zoning, Engineering, Pre-Approved Plans)
• Questions
Page 14 of 15
VICE MAYOR ELLIS asked about the median cost of the new houses planned, noting a 35-50%
market increase. She wanted to know the expected starting price points and emphasized the
importance of understanding the actual move-in costs for residents. Vice Mayor Ellis requested
staff to revisit affordability goals, aiming for monthly payments closer to $1,500–$1,800, rather
than higher amounts.
COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS expressed interest in being more involved in community listening
sessions, not just reviewing data. He emphasized the need to hear community perspectives
directly, especially since redevelopment could affect long-established neighborhoods.
Councilmember Harris warned that while state laws may override local concerns, sensitivity is
crucial in managing community impacts. He also noted the potential for opportunity zone credits
to encourage investment in live and workspaces.
COUNCILMEMBER ENCINAS praised the presentation but stressed the need for ongoing, clear
communication about realistic affordable housing options. He suggested expanding focus beyond
the Southside Village project to other parts of the city for future planning.
COUNCILMEMBER ORLANDO raised legal questions about whether certain historic or overlay
districts are exempt from recent housing laws. He asked about timelines for private partnerships,
city property use, and updated codes. Councilmember Orlando urged exploring how to accelerate
housing projects, especially shovel-ready ones, if government funding is available.
COUNCILMEMBER POSTON confirmed that Chandler is a net importer of jobs across all sectors,
from service to tech. She asked about infrastructure capacity, particularly in North Chandler, and
whether other areas might have gaps. Councilmember Poston inquired about the comprehensive
housing study due in October 2025 and if it would address broader city housing needs. She also
highlighted the importance of ensuring neighborhood residents are informed and involved in
discussions, noting a lack of local community leaders at the meeting.
MR. SNYDER explained the housing study would be data-driven, with strategy recommendations.
Next steps include developing an action plan with city administration to prioritize short-, mid-, and
long-term housing strategies for Council review.
MAYOR HARTKE asked if there are plans for a town meeting or presentation to share this
information with the public.
MS. POWELL confirmed that, pending Council’s approval tonight, public engagement would be the
next step.
COUNCILMEMBER HAWKINS complimented the presentation and emphasized prioritizing quality
over quantity in housing development, looking forward to identifying easier projects.
Page 15 of 15
MAYOR HARTKE added that housing should fit neighborhood character rather than adopting a
one-size-fits-all approach. He asked if some projects could move faster in areas with newer
infrastructure and available land, rather than waiting on older areas.
Public Comment
BARBARA QUIJADA, Chandler Congregation, speaking for the Valley Interfaith Project (VIP), said
they’ve been working with the city for over a year to support more housing in Chandler especially
for middle-income families who are important to the community and economy. VIP members have
joined city meetings to make sure the new housing plan (2026–2036) focuses on affordable,
mixed-income housing like condos and apartments. They know Chandler has little empty land left,
so building and redeveloping wisely is important. VIP supports flexible planning to meet changing
needs and appreciates the city’s efforts to go beyond state housing laws. They are also working
with the local school district to help provide stable housing near schools, which helps students
succeed. Finally, VIP urges the city to use all available tools to encourage new housing projects
and attract developers with good ideas. They look forward to continuing to work with the city to
solve the housing crisis.
Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 5:39 p.m.
ATTEST: _______________________
______________________________
City Clerk Mayor
Approval Date of Minutes: September 15, 2025
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 11th day of August 2025. I further
certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
DATED this _______ day of September, 2025.
__________________________
City Clerk