Attachment G - Opposition - Z-74-24-6.pdf
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
9257 characters
1 Racelle Escolar From: jpaletta1 <jpaletta1@cox.net> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 12:59 PM To: Racelle Escolar Cc: Kathy DeLorey; Melissa Rhodes; Russell Birkland; Betsy & Robert Greenberg Subject: Re: Opposition letter regarding Z-74-24-6 - R5 Misrepresented CAUTION: This email originated outside of the City of Phoenix. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the sender and were expecting this email. Report Suspicious PLEASE PLACE IN CITY COUNCIL FILE It seems there were some concerns about the representation of the R5 zoning during the planning commission meeting. It was perceived that the commission and the planning department may have favored the developer's interests. Some specific points of concern include the emphasis on the suitability of R5 for the site, overlooking traffic concerns, and the lack of consideration for the negative impact of R5 on the area. It was stressed that the R5 zoning was part of a compromise from a previous rezoning, and it's important to provide detailed explanations to the council and during office visits regarding the reasons for having this higher zoning. It was also mentioned that the lawyer's presentation on the R5 zoning was misleading. During the council hearing, it was suggested that speakers provide a detailed explanation of the history to ensure a comprehensive understanding. In conclusion, the choice between R3 and R5 zoning for a multifamily development on 1.82 acres will depend on factors such as desired density, community context, and local zoning regulations. R5 zoning typically allows for higher density and taller buildings compared to R3, which might be more suitable for urban or higher-density suburban areas. John Paletta 2121 East Glenrosa Ave Phoenix, Arizona Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone [mail.onelink.me] On Friday, October 11, 2024, 12:53 PM, jpaletta1 <jpaletta1@cox.net> wrote: PLEASE PLACE IN CITY COUNCIL FILE It seems there were some concerns about the representation of the R5 zoning during the planning commission meeting. It was perceived that the commission and the planning department may have favored the developer's interests. Some specific points of concern include the emphasis on the suitability of R5 for the site, overlooking traffic concerns, and the lack of consideration for the negative impact of R5 on the area. ATTACHMENT G 2 It was stressed that the R5 zoning was part of a compromise from a previous rezoning, and it's important to provide detailed explanations to the council and during office visits regarding the reasons for having this higher zoning. It was also mentioned that the lawyer's presentation on the R5 zoning was misleading. During the council hearing, it was suggested that speakers provide a detailed explanation of the history to ensure a comprehensive understanding. In conclusion, the choice between R3 and R5 zoning for a multifamily development on 1.82 acres will depend on factors such as desired density, community context, and local zoning regulations. R5 zoning typically allows for higher density and taller buildings compared to R3, which might be more suitable for urban or higher-density suburban areas. John Paletta 2121 East Glenrosa Rd Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone [mail.onelink.me] 1 Racelle Escolar From: jpaletta1 <jpaletta1@cox.net> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 1:38 PM To: Racelle Escolar Cc: Kathy DeLorey; Melissa Rhodes; Russell Birkland; ryanworldtravel8@gmail.com; Betsy & Robert Greenberg Subject: Letter of Oppositon - Rezoning Case Z-74-24-6 CAUTION: This email originated outside of the City of Phoenix. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the sender and were expecting this email. Report Suspicious PLEASE PLACE IN COUNCIL FOLDER FOR 21/12/24 At the recent Planning Commission meeting on 10/10/24 regarding Rezoning Case Z-74-24, it was observed that individuals from outside the immediate area were brought in to advocate for the R3 to R5 zoning change. These individuals seemed unfamiliar with the specific details of the case, and it was noted that the rezoning primarily impacts the local neighborhood rather than individuals residing four miles away on 28th Street. Furthermore, during the hearing, there were speakers who voiced support for the rezoning in the context of affordable housing, although this aspect was not directly relevant to the rezoning case at hand. The manufactured nature of this support was unfortunate and detracted from the substantive discussion of the hearing. Best regards, John Paletta 2121 East Glenross Ave Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone [mail.onelink.me] 1 Racelle Escolar Subject: R5 MISREPRESENTATION From: jpaletta1 <jpaletta1@cox.net> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 3:31 PM To: Racelle Escolar <racelle.escolar@phoenix.gov> Cc: Kathy DeLorey <ksews60@gmail.com>; Kathryn northcentralnews.net <kathryn@northcentralnews.net>; Melissa Rhodes <melissa.rhodes.az@gmail.com>; Russell Birkland <rgenebirkland@gmail.com>; ryanworldtravel8@gmail.com; Betsy & Robert Greenberg <berto56@cox.net> Subject: R5 MISREPRESENTATION 6 - R5 MIS REPRESENTSTION Dear Phoenix City Council: I am writing to express our concerns regarding the recent presentation of the rezoni ng case Z -74-24-6 at the 10/10/2024 Planning Commission ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart Subject: Concerns Regarding Rezoning Case Z-74-24-6 - R5 MISREPRESENTSTION Dear Phoenix City Council: I am writing to express our concerns regarding the recent presentation of the rezoning case Z-74-24-6 at the 10/10/2024 Planning Commission Meeting. It has come to our attention that there were some misrepresentations made during the presentation, particularly in the portrayal of R5 zoning in our neighborhood. We believe that there was a lack of transparency in the presentation, as certain crucial historical details regarding the R5 zoning were omitted. It is important to note that these details were extensively discussed during the compromise meetings with the lawyer and developer, but unfortunately, they were not conveyed to the Planning Commission. Our neighborhood has a long history of grappling with rezoning issues, dating back to 1986 (Z-210-86). After 11 years of negotiations, a compromise was reached in 1994, resulting in the downzoning of the entire block between Glenrosa and Turney and 21st Street and 22nd Street to R2, with the southeast corner designated as R5 as part of the compromise. Specific stipulations were put in place for two-story structures along Turney Ave and 21st Street and three stories in the center of the project. Furthermore, the northwest corner has a history of rezoning dating back to 1978, with the corner of 20th Street and Campbell initially zoned as an 8-story Midrise. Subsequently, through negotiations with the city, it was rezoned to R5 with specific restrictions, including no traffic entering the neighborhood and a 30-foot setback behind the parking lot. We are concerned that the use of these two parcels of R5 to justify the current rezoning is misleading and does not fully capture the complexities and history of the zoning in our neighborhood. We hope that these concerns can be addressed and that all relevant information will be accurately presented to the Council on 11/12/24. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, John Paletta 2121 East Glenrosa Ave Phoenix, Arizona. 85016 602 300 4067 jpaletta1@cox.net Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone [mail.onelink.me] 1 John Roanhorse From: Leah Adelman <lfadelman@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 4:55 PM To: John Roanhorse Subject: Concern Regarding the Impact of Proposed Project on My Property Value CAUTION: This email originated outside of the City of Phoenix. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the sender and were expecting this email. Report Suspicious Dear Committee Members, I hope this letter finds you well. My name is Leah Adelman and I am writing as a first-time homeowner who lives adjacent to the proposed project. While I understand that development is often necessary for community growth, I am deeply concerned that this particular project will negatively impact the value of my home and the quality of life in my neighborhood. As a homeowner, this investment is significant to me, both financially and emotionally. The proximity of the project to my property raises serious concerns about increased noise, traffic, and potential environmental effects, all of which are likely to drive down the value of my home. This is particularly troubling as I had hoped this would be a place where I could establish long-term roots in a stable and growing community. I respectfully urge you to reconsider the current scope of the project and take into account the potential harm it could cause to homeowners like myself, who will be directly affected. Please consider alternative solutions or mitigations that could alleviate these concerns, ensuring that this project supports both the growth of the community and the wellbeing of its residents. Thank you for your time and consideration of my concerns. Sincerely, Leah Adelman 2130 E Turney Ave #1 Phoenix AZ 85018 4043957474