Attachment D - PC Memo - Z-58-24-8.pdf

City of Phoenix — Formal (2024-11-13)
Extracted text (via pymupdf) 308608 characters
To: 
 
City of Phoenix Planning Commission        
Date: October 7, 2024 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
From:  
Racelle Escolar, AICP 
 
 
Principal Planner 
 
Subject: 
ITEM NO. 6 (Z-58-24-8) - APPROXIMATELY 710 FEET NORTH AND 305 
FEET WEST OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 20TH AVENUE AND 
SOUTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE 
 
The purpose of this memo is to recommend the removal a stipulation in response to the 
South Mountain Village Planning Committee (VPC) recommendation and to convey 
additional opposition correspondence that has been received regarding this rezoning 
request. 
 
Rezoning Case No. Z-58-24-8 is a request to rezone 4.54 acres located approximately 
710 feet north and 305 feet west of the northwest corner of 20th Avenue and South 
Mountain Avenue from S-1 (Ranch or Farm Residence) to R1-10 (Single-Family 
Residence District) to allow a single-family residential subdivision. 
 
The South Mountain VPC heard this request on September 10, 2024, and 
recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, with additional stipulations by a 
vote of 7-5. 
 
Staff recommends that Stipulation No. 20 be deleted, as it seeks to limit the height of 
the development to 32 feet. The maximum height permitted with the R1-10 Zoning 
District is two stories and 30 feet and cannot be exceeded via a rezoning stipulation. 
Since the maximum height requirement of 30 feet will apply, a stipulation limiting the 
height to 30 feet is not appropriate. 
 
Staff recommends approval, per the modified stipulations in bold font below: 
 
1. 
The conceptual site plan and landscape plan for future development of the site 
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Hearing Officer through the 
public hearing process, including review by the South Mountain Village 
Planning Committee, for stipulation modification prior to preliminary site plan 
approval. This is a legislative review for conceptual purposes only. Specific 
development standards and requirements will be determined by the Planning 
Hearing Officer and the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
2. 
The conceptual elevations for future development of the site shall be reviewed 
and approved by the Planning Hearing Officer through the public hearing 
process, including review by the South Mountain Village Planning Committee, 
for stipulation modification prior to final site plan approval. This is a legislative 
review for conceptual purposes only. Specific development standards and 
ATTACHMENT D

Z-58-24-8 Planning Commission Backup Memo 
October 7, 2024 
Page 2 of 4 
 
 
requirements will be determined by the Planning Hearing Officer and the 
Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
3. 
Prior to preliminary plat approval, documentation shall be provided that 
demonstrates participation in the Environmental Protection Agency’s 
WaterSense certification program, or an equivalent program, as approved by 
the Planning and Development and Water Services departments. 
 
 
4. 
A WaterSense inspection report from a third-party verifier shall be submitted 
that demonstrates successful participation in the Environmental Protection 
Agency’s WaterSense certification program, or an equivalent program, prior to 
certificate of occupancy, as approved by the Planning and Development 
Department. 
 
 
5. 
Only landscape materials listed in the Phoenix Active Management Area Low-
Water-Use/Drought-Tolerant Plant List shall be utilized in the common areas 
and within the front yards of individual residential lots, as approved or modified 
by the Planning and Development Department. 
 
 
6. 
Natural turf shall only be utilized on individual single-family lots (behind the 
front yard); required retention areas (bottom of basin); and functional turf areas 
within common areas, as approved by the Planning and Development 
Department. 
 
 
7. 
Pressure regulating sprinkler heads and/or drip lines shall be utilized in any turf 
areas to reduce water waste. 
 
 
8. 
A minimum of two green infrastructure (GI) techniques for stormwater 
management shall be implemented per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green 
Infrastructure and Low-Impact Development Details for Alternative Stormwater 
Management, as approved or modified by the Planning and Development 
Department. 
 
 
9. 
Participation in the City of Phoenix Homeowner’s Association Water Efficiency 
Program shall be incorporated into to Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions 
for the subdivision, prior to final site plan approval. 
 
 
10. 
Swimming pools on individual single-family lots shall be limited to 600 square 
feet in size. 
 
 
11. 
A minimum 50 feet of right-of-way shall be dedicated and constructed for the 
full width of 20th Lane for the full length of the subject site, connecting to the 
southern adjacent parcel.   
 
 
12. 
A minimum 50-foot radius easement shall be dedicated and a minimum 45-foot 
radius temporary turnaround shall be constructed at the southern terminus of 
20th Lane. Alternatively, a permanent turn around design may be considered

Z-58-24-8 Planning Commission Backup Memo 
October 7, 2024 
Page 3 of 4 
 
 
and shall include a center landscaped island, designed to City of Phoenix 
standards, as approved by the Street Transportation Department. 
 
 
13. 
All streets within and adjacent to the development shall be constructed with 
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, 
landscaping and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and 
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA 
accessibility standards. 
 
 
14. 
The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and 
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or 
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be 
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed 
and approved by the City Attorney. 
 
 
15. 
In the event archeological materials are encountered during construction, the 
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the 
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials. 
 
 
16. 
Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207 
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County 
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning 
application file for record. 
 
 
17. 
THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 18 UNITS. 
 
 
18. 
A MINIMUM OF 30% OF BUILDING ELEVATIONS SHALL INCLUDE 
COVERED PORCHES IN THE FRONT YARD AND REAR YARD AT A 
MINIMUM OF 60 FEET EACH AND AT A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 6 FEET, AS 
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
19. 
THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR 80% OF THE LOTS SHALL BE 
LIMITED TO ONE STORY AND 26 FEET, AS APPROVED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
20. 
THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT SHALL BE TWO-STORIES AND 32 
FEET, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
21. 
20. 
A MINIMUM OF 8% OF THE GROSS PROJECT AREA SHALL BE RETAINED 
AS COMMON AREA, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
22. 
21. 
BUILDING ELEVATIONS SHALL CONTAIN MULTIPLE COLORS, EXTERIOR 
ACCENT MATERIALS AND TEXTURAL CHANGES THAT EXHIBIT QUALITY 
AND DURABILITY SUCH AS BRICK, STONE, COLORED TEXTURED

Z-58-24-8 Planning Commission Backup Memo 
October 7, 2024 
Page 4 of 4 
 
 
CONCRETE OR STUCCO, OR OTHER MATERIALS TO PROVIDE A 
DECORATIVE AND AESTHETIC TREATMENT, AS APPROVED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
23. 
22.  
ALL STREET-FACING GARAGE DOORS LENGTHS SHALL BE LESS THAN 
50% OF THE TOTAL WIDTH OF THE FAÇADE, AS APPROVED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
24. 
23. 
FRONT SETBACKS FOR COVERED BUILDING ELEMENTS SHALL BE 
STAGGERED BY A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET, AS APPROVED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 
 
 
25. 
24.  
LOT WIDTHS SHALL VARY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
26. 
25. 
THE SOUTHERN END OF THE STREET SHALL HAVE LANDSCAPING AND 
WROUGHT IRON VIEW FENCING TO ENHANCE THE VIEW OF SOUTH 
MOUNTAIN, UNTIL 20TH LANE IS CONSTRUCTED TO THE SOUTH OF THE 
PROPERTY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
DEPARTMENT. 
 
 
27. 
26. 
A RETAINING WALL SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTHERN 
BOUNDARY OF TRACT A, AS APPROVED OR MODIFIED BY THE 
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.  
 
 
28. 
27. 
THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE 
SITE PLAN DATE STAMPED SEPTEMBER 5, 2024, AS MODIFIED BY THE 
ABOVE STIPULATIONS AND AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND 
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.   
 
Enclosure 
Opposition correspondence (236 pages)

July 1, 2024
My name is Constance Box and I live at 7719 S. 20th Dr. I am writing in opposition to the
application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submitted by John Fox, which
proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum density allowed for
R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.
Density- problems
●
This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20
homes) in addition to ADUs.
o
This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern
neighbors with homes on S-1 property.
o
It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17)
Density- solutions
●
Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing
goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding communities as outlined below.
Traffic- problems
●
In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suffers severely
from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while also directly across
from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a
neighborhood.
o
According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.
●
No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning.
●
Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially
impacting safety, property, and health.
Traffic- solutions

●
R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing
neighborhood.
●
Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for
rezoning/development.
Housing design- problems
●
The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.
●
The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual
designs.
Housing design- solutions
●
Limit construction to single-story (most important).
●
Require deep front porches.
●
Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street.
●
Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems
●
The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions
●
Require lower density zoning and more open space.
●
Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling.
●
Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials.
●
Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change.
●
Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the
sun off the building walls and shade the ground.
●
Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls.
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it
appear before the SMVPC.
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend.
He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting has been
called.
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application
should not move forward.
Respectfully,
Constance Box
7719 S 20th Drive
Phoenix, AZ 85041

:ƵůǇϭƐƚ͕ ϮϬϮϰ
DǇŶĂŵĞŝƐĂǀŝĚ<ĞǇĂŶĚ/ůŝǀĞĂƚϮϬϬϲtĞƐƚƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞ͕ WŚŽĞŶŝǆǌϴϱϬϰϭ͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶ
ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌͲϱϴͲϮϰͲϴƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ
ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞŵĂǆŝŵƵŵ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZͲϭϬ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ͘
/ĂŵŽƉƉŽƐĞĚƚŽŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘
ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^Ͳϭ
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZͲϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇĂƚŶŽ
ŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚϯ͘ ϱĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘ dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘
o
dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŝƚŚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͘
o
/ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ
ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x
ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ͲϭĂŶĚZͲϭϬŝƐZͲϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐĂƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘
dƌĂĸĐͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x
/ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂϱϮͲŚŽŵĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇ
ĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞŚĞĂǀǇƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞǁŚŝůĞĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐ
ĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘
o
ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬƚŚĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂůƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞͲĨĂŵŝůǇ
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘
x
EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͘
x
&ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ͕ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ ĂŶĚŚĞĂůƚŚ͘
dƌĂĸĐͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ

x
ZͲϭϴĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘
x
dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x
dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨϮͲƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ ϮϮͲϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ͘
x
dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚͲĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x
>ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ;ŵŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x
dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽĂϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚĞŵŝƐƐŝǀŝƚǇĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘
x
^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶͲĨŽƌǁĂƌĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐϮϬϮϭ
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ͘ tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
ƐƵŶŽīƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘
x
ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽīďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘
>ĂƐƚůǇ͕ ĂƐŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚƚŚĞŽŶůǇϮ
ŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW͘
ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ĂŵŽŶƚŚůĂƚĞƌ͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂů
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ͘ 

,ĞƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞĐŽƵůĚĚŽ
ƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
ĐĂůůĞĚ͘
,ĞŚĂƐŶŽƚůŝƐƚĞŶĞĚƚŽ͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ ƐĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ͘ ,ŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘ dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ͕
ĂǀŝĚ<ĞǇĂŶĚEŝŬŝ<ĞǇ
ϮϬϬϲtĞƐƚƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞ
WŚŽĞŶŝǆǌϴϱϬϰϭ

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
Opposition to Rezoning Case Z-58-24-8
James Betterment <jamesbetterment@gmail.com>
Mon 7/8/2024 4:50 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (22 KB)
Opposition-letter_Z-58-24-8_8008-S-20th-Ave_James-Betterment.docx;
Please see attached for my opposition to rezoning case Z-58-24-8.£
7/9/24, 2:14 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANF8CoQjfVdJkzQ3ok2BFps…
1/1

July 4th 2024 
My name is :ĂŵĞƐĞƩĞƌŵĞŶƚand I live at 8008 S 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041. /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶ
ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ 
ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ^-ϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞŵĂǆŝŵƵŵ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZ-10͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ.  
I am opposed to ŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ.  
 
 
Loss of Privacy:  
x dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁŽƵůĚƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶĨŽƵƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂďƵƫŶŐƚŚĞďĂĐŬŽĨ
ŵǇƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ ƐŝŐŶŝĮĐĂŶƚůǇƌĞĚƵĐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŝǀĂĐǇƚŚĂƚŵǇĨĂŵŝůǇĂŶĚ/ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĞŶũŽǇ͘ dŚĞ
ŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶŽĨƚǁŽ-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽƵƐĞƐŝƐƉĂƌƟĐƵůĂƌůǇĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐ͕ ĂƐƚŚĞƐĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞ
ĚŝƌĞĐƚƐŝŐŚƚůŝŶĞƐŝŶƚŽŵǇďĂĐŬǇĂƌĚĂŶĚƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŝŶƚŽŵǇŚŽŵĞ͕ ƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĐŽŵƉƌŽŵŝƐŝŶŐ
ŽƵƌƉƌŝǀĂĐǇ͘ 
 
/ŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞEŽƟĐĞĂŶĚŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇ/ŶƉƵƚ͗  
x /ŚĂǀĞŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶǇŶŽƟĐĞƐŽĨƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĂŶĚŚĂĚƚŽďĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚďǇ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐƚŚĞĚĂǇďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞŵĞĞƟŶŐƐ͘  
 
Density- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-ϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƟes at no 
ŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚϯ͘ ϱĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘ dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o This deŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with homes on S-ϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͘ 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ ǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-ϭĂŶĚZ-ϭϬŝƐZ-ϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐ ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ŵŝƟŐĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀŝŶŐůŽĐĂů
ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ ƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐ.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ exit ŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ tǇŶĚŚĂŵ^ƋƵĂƌĞ͕ 
a 52-home neŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇ
ƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ while

ĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐ
ŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂů ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞ-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬƚƌŝƉƐ ƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞ
ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ.  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞsame ƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ͕ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ and health. 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Z-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 
 
Housing design- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞs ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐhomes͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ͘  
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-ƐƚƌĞĞƚ-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
Housing design- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘  
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚemissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘

x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-ĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
sun Žī ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ ƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽī ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 
 
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŚĂƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůǇďĞĞŶƉůĂŶŶĞĚƐŝŶĐĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĞůĞǀĂƟŽŶƐĂƌĞĚĂƚĞĚ
^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯĂŶĚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚƉůĂŶƌĞǀŝĞǁǁĂƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯ͘ zĞƚDƌ͘ &ŽǆƐĞŶƚ
ŽƵƚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞƚŽƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĨŽƌ May 18, 2024. As ŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐ
ŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚ
ĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚthe only ϮŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞ
ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.  
ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ on June 15͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂůŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ. His 
ĐŽůůĞĂŐƵĞ ƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞ
ĐŽƵůĚĚŽƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞthese ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐ
ŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
He has not listened to͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ. His development 
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ, 
:ĂŵĞƐĞƩĞƌŵĞŶƚ 
 
8008 S 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041

July 8th, 2024
My name is Jose Angel Perea and I live at 8004 S 20th Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85041. I am writing in
opposition to the application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submitted
by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum
density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.
Density- problems
●
This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 properties at no
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20
homes) in addition to ADUs.
o
This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern
neighbors with homes on S-1 property.
o
It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17)
Density- solutions
●
Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing
goals and provide additional benefits including mitigating heat and preserving local
character to the surrounding communities.
Traffic- problems
●
In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through Wyndham Square,
a 52-home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already
suffers severely from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while
also directly across from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees
greater traffic than a neighborhood.
o
According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.
●
No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning and does nothing to alleviate immediate
problems.
●
Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially
impacting safety, property, and health.

Traffic- solutions
●
R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing
neighborhood.
●
Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for
rezoning/development.
Housing design- problems
●
The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.
●
The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual
designs.
Housing design- solutions
●
Limit construction to single-story (most important).
●
Require deep front porches.
●
Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street.
●
Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems
●
The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions
●
Require lower density zoning and more open space.
●
Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling.
●
Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials.
●
Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change.
●
Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the
sun off the building walls and shade the ground.
●
Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls.
This proposal has apparently been planned since last year since the elevations are dated
September 2023 and the first plan review was scheduled for November 2023. Yet Mr. Fox sent
out the first meeting notice to the neighbors for May 18, 2024. As of this writing, Mr. Fox has
made absolutely no effort to work with any of the neighbors and address the concerns listed
above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 meetings he called to present this plan to the
surrounding property owners before having it appear before the SMVPC.

At the second meeting, on June 15, the plan had not changed and there were several neighbors
who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend. His
colleague told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he
could do to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting
has been called.
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application
should not move forward.
Respectfully,
Jose Angel Perea
8004 S 20th Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85041

07-09-2024 
My name is Miguel Rubio and I live at 8020 s. 20th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85041͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶ
ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ 
ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚly S-1 property to the maximum 
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZ-10͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ.  
I am opposed to ŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐproposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇestablished homes on S-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-ϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƟes at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan ǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;Rio Montana Plan, pg. ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Appropriate density trĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚappropriate ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
goals ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ŵŝƟŐĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀŝŶŐůŽĐĂů
ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ ƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐ.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- problems 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ exit is through Wyndham Square, 
a 52-home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already 
ƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ while 
ĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐ
greateƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂů ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐits guidelineͿ͕ Ăsingle-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬtrips per day on average, not 
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ and does nothing to alleviate immediate 
problems.  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ, property, and health.

dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x R-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
neighborhood. 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚ ďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 
 
Housing design- problems 
x The development proposes ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐhomes͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-story.  
x The dĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-street-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
designs. 
Housing design- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x Require dĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- problems 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞ ŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟng heat.  
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ - ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x Require high emissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-Ĩorward ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
sun Žī the building walls and shade the ground. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
based on the lot orŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ to also keep the sun Žī building walls. 
 
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŚĂƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůǇďĞĞŶƉůĂŶŶĞĚƐŝŶĐĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĞůĞǀĂƟŽŶƐĂƌĞĚĂƚĞĚ
^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯĂŶĚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚƉůĂŶƌĞǀŝĞǁǁĂƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯ͘ zĞƚMr. Fox sent 
ŽƵƚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞto the neighbors ĨŽƌ May 18, 2024. As ŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐ
ŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚ
ĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚthe only ϮŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚo the 
surrounding property owners ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.

ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ on June 15͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂůŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ. His 
ĐŽůůĞĂŐƵĞ told the neighbors who ǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞ
ĐŽƵůĚĚŽƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞthese ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐ
ŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
He has not listened to͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ. His development 
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. This ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ, 
Miguel Rubio 
 
8020 s. 20th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85041

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
Opposition to Rezoning Case Z-58-24-8
Nicki Sordello <nickisordello@yahoo.com>
Mon 7/8/2024 7:02 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (22 KB)
Opposition-letter_Z-58-24-8_8008-S-20th-Ave_Nicole.Sordello.docx;
Good evening,
Please see the attached letter in opposition to the rezoning proposal Z-58-24-8. If you have any
questions or request further information, please let me know.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Nicole Sordello
7/9/24, 2:24 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAEEAv%2BuhPpRDvjgN2TWr…
1/1

July 8th 2024 
To whom it may concern, 
My name is Nicole Sordello, and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041. /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐthis 
ůĞƩĞƌin ƐƚƌŽŶŐ ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-
24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ^-1 property to the 
ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZ-10.  
I am opposed to ƚŚŝƐƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůĨŽƌ ŵƵůƟƉůĞreasons:  
 
 
Loss of Privacy:  
x dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁŽƵůĚƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶĨŽƵƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂďƵƫŶŐƚŚĞďĂĐŬŽĨ
ŵǇƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ ƐŝŐŶŝĮĐĂŶƚůǇƌĞĚƵĐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŝǀĂĐǇƚŚĂƚŵǇĨĂŵŝůǇĂŶĚ/ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĞŶũŽǇ͘ dŚĞ
ŝŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶŽĨƚǁŽ-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽƵƐĞƐŝƐƉĂƌƟĐƵůĂƌůǇĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐ͕ ĂƐƚŚĞƐĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞ
ĚŝƌĞĐƚƐŝŐŚƚůŝŶĞƐŝŶƚŽŵǇďĂĐŬǇĂƌĚĂŶĚƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŝŶƚŽŵǇŚŽŵĞ͕ ƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĐŽŵƉƌŽŵŝƐŝŶŐ
our privacy. 
 
/ŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞEŽƟĐĞĂŶĚŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇ/ŶƉƵƚ͗  
x /ŚĂǀĞŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶǇŶŽƟĐĞƐŽĨƚŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚrequest ĂŶĚŚĂĚƚŽďĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĞĚďǇ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐƚŚĞĚĂǇďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞŵĞĞƟŶŐƐ͘  
 
Density- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x This ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-ϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƟes at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with homes on S-1 property. 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ ǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-ϭĂŶĚZ-ϭϬŝƐZ-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚappropriate ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐ ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ŵŝƟŐĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀŝŶŐůŽĐĂů
character ƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐ.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ exit ŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ Wyndham Square, 
a 52-ŚŽŵĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇ

ƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ while 
ĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌentraŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ, which sees 
ŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
Impact Study Manual ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞ-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬtrips per ĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞ
ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ.  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ, property, and health. 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Z-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞlopment. 
 
Housing design- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x The development proposes ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-story homes, which are not 
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐhomes͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-story.  
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-street-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌconceptual 
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
Housing design- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
each lot does nothiŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘  
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚemissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘

x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-Ĩorward ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
sun Žī ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ ƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽī ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 
 
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŚĂƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůǇďĞĞŶƉůĂŶŶĞĚƐŝŶĐĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĞůĞǀĂƟŽŶƐĂƌĞĚĂƚĞĚ
^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯĂŶĚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚƉůĂŶƌĞǀŝĞǁǁĂƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯ͘ zĞƚDƌ͘ &ŽǆƐĞŶƚ
ŽƵƚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞƚŽƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĨŽƌ May 18, 2024. As ŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐ
ŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚ
ĂďŽǀĞ͕ which he has heard in person at the only ϮŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞ
ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.  
 
ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ on June 15͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂůŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ. His 
ĐŽůůĞĂŐƵĞ ƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞ
could do to incorporate these ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐ
ŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ concerns. His development 
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ, 
 
Nicole Sordello  
 
8008 S. 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041

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
Z-58-24-8
Andrew Maifield <andrewmaifield@yahoo.com>
Tue 7/2/2024 12:38 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Samuel Rogers££
I Andrew Maifield am a resident of the Windham square housing community.£ £Homeowner.£ £I
am sending this email to the city of Phoenix to dispute The rezoning allowing housing
developers using£ windham square as the main entrance and exit of the new housing
community.£ £The rezoning will negatively affect my family my home value and the quiet good-
hearted small community we live in.£ £Rezoning for 20 homes on 4.5 acres is unrealistic.£ Small
cramped homes like that would reduce the values of neighboring homes and especially my
home value.£ The large amount of traffic will be a burden on my small children and our family.£ I
would like to request the city block Windham squares access to that lot for good.£ Permanently
block and wall that access point.£ The veterans retired city workers current city workers
hardworking tax paying citizens that live in this community do not want to change it please
respect our request.£ £Thank you Samuel for helping with this matter.££
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]
7/3/24, 10:16 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAH3GQQI1TJtMhTZ5XgE8uro…
1/1

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
Opposition letter- Case Number Z-58-24-8
D. Fong <dpfong@hotmail.com>
Tue 7/2/2024 3:20 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (19 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8.docx;
Mr. Samuel Rogers,
Please see my opposiƟon leƩer aƩachment relaƟng to Case Number: Z-58-24-8 to be included in the ﬁle
for the Village Planning CommiƩee meeƟng on Tuesday, July 9, 2024.
Regards,
David Fong
2004 W. Harwell Rd - Wyndham Square neighborhood
7/3/24, 10:57 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPA0z1r%2FTKdAuF7P8YXC…
1/1

July 2, 2024 
My name is David Fong and I live at 2004 W. Harwell Rd. I am writing in opposition to the 
application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8submitted by John Fox, which 
proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum density allowed for R-
10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
x This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
homes) in addition to ADUs.  
o This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional 
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern 
neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities 
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density- solutions 
x Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations 
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing 
goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding communities as outlined below. 
 
Traffic- problems 
x In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suffers severely 
from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baselinewhile also directly across 
from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a 
neighborhood.  
o According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic 
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an 
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 tripsper day on average, not 
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.  
x No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to 
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning.  
x Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially 
impacting safety, property, and health. 
Traffic- solutions

x R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing 
neighborhood. 
x Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulatedbefore any approvals for 
rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design- problems 
x The development proposesan unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.  
x The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
designs. 
Housing design- solutions 
x Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
x Require deep front porches. 
x Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
x Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
x The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from 
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- solutions 
x Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
x Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling. 
x Require high emissivityand high SRI roofing materials. 
x Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and 
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021 
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change. 
x Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the 
sun off the building walls and shade the ground. 
x Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls. 
 
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the 
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
appear before the SMVPC.  
 
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend.

He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he could do 
to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting has been 
called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application 
should not move forward. 
 
Respectfully, 
David Fong 
 
2004 W. Harwell Rd.

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
Z-58-24-8
Eduardo Camacho <lalocamacho@cox.net>
Tue 7/2/2024 8:16 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (21 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8 (2).docx;
Hello Samuel,
please see attached letter of opposition
thank you,
Eduardo Camacho
7/3/24, 11:05 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAMotTcJOi0pKnXWGedXoxR8…
1/1


:ƵůǇϮ͕ ϮϬϮϰ
DǇŶĂŵĞŝƐĚƵĂƌĚŽĂŵĂĐŚŽĂŶĚ/ůŝǀĞĂƚϮϬϭϱtƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞWŚŽĞŶŝǆϴϱϬϰϭ͘ /Ăŵ
ǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌͲϱϴͲϮϰͲϴ
ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞ
ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZͲϭϬ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ͘ 
/ĂŵŽƉƉŽƐĞĚƚŽŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 

ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^Ͳϭ
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZͲϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇĂƚŶŽ
ŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚϯ͘ ϱĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘ dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘ 
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŝƚŚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͘ 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ
ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ͲϭĂŶĚZͲϭϬŝƐZͲϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐĂƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘ 

dƌĂĸĐͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂϱϮͲŚŽŵĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇ
ĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞŚĞĂǀǇƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞǁŚŝůĞĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐ
ĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬƚŚĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂůƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞͲĨĂŵŝůǇ
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘ 
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚ Ğǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͘ 
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ͕ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ ĂŶĚŚĞĂůƚŚ͘ 
dƌĂĸĐͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ

x ZͲϭϴĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 

,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨϮͲƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ ϮϮͲϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ͘ 
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚͲĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ;ŵŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 

,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽĂϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘ 
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚĞŵŝƐƐŝǀŝƚǇĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶͲĨŽƌǁĂƌĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐϮϬϮϭ
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ͘ tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
ƐƵŶŽīƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽīďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 

>ĂƐƚůǇ͕ ĂƐŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚƚŚĞŽŶůǇϮ
ŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW͘ 

ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ĂŵŽŶƚŚůĂƚĞƌ͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂů
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ͘ 

,ĞƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞĐŽƵůĚĚŽ
ƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
ĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 

,ĞŚĂƐŶŽƚůŝƐƚĞŶĞĚƚŽ͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ ƐĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ͘ ,ŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘ dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 

ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ͕ 
ĚƵĂƌĚŽĂŵĂĐŚŽ

ϮϬϭϱtƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞ
WŚŽĞŶŝǆϴϱϬϰϭ



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
Z-58-24-8
Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Tue 7/2/2024 1:51 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (2 MB)
My letter of opposition.docx;
My name is Jai Goudeau and I live at 2013 W. Harwell Road Phoenix, 85041. I am writing in
opposition to the Rezoning request filed for approximately 4.5 acres site located at 700’ feet
north and 305’ feet west of the northwest corner of South Mountain Ave and 20th Ave, rezoning
case number Z-58-24 to change zoning from S1 to R1-10.
Attached is my letter of opposition.
7/3/24, 10:21 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAAx1C%2FGhd%2BNNnma3l…
1/1

To whom it may concern, 
 
My name is Jai Goudeau and I live at 2013 W. Harwell Road Phoenix, 85041.  I am 
writing in opposition to the Rezoning request filed for approximately 4.5 acres site 
located at 700’ feet north and 305’ feet west of the northwest corner of South Mountain 
Ave and 20th Ave, rezoning case number Z-58-24 to change zoning from S1 to R1-10.  
 
I am President of the Board for the Wyndham Square Neighborhood Homeowners 
Association and resident.   I am opposed to rezoning due to the increased traffic impact 
it would have in our community.  Our neighborhood only has one road into it on 20th 
drive from Baseline Rd with Branham Ln and Harwell Rd connecting to 20th Ln which 
dead ends south of Harwell Rd.  (see Fig 1 attached).  20th Dr is a standard road with a 
traffic circle mid-block.  Our community already struggles to pull out onto Baseline Rd 
during peak hours, often having to wait long times, especially if making a left-hand turn 
in the mornings due to people entering the businesses on the north side.   
 
I am concerned about the layout of the proposed development only having one road in 
and if it has sufficient space for construction vehicles, emergency vehicles and 
deliveries to turn around.  I believe it is most likely that those vehicles would end up 
backing all the way up to Harwell Rd to exit the development.   
 
When we purchased our home in 2003, we paid a premium to have a view of the 
mountains and if the proposed development were to continue with two story homes 
built, it would obstruct our view of the mountains ruining our investment.   
 
The developer proposes adding retention areas against the properties on the north side 
of the development.  A major concern that we have is that when our homes were built, 
they had to have their own water retention area in the yard.  This puts our homes way 
below the property’s elevation to the south where the proposed development will be.  
The property sits approximately 4 feet higher than our property.  Attached are images 
showing the elevation below the fence line (see fig2 attached) (ladder is 6feet for 
reference) and an overview of the elevation of the two properties (see fig3 attached).  In 
the past we have had problems with our yards flooding due to heavy rainfall and the 
water entering our yard through tunnels left by wildlife.  We see this currently with the 
residence at 2009 W Harwell Rd when the resident to the south put up a block wall 
around their property causing their yard to flood every time it rains.  This problem will be 
prevalent for my property as well as the property of 2017 W Harwell and 7828 S. 20th 
Ln.  
 
Mr Fox has not made an effort to work with the neighborhood regarding these concerns 
and I believe he has not acted in good faith to address the community and involve us in 
the process based on the following: 
 
In the first meeting he arranged at a Barro’s Pizza parlor on a Saturday afternoon in 
which I received notice 4 days prior and some did not receive notice at all.  There was 
loud music playing and very few people could hear his presentation or respond.  I 
requested that we have another meeting in a more suitable location so I reserved a

meeting room at Caesar Chavez Library on May 28th for June 15th and he said he would 
send out notices.   
 
At the second meeting on June 15th, John Fox was in attendance with Mike Haer.  In the 
meeting several attendees addressed their concerns as well as I and Mike Haer said he 
wanted to take this information and address his team and he and John Fox agreed to 
have another meeting to discuss their findings prior to the hearing.   
 
I contacted John Fox as I saw a survey crew doing measurements on 06/18/24.  I asked 
John if he was still having another community meeting as he requested or if he was 
moving forward with the Village Planning Committee meeting to which he replied that he 
was not going to have another neighborhood meeting because he wanted to have a 
constructive meeting and was tired of getting beaten up.  I reminded him that he and 
Mike requested that we have another meeting and he told me that he had not spoken to 
Mike and that Mike would be out of town during the Village Planning Committee 
Meeting.  I then requested that John send me a copy of his mailing list that he has been 
using to notify the neighborhoods because there have been so many residents saying 
that they are not receiving them.  He told me that he sent the notices out to the 
residents within 600 feet of the property boundary and that he would send me the 
mailing list that he used. 
Upon evaluation of the mailing list, I discovered that the 600 feet covered only 
approximately half of the neighborhood.   
 
I believe that a developer acting in good faith would have sent out notices to the entire 
neighborhood being affected in this situation.  It was determined that approximately 23 
of 52 homes were not notified of the meetings by John Fox.     
 
 
 
 
Fig 1

Fig2

Fig3

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
Zoning case number Z-58-24-8
Lori <ernlor639@cox.net>
Tue 7/2/2024 3:14 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
2 attachments (910 KB)
Lori_0001.jpg; Lori_0002.jpg;
7/3/24, 10:56 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABjbaVltbUWVnkCaGWPIt0Q…
1/1

7/3/24, 10:24 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABjbaVltbUWVnkCaGWPIt0Q…
1/1

7/3/24, 10:25 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABjbaVltbUWVnkCaGWPIt0Q…
1/1

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
Z-58-24-8
Joe Hernandez <cndymnrotc@gmail.com>
Tue 7/2/2024 10:34 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>;Jaigoudeau@gmail.com <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
1 attachments (3 MB)
Z-58-24-8 SIGNED HERNANDEZ N PG 1.zip;
Greetings
As Requested£
Nadine Hernandez
7/3/24, 11:21 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJNrcuQOJotBpSbqcmpXBhc…
1/1

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
Case # Z-58-24-8
Natividad Tapia <natytapia54@gmail.com>
Tue 7/2/2024 8:05 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (21 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8.docx;
Hello Samuel,
Please see the aƩached leƩer of opposiƟon.
Thank you,
NaƟvidad
7/3/24, 11:02 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACFpVS4SvfREtLk7Nn65sEI…
1/1


Ϭϳͬ ϬϮͬ ϮϬϮϰ
DǇŶĂŵĞŝƐEĂƟǀŝĚĂĚdĂƉŝĂĂŶĚ/ůŝǀĞĂƚϮϬϭϱtƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞWŚŽĞŶŝǆϴϱϬϰϭ͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐ
ŝŶŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌͲϱϴͲϮϰͲϴ
ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞ
ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZͲϭϬ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ͘ 
/ĂŵŽƉƉŽƐĞĚƚŽŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 

ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^Ͳϭ
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZͲϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇĂƚŶŽ
ŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚϯ͘ ϱĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘ dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘ 
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŝƚŚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^ͲϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͘ 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ
ĞŶƐŝƚǇͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ͲϭĂŶĚZͲϭϬŝƐZͲϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐĂƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘ 

dƌĂĸĐͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂϱϮͲŚŽŵĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇ
ĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞŚĞĂǀǇƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞǁŚŝůĞĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐ
ĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬƚŚĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂůƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞͲĨĂŵŝůǇ
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘ 
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚ Ğǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͘ 
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ͕ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ ĂŶĚŚĞĂůƚŚ͘ 
dƌĂĸĐͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ

x ZͲϭϴĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 

,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨϮͲƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ ϮϮͲϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ͘ 
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶͲƐƚƌĞĞƚͲĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞͲƐƚŽƌǇ;ŵŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 

,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽĂϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘ 
,ĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞͲƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚĞŵŝƐƐŝǀŝƚǇĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶͲĨŽƌǁĂƌĚďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐϮϬϮϭ
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ͘ tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
ƐƵŶŽīƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽīďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 

>ĂƐƚůǇ͕ ĂƐŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚƚŚĞŽŶůǇϮ
ŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW͘ 

ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ĂŵŽŶƚŚůĂƚĞƌ͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂů
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ͘ 

,ĞƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞĐŽƵůĚĚŽ
ƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
ĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 

,ĞŚĂƐŶŽƚůŝƐƚĞŶĞĚƚŽ͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ ƐĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ͘ ,ŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘ dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 

ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ͕ 

EĂƟǀŝĚĂĚdĂƉŝĂ
Natividad Tapia  
ϮϬϭϱtƌĂŶŚĂŵ>ĂŶĞWŚŽĞŶŝǆϴϱϬϰϭ



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
Z-58-24-8
D D <del2034848@gmail.com>
Wed 7/3/2024 5:06 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (83 KB)
DD Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8.pdf;
Hi Samuel,£
Here is my opposition letter. Also, I wanted to include£that a lot of people are
continuously£doing turn arounds on our driveway and it is getting very annoying.
Thank you.
Delilah Delgai
7/8/24, 1:43 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAONxZOXAefJKm%2FOexTz…
1/1

07/03/2024, 
 My name is Delilah Delgai and I live at 7711 S. 20th Drive Phoenix AZ 85041. I am wriƟng in 
 opposiƟon to the applicaƟon for development and rezoning case number  Z-58-24-8  submiƩed 
 by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum 
 density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus). 
 I am opposed to mulƟple issues with this proposed development. 
 Density- problems 
 ●  This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
 properƟes. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
 more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
 homes) in addiƟon to ADUs. 
 o  This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at tradiƟonal 
 <=3.5) and an inappropriate transiƟon density for all east and southern neighbors 
 with homes on S-1 property. 
 o  It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densiƟes 
 towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
 density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
 Density- soluƟons 
 ●  Appropriate density transiƟon between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
 acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construcƟon but with appropriate accommodaƟons 
 for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will sƟll further the city’s housing 
 goals and provide addiƟonal beneﬁts to the surrounding communiƟes as outlined below. 
 Traﬃc- problems 
 ●  In relaƟon to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
 neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suﬀers severely 
 from diﬃcult entrance/exit due to the heavy traﬃc on Baseline while also directly across 
 from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traﬃc than a 
 neighborhood. 
 o  According to the ITE Trip GeneraƟon Report 10  th  EdiƟon  ( Maricopa’s Traﬃc 
 Impact Study Manual  references the ITE report as its  guideline), a single-family 
 house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traﬃc to an 
 already boƩlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
 including traﬃc potenƟally generated by ADU residents. 
 ●  No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
 for the foreseeable future and waiƟng to see if that will eventually become an opƟon to 
 alleviate traﬃc issues is not good planning. 
 ●  Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traﬃc congesƟon potenƟally 
 impacƟng safety, property, and health. 
 Traﬃc- soluƟons

●  R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traﬃc for the exisƟng 
 neighborhood. 
 ●  Traﬃc impact study and recommendaƟons sƟpulated before any approvals for 
 rezoning/development. 
 Housing design- problems 
 ●  The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
 compaƟble with the recommendaƟons of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
 South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
 majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story. 
 ●  The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
 other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
 designs. 
 Housing design- soluƟons 
 ●  Limit construcƟon to single-story (most important). 
 ●  Require deep front porches. 
 ●  Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
 ●  Require more architectural variety and placement/orientaƟon on lots. 
 Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
 ●  The current sƟpulaƟons list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
 current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
 each lot does nothing to miƟgate the heat island eﬀect that will be exacerbated from 
 that much roof area absorbing and radiaƟng heat. 
 Heat island/climate, trees/shade - soluƟons 
 ●  Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
 ●  Require use of available SRP ﬂood irrigaƟon to provide added cooling. 
 ●  Require high  emissivity  and high SRI rooﬁng materials. 
 ●  SƟpulate the most conservaƟon-forward building pracƟces for housing insulaƟon and 
 heat island miƟgaƟon currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s  2021 
 Climate AcƟon Plan . We don’t have Ɵme for “business  as usual” to curb climate change. 
 ●  Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properƟes to help keep the 
 sun oﬀ the building walls and shade the ground. 
 ●  Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
 based on the lot orientaƟon) to also keep the sun oﬀ building walls. 
 Lastly, as of this wriƟng, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no eﬀort to work with any of the 
 neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
 meeƟngs he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
 appear before the SMVPC. 
 At the second meeƟng, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
 neighbors who conﬁrmed they did not receive a second meeƟng noƟce leƩer in Ɵme to aƩend. 
 He told the neighbors who were able to aƩend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeƟng, but no such meeƟng has been 
 called. 
 He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
 plan is completely incompaƟble and insensiƟve to the surrounding neighbors. This applicaƟon 
 should not move forward. 
 Respecƞully, 
 Delilah Delgai 
 7711 S. 20th Drive 
 Phoenix AZ, 85041

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
Z-58-24-8
Lorenzo Gonzales <guad6604@outlook.com>
Wed 7/3/2024 1:37 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (6 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8[8370].docx;
Sent from Mail [go.microsoŌ.com] for Windows
7/5/24, 2:23 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADlyoCEcD9JFpN1i%2B%2BJ…
1/1

7/3/24 
My name is Lorenzo Gonzales] and I live at 7815 S 20th Dr. I am writing in opposition to the 
application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submitted by John Fox, which 
proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum density allowed for R-
10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
• This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
homes) in addition to ADUs.  
• This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional 
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern 
neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
• It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities 
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density- solutions 
• Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations 
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing 
goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding communities as outlined below.  
 
Traffic- problems 
• In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suffers severely 
from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while also directly across 
from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a 
neighborhood.  
• According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic 
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an 
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.  
• No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to 
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning.  
• Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially 
impacting safety, property, and health. 
Traffic- solutions

• R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing 
neighborhood. 
• Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for 
rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design- problems 
• The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.  
• The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
designs. 
Housing design- solutions 
• Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
• Require deep front porches. 
• Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
• Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
• The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from 
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions 
• Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
• Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling. 
• Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials. 
• Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and 
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021 
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change. 
• Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the 
sun off the building walls and shade the ground. 
• Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls. 
 
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the 
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
appear before the SMVPC.  
 
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend. 
He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting has been 
called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application 
should not move forward. 
 
Respectfully, 
Lorenzo Gonzales 
 
7815 S 20th Dr. Phx AZ 85041

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
Wyndham SQ: Rezoning Hearing
Melissa Sunia <joeysparents@msn.com>
Wed 7/3/2024 3:28 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Cc:Michelle Teodoro <michelle.teodoro@associaarizona.com>
1 attachments (21 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8_MS.docx;
Please see the attached letter.£
R,
Melissa Sunia
2022 West Branham Lane
Phoenix, AZ 85041
7/8/24, 1:39 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAN4%2BZQe89E2CieZFCyrvn…
1/1

7/3/24 
My name is Melissa Sunia and I live at 2022 West Branham Lane. I ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽ
ƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ 
ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚly S-ϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞŵĂǆŝŵƵŵĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚ
ĨŽƌZ-10͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ.  
/ĂŵŽƉƉŽƐĞĚƚŽ ŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ.  
 
Density- problems 
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-ϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇĂƚŶŽ
ŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚϯ͘ ϱĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͘ dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚ ĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with ŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ S-ϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͘ 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
density areas. (ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-ϭĂŶĚZ-ϭϬŝƐZ-ϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐ ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐĂƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚďĞůŽǁ.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- problems 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ ŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂϱϮ-ŚŽŵĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇ
ĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ ǁŚŝůĞĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐ
ĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂů ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂsŝŶŐůĞ-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬƚƌŝƉƐ ƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͘  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ͕ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͕ and health. 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ

x Z-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚ ďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 
 
Housing design- problems 
x dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞs ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ͘  
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-street-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
Housing design- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- problems 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘  
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ - ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚemissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-ĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐ ĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
sun Žī ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ ƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽī ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 
 
>ĂƐƚůǇ͕ ĂƐŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚƚŚĞŽŶůǇ2 
ŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.  
 
ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ĂŵŽŶƚŚlater͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂů
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽ ĂƩĞŶĚ.

,ĞƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞĐŽƵůĚĚŽ
ƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞthese ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
ĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
,ĞŚĂƐŶŽƚůŝƐƚĞŶĞĚƚŽ͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ. HŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ͕ 
Melissa Sunia 
 
2022 West Branham Lane

07/03/2024, 
 My name is Shangel CasƟllo and I live at 7711 S. 20th Drive Phoenix AZ 85041. I am wriƟng in 
 opposiƟon to the applicaƟon for development and rezoning case number  Z-58-24-8  submiƩed 
 by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum 
 density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus). 
 I am opposed to mulƟple issues with this proposed development. 
 Density- problems 
 ●  This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
 properƟes. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
 more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
 homes) in addiƟon to ADUs. 
 o  This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at tradiƟonal 
 <=3.5) and an inappropriate transiƟon density for all east and southern neighbors 
 with homes on S-1 property. 
 o  It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densiƟes 
 towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
 density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
 Density- soluƟons 
 ●  Appropriate density transiƟon between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
 acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construcƟon but with appropriate accommodaƟons 
 for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will sƟll further the city’s housing 
 goals and provide addiƟonal beneﬁts to the surrounding communiƟes as outlined below. 
 Traﬃc- problems 
 ●  In relaƟon to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
 neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suﬀers severely 
 from diﬃcult entrance/exit due to the heavy traﬃc on Baseline while also directly across 
 from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traﬃc than a 
 neighborhood. 
 o  According to the ITE Trip GeneraƟon Report 10  th  EdiƟon  ( Maricopa’s Traﬃc 
 Impact Study Manual  references the ITE report as its  guideline), a single-family 
 house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traﬃc to an 
 already boƩlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
 including traﬃc potenƟally generated by ADU residents. 
 ●  No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
 for the foreseeable future and waiƟng to see if that will eventually become an opƟon to 
 alleviate traﬃc issues is not good planning. 
 ●  Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traﬃc congesƟon potenƟally 
 impacƟng safety, property, and health. 
 Traﬃc- soluƟons

●  R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traﬃc for the exisƟng 
 neighborhood. 
 ●  Traﬃc impact study and recommendaƟons sƟpulated before any approvals for 
 rezoning/development. 
 Housing design- problems 
 ●  The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
 compaƟble with the recommendaƟons of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
 South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
 majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story. 
 ●  The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
 other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
 designs. 
 Housing design- soluƟons 
 ●  Limit construcƟon to single-story (most important). 
 ●  Require deep front porches. 
 ●  Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
 ●  Require more architectural variety and placement/orientaƟon on lots. 
 Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
 ●  The current sƟpulaƟons list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
 current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
 each lot does nothing to miƟgate the heat island eﬀect that will be exacerbated from 
 that much roof area absorbing and radiaƟng heat. 
 Heat island/climate, trees/shade - soluƟons 
 ●  Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
 ●  Require use of available SRP ﬂood irrigaƟon to provide added cooling. 
 ●  Require high  emissivity  and high SRI rooﬁng materials. 
 ●  SƟpulate the most conservaƟon-forward building pracƟces for housing insulaƟon and 
 heat island miƟgaƟon currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s  2021 
 Climate AcƟon Plan . We don’t have Ɵme for “business  as usual” to curb climate change. 
 ●  Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properƟes to help keep the 
 sun oﬀ the building walls and shade the ground. 
 ●  Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
 based on the lot orientaƟon) to also keep the sun oﬀ building walls. 
 Lastly, as of this wriƟng, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no eﬀort to work with any of the 
 neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
 meeƟngs he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
 appear before the SMVPC. 
 At the second meeƟng, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
 neighbors who conﬁrmed they did not receive a second meeƟng noƟce leƩer in Ɵme to aƩend. 
 He told the neighbors who were able to aƩend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeƟng, but no such meeƟng has been 
 called. 
 He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
 plan is completely incompaƟble and insensiƟve to the surrounding neighbors. This applicaƟon 
 should not move forward. 
 Respecƞully, 
 Shangel CasƟllo 
 7711 S. 20th Drive 
 Phoenix AZ, 85041

07/05/2024 
My name is Dawn Smith and I live at 7816 South 20th Lane, Phoenix Az 85041͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶ
ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ 
ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚly S-1 property to the maximum 
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZ-10͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ.  
I am opposed to ŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐproposed development.  
 
Density- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-10 property at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with homes on S-1 property. 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-ϭĂŶĚZ-ϭϬŝƐZ-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚappropriate ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐ ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐĂƐŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚďĞůŽw.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ exit ŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂϱϮ-home 
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇ
ĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ ǁŚŝůĞĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐ
ĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂů ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉŽƌƚĂƐŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞ-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬtrips per ĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͘  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨety, property, and health. 
dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ

x Z-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚ ďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 
 
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶ- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x The development proposes ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶƚŽƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞǀŝĞǁƐƚŽ
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐhomes͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-story.  
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-street-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
,ŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞƐŝŐŶ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Limit ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ trees/shade- ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐ 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘  
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ - ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚemissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-Ĩorward ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
heat island miƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
sun Žī ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ to also keep the sun Žī ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐ͘ 
 
>ĂƐƚůǇ͕ ĂƐŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚthe only 2 
ŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚ
ĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.  
 
ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ĂŵŽŶƚŚlater͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂů
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ.

,ĞƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞĐŽƵůĚĚŽ
ƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞthese ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
ĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
He has not listened to͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ. His development 
ƉůĂŶŝƐĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ, 
Dawn Smith 
 
7816 S 20th Ln 
Phoenix, Az 85041

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
Oppose the Zoning Change Filed by John Fox - Case # Z-58-24-8
Fy M <fym2429@gmail.com>
Thu 7/4/2024 4:57 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (19 KB)
Oppose Zoning Change,-case # Z-58-24-8.docx;
Good morning Samuel Rogers,
Please see attached for the opposition letter.
I, Funyung£Mon, the resident and homeowner at 8115 S 21st Drive, Phoenix, AZ
85041. I missed the past two meetings because the meeting notice was mailed out
very£late. When I received the notice, the meeting date was already£past.
Respectfully,
Funyung£Mon,
8115 S 21st Dr, Phoenix, AZ 85041
7/8/24, 2:31 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAALQIdTpXuJIiYkKB6uKHaU…
1/1

07-04-24 
My name is Funyung Mon and I live at 8115 S 21st Dr, Phoenix, AZ 85041 for more than 15 
years. I am writing in opposition to the application for development and rezoning case number 
Z-58-24-8 submitted by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property 
to the maximum density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
x 
This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
homes) in addition to ADUs.  
x 
This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional 
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern 
neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
x 
It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities 
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density- solutions 
x 
Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations 
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing 
goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding communities as outlined 
below.  
 
Traffic- problems 
x 
In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suffers severely 
from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while also directly 
across from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than 
a neighborhood.  
x 
According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic 
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an 
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.  
x 
No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to 
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning.  
x 
Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially 
impacting safety, property, and health. 
Traffic- solutions

x 
R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing 
neighborhood. 
x 
Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for 
rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design- problems 
x 
The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.  
x 
The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
designs. 
Housing design- solutions 
x 
Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
x 
Require deep front porches. 
x 
Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
x 
Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
x 
The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with 
the current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing 
footprint on each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be 
exacerbated from that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions 
x 
Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
x 
Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling. 
x 
Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials. 
x 
Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and 
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021 
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change. 
x 
Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the 
sun off the building walls and shade the ground. 
x 
Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls. 
 
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the 
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
appear before the SMVPC.  
 
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend. 
He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting has been 
called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application 
should not move forward. 
 
Respectfully, 
 
Funyung Mon 
The homeowner/resident at 8115 S 21st Drive, Phoenix, AZ 85041

Gabriel Betancourt 
7823 S. 20th drive 
Phoenix. AZ 85041 
 
For: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department, Samuel Rogers, John Fox 
In regard to zoning change application #Z-58-24-8 
                   
My name is Gabriel Betancourt, I am the property owner at 7823 S. 20th drive and have been 
here since June of 2009. Please accept this letter as testimony of concern against the rezoning 
proposal near the Wyndham Square community. The is a small, semiprivate neighborhood that 
is only accessible through a private cul-de-sac street. This is one of the main reasons that 
attracted me to purchase my home. I know many families in the neighborhood and keep an eye 
out for each other. I understand local traffic patterns, events and community attitude towards 
our small neighborhood. Approval of the rezoning application will allow entrance to a new 
residential development via OUR neighborhood and disrupt our peace of mind tremendously. 
We can anticipate two years of construction, an increase in traffic during and after. Deliveries, 
school buses, city services, and emergency response time will increase, and the peace/love of 
our little neighborhood will decrease.  The Wyndham Square community should not carry the 
burden and aftermath for a landlocked development project. We should not give up the reason 
why we chose to live here and why we stay.  
 
 
 
Please feel free to reach me anytime at betancourtfamily@yahoo.com

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
Opposition letter for case Z-58-24-8 to be heard at SMVPC meeting July 9
H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>
Sat 7/6/2024 1:42 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
July 5, 2024
To the SMVPC,
My name is Jewel Clark and my husband and I live at 2020 W. South Mountain Ave. I am wriƟng in
opposiƟon to the applicaƟon for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submiƩed by John
Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum density allowed for R-
10, which is 4.5 (bonus).
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.
£
Density- problems
x        This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R1-10 properties at no
more than standard 3.5 or less density. This development proposes a bonus density of
4.5 (20 homes) in addition to ADUs.
o   This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all eastern and southern
neighbors with homes on S-1 property.
o   It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17)
o   Allowing such inappropriate density is unprecedented for all approved single-
family development in the immediate area.
Density- solutions
x        Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R1-10 is R1-18 or approx. 2 houses per
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations for
the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing goals
and provide additional benefits including mitigating heat and preserving local character
for the surrounding communities.
£
Traffic- problems
7/8/24, 2:44 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKtVh%2BlNDTJEmAsoIgM5q…
1/3

x        In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through Wyndham Square,
a 52-home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already
suffers severely from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while also
directly across from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater
traffic than a neighborhood.
o   According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic Impact
Study Manual [maricopa.gov] references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-
family house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not including
traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.
x        No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning and does nothing to alleviate immediate
problems.
x        Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially
impacting safety, property, and health.
Traffic- solutions
x        R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing
neighborhood.
x        Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for
rezoning/development.
£
Housing design- problems
x        The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the majority of
the surrounding homes, which are single-story. All single-family homes approved in the
surrounding area since 2018 have stipulated single-story with the exception of Larkey
Estates, which was originally approved in 2004. That said, all homes along 20th Ave.
adjacent to the proposed project are single story, as are other established developments
such as the nearby Silva Estates and Magdelana Estates.
x        The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual
designs.
Housing design- solutions
x        Limit construction to single-story (most important).
x        Require deep front and back porches.
x        Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street.
x        Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots.
£
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems
x        The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from that
much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions
7/8/24, 2:44 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKtVh%2BlNDTJEmAsoIgM5q…
2/3

x        Require lower density zoning and more open space.
x        Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling.
x        Require high emissivity [en.wikipedia.org] and high SRI roofing materials.
x        Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change.
x        Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the
sun off the building walls and shade the ground.
x        Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls.
£
This proposal has apparently been planned since last year since the elevations are dated
September 2023 and the first plan review was scheduled for November 2023. Yet Mr. Fox sent
out the first meeting notice, with less than the 10 days required lead time, to the neighbors for
May 18, 2024. As of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it
appear before the SMVPC.
£
At the second neighborhood meeting on June 15, the plan had not changed and there were
several neighbors who later confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in
time to attend. His colleague told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back
and see what he could do to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but
no such meeting has been called.
£
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application
should not move forward.
£
Respectfully,
Jewel Clark
£
2020 W. South Mountain Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85041
£
£
--£
£ H. Jewel Clark
££hjewelclark@fastmail.com
7/8/24, 2:44 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKtVh%2BlNDTJEmAsoIgM5q…
3/3

07-04-24
My name is Lucille Heine and I live at 2115 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, AZ 85041. I am writing in
opposition to the application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submitted
by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum
density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).
I am opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.
Density- problems
●
This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20
homes) in addition to ADUs.
o
This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern
neighbors with homes on S-1 property.
o
It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17)
Density- solutions
●
Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing
goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding communities as outlined below.
Traffic- problems
●
In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suffers severely
from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while also directly across
from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a
neighborhood.
o
According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.
●
No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning.
●
Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially
impacting safety, property, and health.
Traffic- solutions

●
R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing
neighborhood.
●
Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for
rezoning/development.
Housing design- problems
●
The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.
●
The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual
designs.
Housing design- solutions
●
Limit construction to single-story (most important).
●
Require deep front porches.
●
Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street.
●
Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems
●
The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions
●
Require lower density zoning and more open space.
●
Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling.
●
Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials.
●
Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change.
●
Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the
sun off the building walls and shade the ground.
●
Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls.
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any of the
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2
meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it
appear before the SMVPC.
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend.
He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he could do

to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting has been
called.
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application
should not move forward.
Respectfully,
Lucille Heine
2115 W. Harwell Rd
Phoenix, AZ 85041

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
Z-58-24
Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Sat 7/6/2024 12:20 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (739 KB)
Petition of opposition.pdf;
7/8/24, 2:41 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPhQ2h56IUlCn4%2Fe%2Fa…
1/1

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
Letter of opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
ameliagoudeau@gmail.com <ameliagoudeau@gmail.com>
Mon 7/8/2024 10:45 AM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (149 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8.pdf;
Mr. Samuel Rogers,
Please find the attached letter of opposition for zoning case number Z-58-24-8.
 ~Amelia Goudeau~
# 602-460-5545
The mind is everything, what you think you become!
7/8/24, 2:52 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABRHQsTBfUvcvV1sa0utpU4…
1/1

July 8, 2024 
My name is Amelia Goudeau and I live at 2013 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, Az 85041. I am wriƟng in 
opposiƟon to the applicaƟon for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-8 submiƩed 
by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the maximum 
density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
I am opposed to mulƟple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
x This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
properƟes. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 property at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
homes) in addiƟon to ADUs.  
o This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at tradiƟonal 
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transiƟon density for all east and southern neighbors 
with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densiƟes 
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density- soluƟons 
x Appropriate density transiƟon between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construcƟon but with appropriate accommodaƟons 
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will sƟll further the city’s housing 
goals and provide addiƟonal beneﬁts to the surrounding communiƟes as outlined below.  
 
Traﬃc- problems 
x In relaƟon to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-home 
neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already suﬀers severely 
from diﬃcult entrance/exit due to the heavy traﬃc on Baseline while also directly across 
from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees greater traﬃc than a 
neighborhood.  
o According to the ITE Trip GeneraƟon Report 10th EdiƟon (Maricopa’s Traﬃc 
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traﬃc to an 
already boƩlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
including traﬃc potenƟally generated by ADU residents.  
x No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
for the foreseeable future and waiƟng to see if that will eventually become an opƟon to 
alleviate traﬃc issues is not good planning.  
x Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traﬃc congesƟon potenƟally 
impacƟng safety, property, and health. 
Traﬃc- soluƟons

x R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traﬃc for the exisƟng 
neighborhood. 
x Traﬃc impact study and recommendaƟons sƟpulated before any approvals for 
rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design- problems 
x The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
compaƟble with the recommendaƟons of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.  
x The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
designs. 
Housing design- soluƟons 
x Limit construcƟon to single-story (most important). 
x Require deep front porches. 
x Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
x Require more architectural variety and placement/orientaƟon on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
x The current sƟpulaƟons list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
each lot does nothing to miƟgate the heat island eﬀect that will be exacerbated from 
that much roof area absorbing and radiaƟng heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - soluƟons 
x Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
x Require use of available SRP ﬂood irrigaƟon to provide added cooling. 
x Require high emissivity and high SRI rooﬁng materials. 
x SƟpulate the most conservaƟon-forward building pracƟces for housing insulaƟon and 
heat island miƟgaƟon currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021 
Climate AcƟon Plan. We don’t have Ɵme for “business as usual” to curb climate change. 
x Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properƟes to help keep the 
sun oﬀ the building walls and shade the ground. 
x Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
based on the lot orientaƟon) to also keep the sun oﬀ building walls. 
 
Lastly, as of this wriƟng, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no eﬀort to work with any of the 
neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 
meeƟngs he called to present this plan to the surrounding property owners before having it 
appear before the SMVPC.  
 
At the second meeƟng, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
neighbors who conﬁrmed they did not receive a second meeƟng noƟce leƩer in Ɵme to aƩend.

He told the neighbors who were able to aƩend that he would go back and see what he could do 
to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeƟng, but no such meeƟng has been 
called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
plan is completely incompaƟble and insensiƟve to the surrounding neighbors. This applicaƟon 
should not move forward. 
 
Respecƞully, 
Amelia Goudeau 
 
2013 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, Az 85041

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Mike Josic <mikejosic@gmail.com>
Mon 7/8/2024 1:12 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (62 KB)
Mike Josic Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8.pdf;
Dear Mr. Rodgers,
Please add my letter and voice to oppose the proposed development and zoning change for
case number££Z-58-24-8.
Please contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter.
Thank£you,
Mike Josic
2020 W. South Mountain Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85041
480-967-6644
7/8/24, 3:29 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABT3bnGjhpBEuvww07X2%2…
1/1




MAKAHFHJ
*#*($/
8*)-);

8)($.
$#'*.$)
*6)/#+-*+-/8)'$5/HFHF<*4/#
*4)/$)5;#*)$7;NKFJG<

(6-$1)"$)*++*.$1*)/*/#++'$1*)*-5'*+()/)-9*)$)".)4(-AKNAHJAN.4($3
8*#)*7;6#$#+-*+*../*-9*)J<K-.*4--)/'8AG+-*+-/8/*/#(7$(4().$/8''*6*-
AGF;6#$#$.J<KB*)4.C<

(*++*.*-(4'1+'-.*)./*/#$.+-*+*.5'*+()/<

).$/8A+-*'(.
• #$.+-*+-/8$.*--*)H.$.B./).*4/#C8./'$.##*(.*)AG+-*+-1.<#
)*-/#)6./.$.-*--8#*(.*)AGF+-*+-1./)*(*-/#)./)-I<K).$/8<
#$.5'*+()/+-*+*..*)4.).$/8*J<KBHF#*(.C$)$1*)/*.<
• #$.).$/8$.$)*).$./)/6$/#/#.4--*4)$)"5'*+')B//-$1*)'TSI<KC))
$)++-*+-$//-).$1*)).$/8*-''./).*4/#-))$"#*-.6$/##*(.*)AG+-*+-/8<
• 
/$.)*/'$")6$/#/#$*
*)/)')6#$#-*(().'*6-).$1./*6-.*4/#

*4)/-&)"-4').$/8./+./6)'*6-)#$"#-).$/8-.<B$*
*)/)
');+"<GMC

).$/8A.*'41*).
• ++-*+-$/).$/8/-).$1*)/6)AG)AGF$.AGN*-++-*7<H#*4..+--*-H<IJ6$/#
*)4.<''*6$)"*)./-41*)4/6$/#++-*+-$/*((*1*).*-/#)5$-*)()/)
.4--*4)$)")$"#*-#**.6$''.1''4-/#-/#$/8=.#*4.$)""*'.)+-*5$$1*)')/.
$)'4$)"($1"1)"#/)+-.-5$)"'*'#-/-/*/#.4--*4)$)"*((4)$1.<

- A+-*'(.
• 
)-'1*)/*$)++-*+-$/).$/8;/#*)'8)/-)@7$/$./#-*4"#8)#(,4-;KHA#*(
)$"#*-#**/*/#)*-/#*)/*.'$)<#)$"#*-#**'-8.4-..5-'8-*($ 4'/
)/-)@7$/4/*/##58/- *).'$)6#$''.*$-/'8-*..-*(*((-$'
.#*++$)")/-)/-)@7$/;6#$#.."-/-/- /#))$"#*-#**<
*-$)"/*/#
-$+)-1*)+*-/GF$1*)B
-$*+=.- 
(+//48

)4'--)./#
-+*-/.$/."4$'$)C;.$)"'A($'8#*4.")-/.GF/-$+.+-
8*)5-"<#/6$''$)-./- /*)'-8*3')&)$"#*-#**8HFF/-$+.
+-8*)5-";)*/$)'4$)"/- +*/)1''8")-/8-.$)/.<
• *.*4/#*4)7$/@)/-))*4)/*)@/#')$.4--)/'8$)"'$5*)*-/#
*-.'4/4-)6$1)"/*.$/#/6$''5)/4''8*()*+1*)/*''5$//- $..4.
$.)*/"**+'))$)")*.)*/#$)"/*''5$/$(($/+-*'(.<
• $-)(-")85#$'.6$''.4%//*/#.(/- *)".1*)+*/)1''8$(+1)"./8;
+-*+-/8;)#'/#<

- A.*'41*).
• AGN).$/8BGF#*(.C/*-4/#*5-''$(+/*)/- *-/#7$.1)")$"#*-#**<
• - $(+/./48)-*(()1*)..1+4'/*-)8++-*5'.*--9*)$)"@5'*+()/<






	*4.$)".$")A+-*'(.
• #5'*+()/+-*+*..)4)&)*6))4(-*HA./*-8#*(.;6#$#-)*/*(+1'6$/#/#
-*(()1*).*/#$*
*)/)')/*+-.-55$6./**4/#
*4)/$)B$*
*)/)');
+".<HHAHIC)-$)*).$./)/6$/#/#5./(%*-$/8*/#.4--*4)$)"#*(.;6#$#-.$)"'A
./*-8<
• #.$")-.#5)*/$)*-+*-/+*-#.;)*)A./-/A$)""-")/-).*-*/#-.$")/4-
'()/.-*(()8/#$*
*)/)')$)/#$-*)+/4'.$").<

	*4.$)".$")A.*'41*).
• $($/*)./-41*)/*.$)"'A./*-8B(*./$(+*-/)/C<
• ,4$-+-*)/+*-#.<
• ,4$-.*(.$")./*$)*-+*-/"-"./#/*)*//#./-/<
• ,4$-(*--#$//4-'5-$/8)+'()/@*-$)/1*)*)'*/.<

	/$.')@'$(/;/-.@.#A+-*'(.
• #4--)/.1+4'1*).'$.//-.*)$/#-.$**)-/.$6'&./**(+'86$/#/#4--)//-
).#(./-+');#*65-;''*6$)"4+/*LFR#*4.$)"**/+-$)/*)#'*/*.)*/#$)"/*
($1"//##/$.')//#/6$''7-/-*(/#/(4#-**-.*-$)")
-$1)"#/<
	/$.')@'$(/;/-.@.#A.*'41*).
• ,4$-'*6-).$/89*)$)")(*-*+).+<
• ,4$-4.*5$''!**$--$"1*)/*+-*5$**'$)"<
• ,4$-#$"#($..$5$/8)#$"#
-**)"(/-$'.<
• 1+4'//#(*./*).-51*)A*-6-4$'$)"+-1.*-#*4.$)"$).4'1*))#/$.')
($1"1*)4--)/'86$/#$)/#$/8*.)'$")6$/#/#$/8=.HFHG'$(/1*)')<
*)=/#51(*->4.$)...4.4'?/*4-'$(/#)"<
• ,4$-.#/-.*)/#./;.*4/#)6./.$.*''+-*+-1./*#'+&+/#.4)*/#
4$'$)"6''.).#/#"-*4)<
• ,4$-+./-*)/)&+*-#.B6#$#++-+-*($))/'8./@6./$)".*)/#
'*/*-$)/1*)C/*'.*&+/#.4)*4$'$)"6''.<

#$.+-*+*.'#.++-)/'8)+')).$)'./8-.$)/#'51*).-/+/(-HFHI)
/#-./+')-5$66..#4'*-*5(-HFHI</
-<*7.)/*4//#-./(1)")*1/*/#
)$"#*-.*-
8GN;HFHJ<.*/#$.6-$1)";
-<*7#.(.*'4/'8)**-//*6*-&6$/#)8*/#
)$"#*-.)-../#*)-).'$./*5;6#$###.#-$)+-.*)//#*)'8H(1)".#
''/*+-.)//#$.+')/*/#.4--*4)$)"+-*+-/8*6)-.*-#5$)"$/++-*-/#
<
//#.*)(1)";*)4)GK;/#+')#)*/#)")/#-6-.5-')$"#*-.6#*
*)-(/#8$)*/-$5.*)(1)")*1'3-$)1(/*3)<	$.*''"4/*'/#
)$"#*-.6#*6-'/*3)/#/#6*4'"*&).6#/#*4'*/*$)*-+*-//#.
*)-).*-/#4'8O
(1)";4/)*.4#(1)"#.)''<

	#.)*/'$./)/*;(4#'../*);)8*/#)$"#*-=.*)-).<	$.5'*+()/+')$.*(+'/'8
$)*(+1')$).).$15/*/#.4--*4)$)")$"#*-.<#$.++'$1*).#*4')*/(*5*-6-<

.+04''8;

$&*.$
HFHF<*4/#
*4)/$)5;#*)$7;NKFJG

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
Z-58-24-8
Ravi Sharma <ravi6161sharma@gmail.com>
Mon 7/8/2024 2:57 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Cc:Ravi Sharma <ravi6161sharma@gmail.com>;H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>
1 attachments (20 KB)
Opposition letter- Z-58-24-8 (1).docx;
Dear Mr. Rogers,
We are attaching a letter to register opposition to the proposed development being discussed
tomorrow in case number Z-58-24-8.££
Regards,
Ravi & Snigdha Sharma
7/8/24, 3:35 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADN4YVKsxwJCoCyS87P%2…
1/1

July 8, 2024 
Our names are Ravi & Snigdha Sharma and we live at 8012 S 20th Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85041. We 
are writing in opposition to the application for development and rezoning case number Z-58-24-
8 submitted by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of currently S-1 property to the 
maximum density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
We are opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density - problems 
x This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on S-1 
properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 properties at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a bonus density of 4.5 (20 
homes) in addition to ADUs.  
o This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at traditional 
<=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and southern 
neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower densities 
towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between lower and higher 
density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density - solutions 
x Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses per 
acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate accommodations 
for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still further the city’s housing 
goals and provide additional benefits including mitigating heat and preserving local 
character to the surrounding communities. 
 
Traffic- problems 
x In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through Wyndham Square, 
a 52-home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood already 
suffers severely from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on Baseline while 
also directly across from a commercial shopping center entrance/exit, which sees 
greater traffic than a neighborhood.  
o According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s Traffic 
Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a single-family 
house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will increase traffic to an 
already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips per day on average, not 
including traffic potentially generated by ADU residents.  
x No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently being lived on 
for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will eventually become an option to 
alleviate traffic issues is not good planning and does nothing to alleviate immediate 
problems.  
x Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion potentially 
impacting safety, property, and health.

Traffic - solutions 
x R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing 
neighborhood. 
x Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals for 
rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design - problems 
x The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which are not 
compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to preserve views to 
South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are inconsistent with the vast 
majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-story.  
x The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage entrances or 
other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana Plan in their conceptual 
designs. 
 
Housing design - solutions 
x Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
x Require deep front porches. 
x Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
x Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - problems 
x The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply with the 
current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% housing footprint on 
each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that will be exacerbated from 
that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions 
x Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
x Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling. 
x Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials. 
x Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation and 
heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the city’s 2021 
Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to curb climate change. 
x Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help keep the 
sun off the building walls and shade the ground. 
x Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west facing 
based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls. 
 
This proposal has apparently been planned since last year since the elevations are dated 
September 2023 and the first plan review was scheduled for November 2023. Yet Mr. Fox sent 
out the first meeting notice to the neighbors for May 18, 2024. As of this writing, Mr. Fox has 
made absolutely no effort to work with any of the neighbors and address the concerns listed

above, which he has heard in person at the only 2 meetings he called to present this plan to the 
surrounding property owners before having it appear before the SMVPC.  
At the second meeting, on June 15, the plan had not changed and there were several neighbors 
who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to attend. His 
colleague told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see what he 
could do to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but no such meeting 
has been called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His development 
plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding neighbors. This application 
should not move forward. 
 
Respectfully, 
 
Ravi & Snigdha Sharma 
 
8012 S 20th Ave. 
Phoenix, AZ, 85041

07-09-2024 
My name is Stephanie Bell and I live at 8020 s. 20th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85041͘ /ĂŵǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶ
ŽƉƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐĐĂƐĞŶƵŵďĞƌZ-58-24-8 ƐƵďŵŝƩĞĚ 
ďǇ:ŽŚŶ&Žǆ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞǌŽŶĞϰ͘ ϱĂĐƌĞƐŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚly S-ϭƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇƚŽƚŚĞŵĂǆŝŵƵŵ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂůůŽǁĞĚĨŽƌZ-10͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐϰ͘ ϱ;ďŽŶƵƐͿ.  
I am opposed to ŵƵůƟƉůĞŝƐƐƵĞƐǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐproposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
x dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝƐďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚŽŶϮƐŝĚĞƐ;ĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚͿďǇĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŚŽŵĞƐŽŶ^-1 
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘ dŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐĂƌĞďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďǇŚŽŵĞƐŽŶZ-ϭϬƉƌŽƉĞƌƟes at no 
more than standard 3.5 density. dŚŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂďŽŶƵƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϰ͘ ϱ;ϮϬ
ŚŽŵĞƐͿŝŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƚŽhƐ͘  
o dŚŝƐĚĞŶƐŝƚǇŝƐŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚůĂŶĚ;ĂƚƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂů
фсϯ͘ ϱͿĂŶĚĂŶŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚƌĂŶƐŝƟŽŶĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĨŽƌĂůůĞĂƐƚĂŶĚƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
with homes on S-1 property. 
o /ƚŝƐŶŽƚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ ǁŚŝĐŚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚƐůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƟĞƐ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐ^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬĂŶĚŐƌĂĚƵĂůĚĞŶƐŝƚǇƐƚĞƉƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶůŽǁĞƌĂŶĚŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ĚĞŶƐŝƚǇĂƌĞĂƐ͘ ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐ͘ ϭϳͿ 
Density- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Appropriate density trĂŶƐŝƟŽŶďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^-ϭĂŶĚZ-ϭϬŝƐZ-ϭϴŽƌĂƉƉƌŽǆ͘ ϮŚŽƵƐĞƐƉĞƌ
ĂĐƌĞŽƌϮ͘ ϯϰǁŝƚŚďŽŶƵƐ͘ ůůŽǁŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶďƵƚǁŝƚŚappropriate ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƟŽŶƐ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐǁŝůůƐƟůůĨƵƌƚŚĞƌƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ ƐŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ
ŐŽĂůƐ ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůďĞŶĞĮƚƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ŵŝƟŐĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞƌǀŝŶŐůŽĐĂů
ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ ƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐ.  
 
dƌĂĸĐ- problems 
x /ŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽŝŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ ƚŚĞŽŶůǇĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ exit ŝƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ tǇŶĚŚĂŵ^ƋƵĂƌĞ͕ 
a 52-ŚŽŵĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƚŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽŶƚŽĂƐĞůŝŶĞZĚ͘ dŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚĂůƌĞĂĚǇ
ƐƵīĞƌƐƐĞǀĞƌĞůǇĨƌŽŵĚŝĸĐƵůƚĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ ĞǆŝƚĚƵĞƚŽƚŚĞheavy ƚƌĂĸĐŽŶĂƐĞůŝŶĞ while 
ĂůƐŽĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐƌŽƐƐĨƌŽŵĂĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĐĞŶƚĞƌĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞͬ Ğǆŝƚ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚƐĞĞƐ
ŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĸĐƚŚĂŶĂŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ.  
o ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶZĞƉŽƌƚϭϬth ĚŝƟŽŶ;DĂƌŝĐŽƉĂ͛ ƐdƌĂĸĐ
/ŵƉĂĐƚ^ƚƵĚǇDĂŶƵĂů ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĞ/dƌĞƉort as ŝƚƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞͿ͕ ĂƐŝŶŐůĞ-ĨĂŵŝůǇ 
ŚŽƵƐĞŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƐϭϬƚƌŝƉƐƉĞƌĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ dŚĂƚǁŝůůŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚƌĂĸĐƚŽĂŶ
ĂůƌĞĂĚǇďŽƩůĞŶĞĐŬĞĚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚďǇϮϬϬtrips per ĚĂǇŽŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞ͕ ŶŽƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚƌĂĸĐƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇhƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐ͘  
x EŽƐŽƵƚŚďŽƵŶĚĞǆŝƚͬ ĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞĐĂŶďĞĐŽƵŶƚĞĚŽŶďͬ ĐƚŚĞůĂŶĚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇďĞŝŶŐůŝǀĞĚŽŶ
ĨŽƌƚŚĞĨŽƌĞƐĞĞĂďůĞĨƵƚƵƌĞĂŶĚǁĂŝƟŶŐƚŽƐĞĞŝĨƚŚĂƚǁŝůůĞǀĞŶƚƵĂůůǇďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶŽƉƟŽŶƚŽ
ĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞƚƌĂĸĐŝƐƐƵĞƐŝƐŶŽƚŐŽŽĚƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽĂůůĞǀŝĂƚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞ
prŽďůĞŵƐ.  
x &ŝƌĞĂŶĚĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐĂŵĞƚƌĂĸĐĐŽŶŐĞƐƟŽŶ ƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůůǇ
ŝŵƉĂĐƟŶŐƐĂĨĞƚǇ, property, and health.

dƌĂĸĐ- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x Z-18 density ;ϭϬŚŽŵĞƐͿƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞŽǀĞƌĂůůŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĸĐĨŽƌƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƟŶŐ
ŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚ͘ 
x dƌĂĸĐŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚƵĚǇĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐƐƟƉƵůĂƚĞĚ ďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐĨŽƌ
ƌĞǌŽŶŝŶŐͬ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ 
 
Housing design- problems 
x The development proposes ĂŶƵŶŬŶŽǁŶŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ2-ƐƚŽƌǇŚŽŵĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞŶŽƚ
ĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂPlan to preserve views to 
^ŽƵƚŚDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ;ZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶ͕ ƉŐƐ͘ 22-ϮϯͿĂŶĚĂƌĞŝŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞǀĂƐƚ
ŵĂũŽƌŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐhomes͕ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƐŝŶŐůĞ-story.  
x dŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞƌƐŚĂǀĞŶŽƚŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͕ ŶŽŶ-street-ĨĂĐŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌ
other ƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚďǇƚŚĞZŝŽDŽŶƚĂŶĂWůĂŶŝŶƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů
ĚĞƐŝŐŶƐ͘ 
Housing design- ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x >ŝŵŝƚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƚŽƐŝŶŐůĞ-ƐƚŽƌǇ;mŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚͿ. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉĨƌŽŶƚƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŽŵĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĂƚĚŽŶŽƚĨĂĐĞƚŚĞstreet. 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵŽƌĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůǀĂƌŝĞƚǇ ĂŶĚƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚͬ ŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶůŽƚƐ͘ 
 
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ- problems 
x dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐƟƉƵůĂƟŽŶƐůŝƐƚƚƌĞĞƐŽŶĞŝƚŚĞƌƐŝĚĞŽĨĐŽŶĐƌĞƚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůǇǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƚƌĞĞĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͕ ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐƵƉƚŽa ϲϬйŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĨŽŽƚƉƌŝŶƚŽŶ
ĞĂĐŚůŽƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚŝŶŐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚĞīĞĐƚƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞĞǆĂĐĞƌďĂƚĞĚĨƌŽŵ
ƚŚĂƚŵƵĐŚƌŽŽĨĂƌĞĂĂďƐŽƌďŝŶŐĂŶĚƌĂĚŝĂƟŶŐŚĞĂƚ͘  
Heat islandͬ ĐůŝŵĂƚĞ͕ ƚƌĞĞƐͬ ƐŚĂĚĞ - ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞůŽǁĞƌĚĞŶƐŝƚǇǌŽŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚŵŽƌĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƵƐĞŽĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ^ZWŇŽŽĚŝƌƌŝŐĂƟŽŶƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĚĞĚĐŽŽůŝŶŐ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŚŝŐŚemissivity ĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ^Z/ƌŽŽĮŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͘ 
x ^ƟƉƵůĂƚĞƚŚĞŵŽƐƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ-Ĩorward ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĨŽƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐŝŶƐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚ
ŚĞĂƚŝƐůĂŶĚŵŝƟŐĂƟŽŶĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĐŝƚǇĐŽĚĞƐ ĂŶĚĂůŝŐŶĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇ͛ Ɛ2021 
ůŝŵĂƚĞĐƟŽŶWůĂŶ. tĞĚŽŶ͛ ƚŚĂǀĞƟŵĞĨŽƌ͞ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĂƐƵƐƵĂů͟ ƚŽĐƵƌďĐůŝŵĂƚĞĐŚĂŶŐĞ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĂĚĞƚƌĞĞƐŽŶƚŚĞĞĂƐƚ͕ ƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚǁĞƐƚƐŝĚĞƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐƚŽŚĞůƉŬĞĞƉƚŚĞ
ƐƵŶŽī ƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůůƐĂŶĚƐŚĂĚĞƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘ 
x ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĞĞƉƐĞƚĨƌŽŶƚĂŶĚďĂĐŬƉŽƌĐŚĞƐ ;ǁŚŝĐŚĂƉƉĞĂƌƉƌĞĚŽŵŝŶĂŶƚůǇĞĂƐƚͬ ǁĞƐƚĨĂĐŝŶŐ
ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŽƚŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƟŽŶͿ ƚŽĂůƐŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞƐƵŶŽī ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂůls. 
 
dŚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŚĂƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůǇďĞĞŶƉůĂŶŶĞĚƐŝŶĐĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĞůĞǀĂƟŽŶƐĂƌĞĚĂƚĞĚ
^ĞƉƚĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯĂŶĚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚƉůĂŶƌĞǀŝĞǁǁĂƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚĨŽƌEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϮϬϮϯ͘ zĞƚDƌ͘ &ŽǆƐĞŶƚ
ŽƵƚƚŚĞĮƌƐƚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞƚŽƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĨŽƌ May 18, 2024. As ŽĨƚŚŝƐǁƌŝƟŶŐ͕ Dƌ͘ &ŽǆŚĂƐ
ŵĂĚĞĂďƐŽůƵƚĞůǇŶŽĞīŽƌƚƚŽǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƚŚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐůŝƐƚĞĚ
ĂďŽǀĞ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŚĂƐŚĞĂƌĚŝŶƉĞƌƐŽŶĂƚthe only ϮŵĞĞƟŶŐƐŚĞĐĂůůĞĚƚŽƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƚŚŝƐƉůĂŶƚŽƚŚĞ
ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ďĞĨŽƌĞŚĂǀŝŶŐŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ^DsW.

ƚƚŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ŽŶ:ƵŶĞ15͕ ƚŚĞƉůĂŶŚĂĚŶŽƚĐŚĂŶŐĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĞƌĞƐĞǀĞƌĂůŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ
ǁŚŽĐŽŶĮƌŵĞĚƚŚĞǇĚŝĚŶŽƚƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĂƐĞĐŽŶĚŵĞĞƟŶŐŶŽƟĐĞůĞƩĞƌ ŝŶƟŵĞƚŽĂƩĞŶĚ. His 
ĐŽůůĞĂŐƵĞ ƚŽůĚƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐǁŚŽǁĞƌĞĂďůĞƚŽ ĂƩĞŶĚ ƚŚĂƚŚĞǁŽƵůĚŐŽďĂĐŬĂŶĚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚŚĞ
ĐŽƵůĚĚŽƚŽŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞthese ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞ:ƵůǇϵ^DsWŵĞĞƟŶŐ͕ ďƵƚŶŽƐƵĐŚŵĞĞƟŶŐ
ŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐĂůůĞĚ͘ 
 
He has not listened to͕ ŵƵĐŚůĞƐƐĂĐƚĞĚŽŶ͕ ĂŶǇŽĨƚŚĞŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌ͛ Ɛ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ. His development 
plan is ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůǇŝŶĐŽŵƉĂƟďůĞĂŶĚŝŶƐĞŶƐŝƟǀĞƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ. dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶ
ƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚŵŽǀĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚ͘ 
 
ZĞƐƉĞĐƞƵůůǇ, 
Stephanie Bell 
 
8020 s 20th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85041

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
Zoning Case Z-58-24-8
LM <directbridge@yahoo.com>
Tue 7/23/2024 8:55 AM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (3 MB)
Opposition letter Z58248_LM.pdf;
Hello,
Please see my attached full letter regarding Zoning Case z-58-24-8
Lynnette Myers
7828 S 20th Lane
Phoenix, AZ 85041
7/31/24, 4:48 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAAJQQ7eQgLxPoHKjBU%2F…
1/1

July 2024 
My name is Lynnette Myers and I live at 7828 S. 20th Lane, Phoenix, AZ 85041-7716 I 
am writing in stern opposition to the application for development and rezoning case 
number Z-58-24-8 submitted by John Fox, which proposes to rezone 4.5 acres of 
currently S-1 property to the maximum density allowed for R-10, which is 4.5 (bonus).  
I am absolutely opposed to multiple issues with this proposed development.  
 
Density- problems 
• This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on 
S-1 properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 
property at no more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a 
bonus density of 4.5 (20 homes) in addition to ADUs.  
o This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at 
traditional <=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and 
southern neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower 
densities towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between 
lower and higher density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Density- solutions 
• Appropriate density transition between S-1 and R-10 is R-18 or approx. 2 houses 
per acre or 2.34 with bonus. Allowing construction but with appropriate 
accommodations for the environment and surrounding neighborhoods will still 
further the city’s housing goals and provide additional benefits to the surrounding 
communities as outlined below.  
 
Traffic- problems 
• In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-
home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood 
already suffers severely from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on 
Baseline while also directly across from a commercial shopping center 
entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a neighborhood.  
o According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s 
Traffic Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a 
single-family house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will 
increase traffic to an already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 trips 
per day on average, not including traffic potentially generated by 
ADU residents.  
• No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently 
being lived on for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will 
eventually become an option to alleviate traffic issues is not good 
planning.  
• Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion 
potentially impacting safety, property, and health. 
Traffic- solutions

• R-18 density (10 homes) to reduce the overall impact on traffic for the existing 
neighborhood. 
• Traffic impact study and recommendations stipulated before any approvals 
for rezoning/development. 
 
Housing design- problems 
• The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which 
are not compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to 
preserve views to South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are 
inconsistent with the vast majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-
story.  
• The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage 
entrances or other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana 
Plan in their conceptual designs. 
Housing design- solutions 
• Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
• Require deep front porches. 
• Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
• Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Heat island/climate, trees/shade- problems 
• The current stipulations list trees on either side of concrete sidewalks to comply 
with the current tree and shade master plan, however, allowing up to a 60% 
housing footprint on each lot does nothing to mitigate the heat island effect that 
will be exacerbated from that much roof area absorbing and radiating heat.  
Heat island/climate, trees/shade - solutions 
• Require lower density zoning and more open space. 
• Require use of available SRP flood irrigation to provide added cooling. 
• Require high emissivity and high SRI roofing materials. 
• Stipulate the most conservation-forward building practices for housing insulation 
and heat island mitigation currently within the city codes and aligned with the 
city’s 2021 Climate Action Plan. We don’t have time for “business as usual” to 
curb climate change. 
• Require shade trees on the east, south and west sides of all properties to help 
keep the sun off the building walls and shade the ground. 
• Require deep set front and back porches (which appear predominantly east/west 
facing based on the lot orientation) to also keep the sun off building walls. 
 
Lastly, as of this writing, Mr. Fox has made absolutely no effort to work with any 
of the neighbors and address the concerns listed above, which he has heard in 
person at the only 2 meetings he called to present this plan to the surrounding 
property owners before having it appear before the SMVPC.  
 
At the second meeting, a month later, the plan had not changed and there were several 
neighbors who confirmed they did not receive a second meeting notice letter in time to 
attend. He told the neighbors who were able to attend that he would go back and see

what he could do to incorporate these concerns before the July 9 SMVPC meeting, but 
no such meeting has been called. 
 
He has not listened to, much less acted on, any of the neighbor’s concerns. His 
development plan is completely incompatible and insensitive to the surrounding 
neighbors. This application should not in anyway move forward. 
 
ADDITIONAL PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES & CONCERNS 
 
I absolutely have major concern about this matter since my home will be 
impacted the most!!! 
The existing pasture that is undeveloped land to the south of our subdivision has been 
this way since prior to our subdivision was build back in 2003. This pasture was 
absolutely influential in my dissension and others to purchase in Wydham Sq in the first 
place.  We were all looking for a small quite neighborhood where we could live and 
actually know our neighbors. My choice in which lot I purchased was 100% influenced 
by the undeveloped land and all the good that comes from that and the views that I 
enjoy daily to the south mountains. 
If the owner of this undeveloped land has sold to a developer to rezone and build they 
are entitled within the appropriate guidelines of the Rio Mountain Plan; but they need to 
have their own access to that development – NOT THROUGH OUR 
NEIGHBORHOOD!! They should have arranged with the seller access off of S 19th Ave 
or off W South Mountain Ave.  This option of our neighborhood should NOT even be a 
possibility!! 
This development as is would dramatically change the safety of our neighborhood and 
my home! Regardless of random drivers not realizing that the neighborhood has no 
outlet we have come together to make things as safe as possible with signs, cameras 
and communication to help one another in our neighborhood. I have suffered both a 
home burglary and a stolen car – I know these kind of crimes will only increase 
dramatically for all of us with the proposed access through our community into another 
community behind us.  
This MUST NOT HAPPEN!! 
I have always pushed for our community to become a gated community and I thing that 
matter needs to be on the table again regardless of the rezoning and proposed 
development to the south of us.  IF somehow this matter moves forward despite our 
entire neighborhood that are 100% opposed then I believe it should become mandatory 
that our community have entrance gates installed to help keep us all safe!! 
 
Respectfully, 
Lynnette Myers 
7828 S. 20th Lane, Phoenix, AZ 85041-7716

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
(No subject)
Butch Box <butchbox@gmail.com>
Wed 8/7/2024 4:44 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Constance Box and I live at 7719 S. 20th Dr .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Constance Box
8/9/24, 10:16 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANKfNt9u17tOhfZPaT7invM%3D
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Butch Box <butchbox@gmail.com>
Wed 8/7/2024 4:43 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Forrest Box and I live at 7719 S 20th Dr.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Forrest Box
8/9/24, 10:15 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQALJcnyQtmWBEgXNvl75ZAN…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Marylou Scadden <mscadden2006@gmail.com>
Wed 8/7/2024 3:03 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
 
My name is MaryLou Scadden and I live at 7807 S 20th Dr, Phoenix AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Best regards,
MaryLou Scadden
8/9/24, 10:10 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAEXjDjCEv6dJnOA5bLrvZqQ…
1/1

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
Z-58-24-8
Andrew Maifield <andrewmaifield@yahoo.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 6:24 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Opposition to rezoning Z-58-24-8.£ £The new house will disproportionately effect the families lyin the
neighboring communities.£ £I would like the city to leave some S1 property in south Phoenix.£ That's
part of the rich and diverse history of our community.£ Thank you.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]
8/9/24, 10:25 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAIkAHHy4Z9BMkdbOG0lJUB4…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Carlo <charles.carbaj@gmail.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 1:58 PM
To: PDD Long Range Planning <pdd.longrange@phoenix.gov>; Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Carlos Carbajal and I live at 2017 W. Harwell Rd, Phoenix AZ, 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development. £
I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Thanks,
Carlos
8/9/24, 10:23 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAAu%2BldgCrJJBg2tS3SiXuF…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
CESAR TRUJILLO <ctrujillo15@ymail.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 9:37 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Cesar Trujillo and I live at 7819 S 20th Dr, Phoenix AZ 85041. 
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current form. 
Sincerely 
Cesar Trujillo 
8/9/24, 10:25 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAIlSCRAwGrpDnU79hJXUD9g…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
D. Fong <dpfong@hotmail.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 3:13 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Mr. Samuel Rogers,
My name is David Fong and I live at 2004 W. Harwell Rd. in the Wyndham Square neighborhood.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development.
I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Regards,
David Fong 
8/9/24, 10:24 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADbTp0YtlWZBk%2BHL179D…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Lori <ernlor639@cox.net>
Thu 8/8/2024 6:32 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
 
My name is Ernest Coscarelli and I live at 2008 W Harwell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
 
Thank you.
 
8/9/24, 10:17 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACv24lRVLEMPk6UttQh0pfU…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Lorraine Gloria <lorigloria@cox.net>
Thu 8/8/2024 2:10 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Our names are Ernie and Lorraine Gloria and we live at 7813 S. 20th Ln., Phoenix, AZ 85041. The 
neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would 
warrant our support of this development. We remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Sent from my iPhone
8/9/24, 10:23 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAP5xc3ywtO1Mgtr%2BZZ%2F…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Lori <ernlor639@cox.net>
Thu 8/8/2024 6:33 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
 
My name is Lori Coscarelli and I live at 2008 W Harwell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Thank you.
 
8/9/24, 10:21 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAK1f%2BGK5AkPYj%2BBH%…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Melissa Sunia <joeysparents@msn.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 1:45 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Michelle Teodoro <michelle.teodoro@associaarizona.com> 
My name is Melissa Sunia and I live at 2022 West Branham Lane Phoenix, AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
R,
Melissa Sunia
Sent from my iPhone
8/9/24, 10:22 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAINm45KMt%2B1GsMbNzLA…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Natividad Tapia <natytapia54@gmail.com>
Thu 8/8/2024 5:33 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Hello, 
My name is NaƟvidad Tapia and I live at 2015 W Branham Lane Phoenix AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any signiﬁcant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current form. 
Thank you,
NaƟvidad Tapia
8/9/24, 10:24 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAECAXhWl%2BNpMhS2J%2F…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Alicia Sainz <aliciaemily2003@yahoo.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 8:24 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: hjewelclark@fastmail.com <hjewelclark@fastmail.com> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Alicia Sainz and I live at  8250 S 20th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85041.              I am writing in
opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8.
This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain opposed to
this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the
Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is
not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan. 
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
Thank you very much,
Alicia Sainz 
623-329-3606
8/13/24, 8:58 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADjQz6nJI79GrdD29we2xxI%3D
1/1

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
Apposition Z-58-24-8.
Carlos Ruiz <carlosviviana2003@gmail.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 8:39 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: hjewelclark@fastmail.com <hjewelclark@fastmail.com> 
Hello Samuel,£
My name is Carlos Ruiz £and I live at 8250 S 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041 . I am writing in opposition to
the proposed development Z-58-24-8. This broker has not made changes to his plans that the
neighbors can support.£ I remain opposed to this development in its current form. Development that is
compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that
govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it.£
£The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.£ I respectfully urge you to vote no.
Sincerely,
Carlos Ruiz
623-329-3606
8/13/24, 8:59 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKWJv2VG79ROjjGl%2F9%2…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Christian Griepenstroh <cgriepenstroh94@gmail.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 11:50 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Jaigoudeau@gmail.com <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com>; Michelle Teodoro <Michelle.Teodoro@associaarizona.com> 
Hello Samuel, 
My name is Christian Griepenstroh and I live at 7710 S 20th Drive, Phoenix AZ, 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
I am unable to attend next Tuesday's meeting due to a work event so I would like to donate my time to
Michelle and Jai to speak on our behalf on this item. 
Have a great weekend, 
Christian G. 
8/13/24, 8:50 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAATZ09xZ1R1HhmjSqlzrdj0%3D
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
D D <del2034848@gmail.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 6:25 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
8/9/2024,£
Good morning,
 My name is Delilah Delgai and I live at 7711 S. 20th Drive Phoenix AZ 85041 .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Sincerely,  
Delilah Delgai 
8/9/24, 10:26 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQALAKmFv6FXVAoDEhWjOYijc…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Eduardo Camacho <lalocamacho@cox.net>
Fri 8/9/2024 3:22 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Hello Samuel, 
My name is Eduardo Camacho and I live at 2015 W Branham Lane Phoenix AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer had made any signiﬁcant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Thank you,
Eduardo Camacho 
8/13/24, 8:54 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAP1k%2BRVvcWBFv%2FMpf…
1/1

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
OPPOSITION TO Z-58-24-8
LM <directbridge@yahoo.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 7:08 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Lynnette Myers and I live at 7828 S 20th Lane, Phoenix AZ 85041
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
L Myers
"Everything you've wanted is on the other side of fear" £–George Addair
Sent from my iPhone
8/13/24, 8:58 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANxJOI9QLu1FqzrxyBPY18w…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
S.C <scastillox79@gmail.com>
Fri 8/9/2024 6:48 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
8/9/2024,£
Good morning,
£My name is Shangel Castillo and I live at 7711 S. 20th Drive Phoenix AZ 85041 .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.£ I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Sincerely,££
Shangel Castillo£
8/9/24, 10:26 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAFwh1Fz6ralKmWNKiqN0ujQ…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Dawn Smith <dawn.smith2@hotmail.com>
Sat 8/10/2024 4:18 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Jaigoudeau@gmail.com <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com>; Michelle Teodoro <Michelle.Teodoro@associaarizona.com> 
£
My name is Dawn Smith, and I live at 7816 S 20th Ln Phoenix AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S20 FE 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
Get Outlook for Android [aka.ms]
8/13/24, 9:00 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAN%2FbO2kkn5dHhDkWkT6i…
1/1

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
Opposition to Rezoning Case Z-58-24-8
Michael Jordan <Michael.d.jordan2@hotmail.com>
Sat 8/10/2024 6:51 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Dear Members of the Planning and Zoning Department,
I am wriƟng to oppose rezoning case Z-58-24-8 due to the serious impact it will have on traﬃc and access to
Baseline Road. Baseline Road is already heavily congested, and during the day, it’s nearly impossible to make a
leŌ turn,  just waiƟng for 1 car to gain access to baseline during the busy Ɵmes could add up to 10 minutes to
a commute, even if they are taking a right turn. The proposed rezoning will only worsen this issue, making it
even harder for residents to safely and eﬃciently use this vital road.
In addiƟon, this rezoning will increase residenƟal traﬃc in front of my house by 200 percent, further disrupƟng
our community. There have been no signiﬁcant changes to the rezoning plans to address these concerns. The
added traﬃc and accessibility challenges are too severe to ignore, and they threaten the quality of life in our
neighborhood.
Please reject this rezoning proposal to protect our neighborhood’s safety, accessibility, and quality of life.
Thank you for your consideraƟon.
Sincerely,
Michael Jordan
7804 s. 20th ln,
Phoenix, AZ , 85041
Michael.d.jordan2@hotmail.com
480-248-5261
10 August 2024
8/13/24, 8:59 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAOxHZpe7qr5NpfUp3AIap28…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Ronald Thompson <rthom82144@aol.com>
Sat 8/10/2024 8:37 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Ronald Thompson and I live at 7728 S 20th Lane, Phoenix, AZ 85041 ( Lot 26 of the 
Wyndham Square Association) .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
 
8/13/24, 9:00 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADoapTBpB05Cr0znvtAGCJw…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Amelia Goudeau <ameliagoudeau@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 4:21 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Hello Samuel,
My name is Amelia Goudeau and I live at 203 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, Az 85041 .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Thank you,
~Amelia Goudeau~
£ #602-460-5545
The mind is everything, what you think you will become.
8/13/24, 9:01 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANPur4yOteRPu0E2WwhBL5…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
David Key <anykeysys@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 6:15 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is David Key and I live at£2006 W. Branham Lane Phoenix, AZ 85041 [google.com]£in
Wyndham Square. The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes
to the plans that would warrant our support of this development. I remain opposed to this
development in its current form.
Thank you for your consideration£in this matter.
8/13/24, 9:01 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKNW1hE8IL1ElEfuBxIhAn0%…
1/1

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
Rezoning Case No. Z-58-24
Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 4:16 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
08/11/2024
 
Re:          Rezoning Case No. Z-58-24
 
To:          Samuel Rogers, City of Phoenix Village Planner
Joshua Bednarek, City of Phoenix Planning and Development Director
South Mountain Village Planning CommiƩee
                City of Phoenix Planning and Zoning Department
 
 
Dear Mr. Bednarek, CommiƩee and Department Members,
I am wriƟng to express my concerns related to the S-1 to R1-10 rezoning for the proposed development of land
owned by Dorothy M. Hallock for the beneﬁt of John Fox and William Seymour Co, Inc., referenced in the case
number cited above. My family and neighbors are concerned the necessary thresholds for rezoning approval,
and ongoing neighborhood concerns about the proposed development, have not been saƟsfactorily addressed
by the developer and exisƟng landowner. This proposal is not compaƟble with the scale and character of the
neighborhood and adjacent residenƟal uses. It is also not in keeping with the Rio Montana Area Plan in several
respects. There are unique challenges presented in this area related to exisƟng properƟes including livestock,
infrastructure, and a history of ﬂooding on this site and adjacent properƟes.
In addiƟon, the proposal does not meet the requirements of R1-10 for lot coverage, rear and side set-back
distances, and minimum common space areas. In fact, they are not even deﬁned for review by the City, the
Village Planning Commission, or the neighborhood stakeholders. We do not agree that this rezoning should be
completed as a Planned ResidenƟal Development case, which allows the peƟƟoner to overcome the
standard zoning requirements without variances. PRDs are typically reserved for larger subdivisions. The
standard zoning requirements, including the lot coverage, rear and side setbacks, and common space area
requirements, are there to protect the community from signiﬁcant changes in the character of the community.
It appears it will be necessary to not only rezone the Subject site, but to obtain variances from the City for a
number of the required zoning elements in order to develop it as proposed.
The developer has entered into an agreement to purchase the land from Ms. Hallock, conƟngent upon the
success of this change in zoning from S-1 to R1-10. The sale will not take place unless the rezoning is completed,
which is a self-imposed condiƟon created by the property owner. Please note:
x         There are no provisions of the S-1 zoning which create a hardship for the current property owner.
x         There are no special circumstances or condiƟons applying to this land or its current use, which do
not also apply to other properƟes in the community.
x         The rezoning and what appear to be the need for extensive variances is not necessary for the
preservaƟon or enjoyment of the owner’s property rights.
8/13/24, 9:01 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABusD2n4ZrBFr2LwR8lZ%2F…
1/3

Our neighbors and family have determined that the approval of this rezoning applicaƟon will be detrimental to
people living and working in the vicinity, to the adjacent property owners, and to the welfare of the public in
general.
Traﬃc Concerns: The development of the subject site, as proposed, will cause a signiﬁcant increase in vehicular
traﬃc in adjacent residenƟal areas, including on extremely Ɵght and narrow streets which were not originally
designed to accommodate another development. Studies should be undertaken to determine if it is
appropriate to bring the traﬃc into this proposed development from the north, or from the property owner’s
adjoining lot to the south, where there is a higher capacity and wider city street close to a main arterial (19th
Avenue). This is an opƟon available to the property owner and developer, and it is possible to design an entry to
the Subject site in this way. We do not know why Ms. Hallock has previously objected to providing an easement
for this purpose, which makes it another self-imposed condiƟon.
Flooding Concerns: There are unknown impacts this development may cause to the surrounding properƟes
including drainage from ﬂooding. The Subject site already has a history of ﬂooding, and the prior ﬂooding has
detrimentally impacted properƟes to the north. Further decreasing the ability of the land to accommodate
ﬂooding, or raising it out of the current 500-year ﬂoodplain level, will negaƟvely impact the surrounding
properƟes. Because civil engineering drawings and ﬁnished ﬂoor or street elevaƟons are not available for
review, it is impossible to know how much the development will further impact the surrounding properƟes.
Many of the neighbors abuƫng the Subject site have sepƟc systems designed to ﬂow toward this property
which could be impacted by diversion of any drainage onto their properƟes. As designed, the proposed
development has virtually no open space or common areas, the lot coverage appears to be greater than what is
allowed by R1-10 zoning, and given the history of ﬂooding this is a signiﬁcant concern to the community. A
hydrology, ﬂoodplain and drainage study, as well as civil engineering drawings detailing how the drainage will
be addressed, should be reviewed and evaluated prior to approval of this rezoning proposal, to determine if
rezoning of this site is suitable for the surrounding community.
Infrastructure: There are also infrastructure concerns for this type of higher density inﬁll development related
to water connecƟon capacity, sewer connecƟons and wastewater capacity. It is unknown whether a water and
sewer connecƟon to the north in a 20+ year old development, designed to meet the needs of the number of
houses there, would accommodate the addiƟonal homes proposed due to its age and previous design. A
further study and report should be required to determine if addiƟonal sewer capacity, modiﬁcaƟon of the
current wastewater system, a liŌ staƟon and possibly changes to easement distances will be necessary in the
exisƟng surrounding neighborhoods in order to meet the latest 2021 wastewater design standards for a new
development. The Planning and Development Department at the City of Phoenix should provide a technical
review to the Village Planning Commission and aﬀected neighborhood stakeholders.
Rio Montana Area Plan: The Subject rezoning proposal conﬂicts with numerous elements cited in the Rio
Montana Area Plan. It is not in conformance with the vision of the area or what we have seen from other area
developments which encourage pedestrian and equestrian acƟvity. It does not achieve a density transiƟon from
north to south in a decreasing manner, and is in opposiƟon to the General Plan and Land Use Map for the area
which indicates a maximum density of 3.5. There is no explanaƟon of how the developer intends to reach the
90 “bonus points” needed for density greater than 3.5 du/acre or why the proposed density meets the
requirements of R1-10 zoning. Bonus points are also typically applied in much larger subdivision PRD cases, not
in sites as small as this one, in these types of inﬁll locaƟons.
The zoning applicaƟon indicates that the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and Land Use Map, but it
exceeds it. The ability to achieve bonus points and a breakdo100wn of how they are applied to this proposal
should be available for review and consideraƟon by the Village Planning CommiƩee and the neighborhood
stakeholders. Many developments in this area have setbacks for horse trails or pedestrian trails. They also
contain perimeter walls with landscape features to prevent one long slab of concrete block facing into
neighboring areas. The Rio Montana Area Plan also encourages variety in lot width, staggered setbacks, rear
loaded garages, roof line and building façade variety and limited privacy fencing – none of which appears to be
included in the proposed development design. In many respects, the designs shown as elements to be avoided
in the Rio Montana plan (Figures 82, 83, 84, 87), are actually included in the plan for the project as designed.
Based on the issues raised above, this rezoning applicaƟon should come in with a full preliminary plat, in
conformance with standard R1-10 zoning and without the many variances which appear to be required to
develop the site.
8/13/24, 9:01 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABusD2n4ZrBFr2LwR8lZ%2F…
2/3

Our family and neighbors are not opposed to residenƟal development as long as it does not negaƟvely impact
the community in favor of one property owner. We recognize that a range of housing opƟons is necessary to
conƟnue the economic viability of the community. However, in this case, it appears to present a signiﬁcant
detrimental impact as designed, and no beneﬁt to the community surrounding the Subject site.  It appears this
rezoning will only beneﬁt Ms. Hallock and the broker seeking to rezone the property, which is not in keeping
with the Core Values stated in the City’s General Plan. We urge the South Mountain Village Planning
Commission, the Phoenix Planning and Zoning Department and the City of Phoenix Planning and Development
Director to consider the above concerns, address them if possible, and work with the community stakeholders
to create a development which will meet the needs of the community.
Sincerely,
 
Jai Goudeau
2013 W. Harwell Road
Phoenix AZ 85041
8/13/24, 9:01 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABusD2n4ZrBFr2LwR8lZ%2F…
3/3

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
chevera trillo <cheveratrillo@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 6:32 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Ntonyt <NtonyT@aol.com>
To the SMVPC,
This communication is to go on record for voicing our strong opposition to the proposed
development Z-58-24-8.
We live at 23rd Ave/Dobbins and continue to be very concerned with over development in the area
that creates unsafe traffic and increased congestion in areas that are not designed for the volume of
additional traffic£this proposed development would create.
The proposed plans, in the current form, are not only bad for the surrounding neighbors, but the
broker has not made changes that can be supported by the neighborhood or listened to the concerns
of the neighborhood.
We stand in opposition with our neighbors in this development's current form.£
As has been the position of ourselves and the neighbors in this area we request SMVPC£support
development that is compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan.££
We respectfully encourage you to vote no and support responsible development - this proposed plan
is not responsible.£
Nick & Chevera Torrez
602.315.9774
2311 W. Dobbins Road
Phx¬85041
***
8/13/24, 9:04 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACnXfdiUN9BCjW7rbyJZpUE…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Niki Key <nkey30@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 6:02 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Niki Key and I live at 2006 W. Branham Lane Phoenix, AZ 85041 in Wyndham Square.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of this development. I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
Thank you for your consideration£in this matter.
Niki Key
8/13/24, 9:00 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADqUkfrgFDRIhmDi1sv0zRA…
1/1

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
Proposed Development Z-58-24-8.
Ravi Sharma <ravi6161sharma@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 6:30 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Cc:H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>;Ravi Sharma <ravi6161sharma@gmail.com>
1 attachments (28 KB)
To the SMVPC -1.doc;
Dear Mr. Roger,
Attached please find my letter of opposition to Proposed Development Z-58-24-8. Let me know if you
have any questions.
Thank you,
Dr. Ravi Sharma
8/13/24, 9:02 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANqSb6JwDhtFgp69nY0p0C8…
1/1

To the SMVPC, 
 
My name is Dr. Ravi Sharma and I live at 8012 S 20th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85041.            
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. 
This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain 
opposed to this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with 
the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that 
govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it. 
 
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a 
compatible level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.  
 
I respectfully urge you to vote no. 
 
Thank you, 
 
Dr. Ravi Sharma

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
Proposed Development Z-58-24-8.
Snigdha Sharma <ushma58@gmail.com>
Sun 8/11/2024 6:37 PM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Cc:H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>;Snigdha Sharma <ushma58@gmail.com>
1 attachments (27 KB)
To the SMVPC -2.doc;
Dear Mr. Roger,
Attached please find my letter of opposition to Proposed Development Z-58-24-8. Let me know if you
have any questions.
Thank you,
Mrs. Snigdha Sharma
8/13/24, 9:05 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAD7NpZ%2BoFglBl5llreE%2F…
1/1

To the SMVPC, 
 
My name is Mrs. Snigdha Sharma and I live at 8012 S 20th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85041.    
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. 
This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain 
opposed to this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with 
the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that 
govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it. 
 
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a 
compatible level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.  
 
I respectfully urge you to vote no. 
 
Thank you, 
 
Mrs Snigdha Sharma

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Alexis Mesquita <alexismesquita2005@gmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 4:31 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Alexis Mesquita and I live at 8020 s 20th ave Phoenix£ Az, 85041. I am writing in opposition
to the proposed development Z-58-24-8.
This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors can support. I remain opposed to
this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the
Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is not
it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.£
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
8/13/24, 9:10 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAN5v9FQzqTRCs5q3fxF72N8…
1/1

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
Opposition letter for Z-58-24-8
H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 3:00 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Jewel Clark, and my home is at 2020 W. South Mountain Ave., Phoenix, AZ, 85041. I am
writing in continued opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8. The broker, Mr. John Fox, has still not
worked with us to create a compatible proposal that the community could support.
The first meeting notice from Mr. Fox was sent to neighbors less than the 10 days required by the city.
Our letter was postmarked June 10 for a June 15 meeting. We received it June 14. The location for the
meeting was a pizza parlor where no one could hear the presentation or see the plans. Mr. Fox did not
have adequate answers for neighbor concerns and was uninterested in any changes to his proposal.
Mr. Fox agreed to another meeting but never made any attempt to have one. Mr. Jai Goudeau,
president of the Wyndham Square neighborhood to the north, made a room reservation at Cesar
Chavez Library and called Mr. Fox to see if he would meet after having not heard from him for over a
week after the first meeting. At that meeting, he still did not have answers to address neighbor
concerns, and he had made no changes to his plans. At the first SMVPC meeting, he again had no
interest in trying to work with the neighbors or alter his plans. After the SMVPC voted for a
continuance with the instructions that he should try to work with the neighbors, he made no effort to
contact any of us to arrange to talk. It was only when concerned members of the SMVPC took time out
of their busy schedules to try and help and arranged a meeting the week before August 13, that he
came to the table with no change in his plan except to modify the widths of the lots slightly, so they
weren’t all the same size and to move the storm basin/retention to a slightly different area. At that
meeting, he said he would prepare a new plan with 2 less houses, which we said was still too high, and
to stagger the lots so the property lines wouldn’t line up with each other across the street. This is not
working with the neighbors. This is not meaningful change. No one in the community has seen what
he plans to present at the August 13 meeting. There is no neighbor we know of that supports even
what little we know of this new plan and no one supported the original one.
The density is not compatible with the surrounding developments, plain and simple. The core goals
and vision for the Rio Montana Plan is to preserve rural character, open space, and promote balanced,
high-quality development with higher densities in the northern portion.
The Rio Montana Site Plan Design emphasizes that a new development should consider the larger
context in which a proposed site is located. The parcel in question is sandwiched between low density
R1-10 homes and acre+ lot homes. Mr. Fox has completely disregarded the context of the area he
wants to rezone for a bonus density of at least 18 homes on 4.54 acres when there is no density
around it greater than 3.23 du/ac and the majority is lower.
8/13/24, 9:08 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAEasR66Z8dxBteak2wAnRME…
1/3

Just because Mr. Fox can request more density doesn’t mean it’s appropriate for the area and it
doesn’t mean he should be rewarded with any bonus for not doing the right thing in the first
place: proposing a reasonable plan and working with the neighbors to refine it for everyone’s
benefit. There is no precedent for it in the area for good reason: it is simply incompatible with the
communities already established.
Wording about compatibility and context for surrounding areas in the Rio Montana Plan and the
Phoenix General Plan are there to provide governing bodies like the SMVPC the power and oversight
to curb one-size-fits-all zoning. This situation calls for the use of that power.
Mr. Fox’s plan is so bare bones (at least what was submitted for the staff report and what the
neighbors have seen) that it is nearly impossible to know if he even understands and is incorporating
key design elements from the Site Plan Design and the Single-Family design criteria such as including:
x        Deep overhangs and deep porches.
x        Planting trees on the east and west of buildings.
x        Planting windbreak perimeter trees.
x        Using deep green, wide-leafed trees for shade such as the Chinese Pistache.
x        Limiting the use of 2-story buildings.
x        Creating terminal vistas.
x        Allowing for adequate non-straight driveways and side-load/rear-load garages.
££ No more than 40% of driveways should be straight.
x        Varieties in roofing materials and facades.
x        Changing façade designs, roofing materials and roof ridge orientation at least every third
house.
x        Staggered housing setbacks.
x        Angled housing orientation on lots.
x        Truly varied lot widths of at least 10’ or more.
x        Meaningful open space.
Mr. Fox has not addressed neighbor concerns about flood mitigation for both communities to the east
and west nor has he addressed traffic concerns for the Wyndham Square neighborhood to the north
which is the only access to Baseline Rd. and any entrance/exit to the proposed development.
All 52 homes in Wyndham Square have on-lot retention in addition to the storm basins at the
entrance. Mr. Fox has only proposed storm basins, which do not appear to be appreciably bigger than
Wyndham Square’s and no on-lot retention. This property is subject to the same runoff patterns as
Wyndham Square. There is no hydrology report that confirms his planned runoff mitigation is
sufficient and does not pose a danger to either the acre+ lots on the east or Wyndham Square to the
north.
8/13/24, 9:08 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAEasR66Z8dxBteak2wAnRME…
2/3

Since Wyndham Square was built in approx. 2003, traffic on Baseline has increased by nearly 500%.
There is only one in/out and that is onto Baseline. Neighbors report that it is extremely difficult to get
in and out of the neighborhood. An additional 18 or more homes will add 180-200 more car trips per
house per day into this neighborhood, dramatically exacerbating an already difficult situation.
Do we think a density of 3.5 du/ac or approx. 15-16 houses is truly appropriate? No. R1-18 or at least
no more of a density than is present in Wyndham Square, which is 3 du/ac would be appropriate.
Lowering the density to no more than 3.5 du/ac is a compromise. Does any lowering of density help
ameliorate traffic for Wyndham Square? Yes, some. Does lower density help with flood mitigation? Yes,
because there can be more open space allotted for additional retention. Does lower density help
provide room to incorporate the design and site plan elements of the Rio Montana Plan? Yes.
Rio Montana calls out a step density of 2-3.5 on pg. 17. There’s no allowance for more than that. If we
are going to hold developers accountable to design criteria, we should hold them to the other
elements in the Plan as well. Make context a criterion and hold developers accountable when they
don’t do it themselves. I respectfully urge you to help us create a plan that keeps density to no more
than 3.5 du/ac as our compromise and as consistent with the Rio Montana Plan. Help us create a plan
that incorporates the well-considered design and site plan elements the Rio Montana Plan calls for. If
this broker doesn’t want to follow the rules and work with the community, please vote no.
Sincerely,
Jewel Clark
--£
£ H. Jewel Clark
££hjewelclark@fastmail.com
8/13/24, 9:08 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAEasR66Z8dxBteak2wAnRME…
3/3

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
In regards to the rezoning hearing Z-58-24-8
Joe and Ana Laura Serna <jals426@gmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 1:58 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
I am Joe Serna.
My Wife Ana and I live in Wyndham Square,
at
2018 West Branham Lane£
Phoenix, AZ 85041.
Neither my Neighbors of Wyndham Square,£
nor I,£
have seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans, that would warrant our
support of his development.££
I remain opposed to this development in its current form!
Respectfully,
CDR Joe Serna MD
(Ret) US Public Health Service£
8/13/24, 9:07 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPo9tNGULvdBlgjDEuB1Ymc…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
julian galindo <julian.galindo64@gmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 11:02 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Hello,£
My name is Julian Galindo and I live at 7808 S. 20th Lane with my wife and (3) kids who are under the
age of 11.£
We have not had any progression towards a resolution for the newly planned development directly
south of Wyndham Square. The developer has not made any concessions per the request of the board
and the community from the July meeting. I remain opposed to the development in its current form.£
Sincerely,£
Julian Galindo
602-413-7791
8/13/24, 9:11 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACzDK4elGYdKuCB7j7VCHfQ…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Mike Josic <mikejosic@gmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 3:07 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Mike Josic and I live at£2020£W. South Mountain Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8.
There is no reason why this development should not conform to the Rio Montana plan other than
greater financial gain for this broker. This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors
can support.£ I remain opposed to this development in its current form. Development that is
compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that
govern our area I would support. This plan is not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.£
I respectfully urge you to support the existing neighbors and vote no.
Sincerely,
Mike Josic
8/13/24, 9:09 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHh6D3SZ9JRIsq3nQhe4ino…
1/1

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
OPPOSITION to Z-58-24-8
Selena Leon <selenanomas@gmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 5:18 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Selena Leon and I live at 2009 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, AZ 85041. The neighbors have not
seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would warrant our support
of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
8/13/24, 9:10 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABJJ5qXxAZRCtP%2FRIOc2T…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
stephanie rubio <stephrubio23@hotmail.com>
Mon 8/12/2024 3:15 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Stephanie Bell, and I live at£ £ £ £ £8020 S 20th Ave Phoenix Az, 85041. I am writing in
opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8.
This broker has not made changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.£ I remain opposed to
this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the
Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is not
it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.£
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
8/13/24, 9:09 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQALz2iU7C6WZCojZpjCXCRB…
1/1

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
**Subject: Opposition to Z-58-24-8**
Candace McDonald-Ramsey <candacedramsey@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 4:00 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Dear Mr. Rogers and Committee Members,
My name is Candace McDonald Ramsey, and I reside at 2012 W. Harwell Rd; Phoenix AZ 85041. I am
writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development under case number Z-58-24-8.
Despite ongoing discussions, it is clear that the developer has not made any significant changes to the
plans that would address the concerns of the community or justify our support for this project. The
current proposal does not adequately consider the impact on our neighborhood, including potential
issues related to traffic, infrastructure, and overall quality of life.
As a resident invested in the well-being and future of our community, I urge you to reject this
development in its current form. We need a plan that truly reflects the needs and interests of the
residents, rather than one that prioritizes external interests at our expense.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,££
Candace McDonald Ramsey£
8/13/24, 4:03 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANTWwvMhgnZAunuSnhEEln…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Elizabeth Franco <nfranco246@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 5:58 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Good afternoon,£
I hope this£email finds you well. My name is Elizabeth Hintze Franco and I live at£7820 S 20th Ln,
Phoenix, AZ 85041. The neighbors along£with my family have not seen that the developer has made
any significant changes to the plans that£would warrant£our support of his development. I am
unfortunately£not able to make it to the hearing today, but I am still opposed to this development in
its current form and would like for it to be taken into consideration.£
Kindest regards,£
Elizabeth Hintze Franco£
602-515-8842
8/28/24, 4:24 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJhB%2BrItbD5JoHXNTUx9t…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
James Betterment <jamesbetterment@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 7:49 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is James Betterment and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave. Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. The broker has not made changes
to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design
elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible
level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan. 
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
8/13/24, 9:11 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPDVeS2CTHhGn5heAyvoziY…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Joe Hernandez <cndymnrotc@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 10:17 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>; Jai Goudeau <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com> 
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
 
My name is Joseph Hernandez and I live at __7706 S 20th DR, PHX, AZ 85041_________________ .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
 
8/28/24, 4:23 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAELh2VWEbGFAmhMWPIFG…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
leticia gonzalez <leticiaglez07@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 8:41 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is leticia gonzalez and I live at  7723 S 20th Dr.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
8/13/24, 9:12 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAGMkwK8UTy1CjI3keu%2FX…
1/1

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
Fwd: Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Joe Hernandez <cndymnrotc@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 10:24 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>; Jai Goudeau <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com> 
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Joe Hernandez <cndymnrotc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:17 AM
Subject: Opposition to Z-58-24-8
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>, Jai Goudeau <Jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
 
My name is Nadine Hernandez Wife of Joseph and I live at __7706 S 20th DR, PHX, AZ
85041_________________ .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
 
8/13/24, 4:01 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAELh2VWEbGFAmhMWPIFG…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Nicki Sordello <nickisordello@yahoo.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 8:14 AM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (14 KB)
Opposition-letter2 _Z-58-24-8_8008-S-20th-Ave_Nicole.Sordello.docx;
Good morning,
My name is Nicole Sordello, and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave. Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. The broker has not made changes to his plans that the
neighbors can support. I remain opposed to this development in its current form. Development that is compatible with the
density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is
not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible level or include other
meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Nicole Sordello
8/13/24, 9:12 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJy64yhrG%2BNPr%2FBy6cY…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Tyler Hintze <tylerbill97@gmail.com>
Tue 8/13/2024 7:54 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Tyler Hintze and I live at 7820 S 20th Ln, Phoenix, AZ 85041.£
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that
would warrant our support of his development.£ I remain opposed to this development in it's current
form.
8/13/24, 9:11 AM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAFaaSg1ea0ZMpYoXSsf8r5I%…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
leticia gonzalez <leticiaglez07@gmail.com>
Fri 9/6/2024 2:13 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Humberto González and I live at 7723 S 20th Dr.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans
that would warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its
current form.£
9/10/24, 12:26 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPxAAM9tcGtDqGJYQUiDC%…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
leticia gonzalez <leticiaglez07@gmail.com>
Fri 9/6/2024 2:10 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Mauricio González and I live at£ 7723 S 20th Dr .
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans
that would warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its
current form.
9/10/24, 12:23 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAP7cfnFa4%2FNKkvf1ZnWeS…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
CESAR TRUJILLO <ctrujillo15@ymail.com>
Sat 9/7/2024 9:47 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Cesar Trujillo and I live at 7819 S 20th Dr, Phoenix AZ 85041. 
I’m opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria, and we 
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons. We welcome development in 
our area, but we want development to be compatible with existing character and quality of the 
existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix general plan, and the 
real Montana plan. 
We support a maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the real Montana 
criteria to be implemented. 
Limiting two-story homes to no more than 20% of the total. 
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC chair by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau.
Thank you.
If you have questions or one more information, email Jewel Clark at hjewelclark@fastmail.com 
or Jai Goudeau at jaigoudeau@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
9/10/24, 12:27 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAOFEAfY4j5hEltO%2BySRQx…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Carla Soberanes <carlasoberanes@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:49 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Carla Soberanes£and I live at 7818 S 20th Drive, Phoenix AZ 85041
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana
criteria and we were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible
with the existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the
requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo
Montana criteria to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai
Goudeau to the zoning application.
Thank you.
Carla Soberanes
Sent from my iPhone
9/10/24, 12:40 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADW8rZ7Izk5IlK%2B4Wd5QQ…
1/1

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
FW: Development update and opposition letter to use
cndymnrotc <cndymnrotc@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 5:42 AM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Cc:H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>;Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
1 attachments (4 MB)
Final-site-plan-from-Fox---20th-and-South-Mountain.jpg;
My contributions to the disapproval of the new proposed development.£ We all agree in our
household that Wyndham Square shouldn't be used as a launch pad for construction traffic and
potential flooding if and when it goes through.£ The South Mountain road is ideal!!!
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
-------- Original message --------
From: "H. Jewel Clark" <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>
Date: 9/7/24 21:58 (GMT-06:00)
To: Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>, Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Cc: Adolfo Mauritsia Coronado <jacoronado@msn.com>, Alicia and Carlos
<aliciaemily2003@yahoo.com>, Alma Tonche <ad.tonche@gmail.com>, Alyssa Kerns
<Alyssam.kerns@gmail.com>, Andrew Maifield <andrewmaifield@yahoo.com>,
bobbyscadden@yahoo.com, Butch Box <butchbox@gmail.com>, Candace McDonald-Ramsey
<Candacedramsey@gmail.com>, Carlos Carbajal <Carbajal17@hotmail.com>, Cesar Trujillo
<ctrujillo15@ymail.com>, Christian Griepenstroh <Cgriepenstroh94@gmail.com>, David Key
<anykeysys@gmail.com>, Dawn Smith <Dawn.Smith2@gmail.com>, Dorothy Hernandez
<1dhernan@tempeschools.org>, Drewkgarvin@gmail.com, Eduardo Camacho
<Lalocamacho@cox.net>, Erika Bowman <Bowman.Erika@gmail.com>, Frank Hernandez
<fhernandez6310@gmail.com>, Franko Hernandez <franko1885@gmail.com>, Funyung Mon
<Fym2429@gmail.com>, Gabriel Betancourt <Betancourtfamily@yahoo.com>, Gheine@cox.net,
"H. Jewel Clark" <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>, Irene Navarro <Sunshinesonirene@yahoo.com>,
ISH326 <imoreu326@gmail.com>, James Betterment <Jamesbetterment@gmail.com>, Jock
<jocksteady01@icloud.com>, Joe Hernandez <Cndymnrotc@gmail.com>, Joe Serna
<jals426@gmail.com>, Jose Perea <jpe.landscaping@gmail.com>, josphatwatitu@yahoo.com,
Julian Galindo <Julian.galindo64@gmail.com>, Justin Intolubbe
<Justin.Intolubbe@associaarizona.com>, Kagiovan@hotmail.com, Linda Laneback
9/10/24, 12:30 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHgdefXF1AZGvacBGOOV2C…
1/3

<llanebac@tempeschools.org>, Lisa Cullen <Cullen_A_Lisa@yahoo.com>, LM
<Directbridge@yahoo.com>, Lorenzo Gonzales <guad6604@outlook.com>, Lori
<ernlor639@cox.net>, Mark <msouders1@cox.net>, MaryLou Scadden
<Mscadden2006@gmail.com>, Michael Jordan <Michael.d.jordan@gmail.com>, Michael Josic
<mikejosic@gmail.com>, Michelleandjuliangalindo@gmail.com, Miguel Rubio
<rb_contracting1lc@outlook.com>, Moe Lathgani <Lathganimoe@yahoo.com>, Monica Garcia
<azattymo@aol.com>, Mustafa Mostofo <sammostofo@gmail.com>, Natividad Tapia
<Natytapia@cox.net>, Niki Key <nkey30@gmail.com>, Ravi Sharma
<ravi6161sharma@gmail.com>, Roberto Branch <rcb1enterprise@gmail.com>, Snigdha Sharma
<ushma58@gmail.com>, Steven Hernandez <Sj-hernandez@hotmail.com>, Susan Knight
<roosie2roosie@gmail.com>, Virginia Waititu <Virginiawaititu@gmail.com>, Alexis Mesquita
<alexismesquita2005@gmail.com>, stephrubio23@hotmail.com
Subject: Development update and opposition letter to use
The vote on the development adjoining our neighborhood is coming
up!
Rezoning case Z-58-24-8 will be voted on Tuesday
September 10th at 6 p.m. at the££South Mountain
Community Library, 7050 S. 24th St.
[phoenixpubliclibrary.org]£
We need you to do 2 things:
£Write an opposition email to register your opposition.
Come to the meeting Tuesday, September 10 at 6 p.m. at the South Mountain Library to
show the SMVPC we stand united.
£
Write your own or send the letter below via email to samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov
-----------------------------------------------------
£
Subject line: Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
£
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Joe and Nadine Hernandez£and I live at 7706 S 20th DR.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
9/10/24, 12:30 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHgdefXF1AZGvacBGOOV2C…
2/3

We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Lastly, a plan that shows the developers contributions to the environmental and traffic
concerns.£
Thank you.
-----------------------------------------------------
If you still have questions or want more information, email Jewel Clark at
hjewelclark@fastmail.com or Jai Goudeau at jaigoudeau@gmail.com.
We have power in numbers! Thank you for your continued efforts and support!
Sincerely,
Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau
9/10/24, 12:30 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHgdefXF1AZGvacBGOOV2C…
3/3

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 South Mountain Village Planning Committee,
David Key <anykeysys@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:29 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is David Key£and I live at£2006 W Branham Ln, Phoenix, AZ 85041 [google.com].£
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and I
am not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
Our community welcomes development in our area, but we want development to be
compatible with the existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the
requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you.
David M Key Jr
9/10/24, 12:36 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQALiMVOWM8n9MrOqMDTtmH…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Eduardo Camacho <lalocamacho@cox.net>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:16 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Eduardo  Camacho and I live at 2015 W Branham Lane Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria,
and we were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for pracƟcal reasons. 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compaƟble with the
exisƟng character and quality of the exisƟng neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support a maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the Rio
Montana criteria to be implemented. 
LimiƟng 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the sƟpulaƟons submiƩed to the SMVPC chair by Jewel Clark and Jai
Goudeau.
Thank you,
Eduardo Camacho
9/10/24, 12:39 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKP2Zu28wYVKql5y5ihkdw4…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Lori Coscarelli <ernlor639@cox.net>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:53 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Ernest Coscarelli£and I live at 2008 W Harwell Road, Phoenix, AZ.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank You,
Ernie
9/10/24, 12:37 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAGpG2OZwmjJJp9OuDRdYU…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Fy M <fym2429@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 3:46 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
£To the SMVPC,
My name£ is Funyung Mon and I live at 8115 S 21st Drive, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I oppose Z-58-24-8. It does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we were not in favor of
the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons. We welcome development in our area, but we want
development to be compatible with the existing character and quality of the existing
neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio
Montana Plan.
We support:£
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Sincerely,£
Funyung Mon, Homeowner at 8115 S 21st Dr, Phoenix, AZ 85041
9/10/24, 12:37 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQADSVEmK%2FPxdMhrqgkSm…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Jacques Phelps <jocksteady01@icloud.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:52 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Jacques Phelps Jr£and I live at 7818 S 20th Dr, Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Jacques Phelps Jr
Sent from my iPhone
9/10/24, 12:40 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANEjZicSn5ZGrTQRNqzHGc8…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z58- 24:8
Joe and Ana Laura Serna <jals426@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 11:04 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
£
To the SMVPC,
£
I am Joe Serna and live in Wyndham Square, at 2018 West Branham Lane (Phx.AZ).
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8.£
The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we were not in favor of the cul-
de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, and to uphold the requirements
for zoning as per the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
9/10/24, 12:41 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPa4eulq6%2BdAg3K7vcpwKl…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Marylou Scadden <mscadden2006@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 8:13 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
 
My name is MaryLou Scadden and I live at 7807 S 20th Dr, Phoenix AZ 85041 .
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we were
not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the existing
character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix
General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you.
9/10/24, 12:30 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHMmRM0WSiZLrYsEdcj1bb…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Natividad Tapia <natytapia54@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 7:48 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is NaƟvidad Tapia and I live at 2015 W Branham Lane Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria, and we were
not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for pracƟcal reasons. 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compaƟble with the exisƟng
character and quality of the exisƟng neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix
General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support a maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the Rio Montana
criteria to be implemented. 
LimiƟng 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the sƟpulaƟons submiƩed to the SMVPC chair by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau.
Thank you,
NaƟvidad Tapia
9/10/24, 12:38 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKP2Zu28wYVKql5y5ihkdw4…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Niki Key <nkey30@gmail.com>
Sun 9/8/2024 9:26 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: David Key <anykeysys@gmail.com> 
Dear South Mountain Village Planning Committee,
£
£
My name is Niki Key£and I live at£2006 W Branham Ln, Phoenix, AZ 85041.£
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and I
am not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
Our community welcomes development in our area, but we want development to be
compatible with the existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the
requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Niki Key
9/10/24, 12:31 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJIB9hhonn1HlCbB%2FS5PF…
1/1

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
opposition to zoning to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Alexis Mesquita <alexismesquita2005@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 5:28 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Alexis Mesquita£and I live at£8020 S 20th Ave.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
9/10/24, 12:51 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACyMXSZfzndJicjyFRV3uPc%…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Alicia Sainz <aliciaemily2003@yahoo.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 4:59 PM
To: hjewelclark@fastmail.com <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>; Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
 
My name is Alicia Sainz and I live at 8250 S 20th Ave, Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we were not
in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the existing
character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix
General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you.
Alicia Sainz 
623 329 3606
9/10/24, 12:50 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAMf2Ps5Vys5Ao1iLu6GVtkY%…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Amelia Goudeau <ameliagoudeau@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 2:16 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Amelia Goudeau and I live at 2013 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix Az 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and
there has been no consideration for the existing community and the direct inpact on the
neighborhood. I am NOT in favor of, any of the proposed plans by the builder or John Fox.£
~Amelia Goudeau~
£ #602-460-5545
9/10/24, 12:47 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPfaw%2BhtpNlLp65n2%2BS…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Ana Laura Serna <als3363@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 8:19 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Ana Laura Serna I live at 2018 W Branham Lane at £Wyndham Square. £I am opposed
to the current plan of Z-58-24-8. £The plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria, also not
in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods: uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan. £I believe the tranquility and safety
of my neighborhood will be compromised with the additional traffic going through it. £
We support:
. £A maximum density os 16 houses to allow for more elements of the Rio Montana criteria to be
implemented.
. Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
. Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
Zoning application.£
Regards£
Ana Laura Serna
Sent from my iPad
9/10/24, 12:43 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANlOn6HrY7VEudneuj3vMvg…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-
Candace McDonald-Ramsey <candacedramsey@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 8:20 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Candace McDonald-Ramsey and I live at£2012 W Harwell Rd, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you,
Candace McDonald-Ramsey£
9/10/24, 12:52 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJ154vXeaKBLik6fExwD%2B…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Carlo <charles.carbaj@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 1:04 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>; PDD Long Range Planning <pdd.longrange@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Carlos Carbajal£and I live at 2017 W Harwell Rd, Phoenix AZ, 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Carlos
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 11:58 AM Carlo <charles.carbaj@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello once again,£
Just re-affirming my opposition.£
My name is Carlos Carbajal and I live at 2017 W. Harwell Rd, Phoenix AZ, 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the
plans that would warrant our support of his development. £
I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
9/10/24, 12:47 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAExpPVQf2ktBlTAinljB3PM%3D
1/2

Thanks,
Carlos C.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 10:19 AM Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> wrote:
Good morning, 
Thank you for your leƩer. I will add it to the oﬃcial ﬁle and forward it to the applicant and the
members of the South Mountain Village Planning CommiƩee.
Thank you,
Samuel Rogers, AICP
Village Planner II*
City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Samuel.Rogers@phoenix.gov
602-534-4010
From: Carlo <charles.carbaj@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 1:58 PM
To: PDD Long Range Planning <pdd.longrange@phoenix.gov>; Samuel S Rogers
<samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Subject: OpposiƟon to Z-58-24-8
£
My name is Carlos Carbajal and I live at 2017 W. Harwell Rd, Phoenix AZ, 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the
plans that would warrant our support of his development. £
I remain opposed to this development in its current form.
Thanks,
Carlos
9/10/24, 12:47 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAExpPVQf2ktBlTAinljB3PM%3D
2/2

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Butch Box <butchbox@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 4:33 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Constance Box and I live at£7719 S 20th Drive.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you
Constance Box
9/10/24, 12:49 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAJngVo99TOBIo6n7gCWrS88…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
D. Fong <dpfong@hotmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 2:44 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Mr. Samuel Rogers,
My name is David Fong and I reside at 2004 W. Harwell Rd. in the Wyndham Square neighborhood.
My neighbors and the Community Management representaƟves sƟll have major concerns that the
Broker, Mr. John Fox, has not made any serious or signiﬁcant changes to the proposed design plans that
would warrant our decision to support this development.
I remain opposed to this development and urge that this applicaƟon not be approved to move forward.
Regards,
David Fong
[avg.com]
Virus-free.www.avg.com [avg.com]
9/10/24, 12:48 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACz7G3iPydlJs3Yerbrm7DE%3D
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Butch Box <butchbox@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 4:29 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Forrest Box and I live at£7719 S 20th Drive.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you.£and I live at 7719 S 20th Drive.£
£
My name is [your name] and I live at [your address].
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
9/10/24, 12:49 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAD8XgC1l5KlEtBoEU2ygxk0%…
1/2

zoning application.
Thank you.
Forrest Box
9/10/24, 12:49 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAD8XgC1l5KlEtBoEU2ygxk0%…
2/2

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
Re: Oppose the Zoning Change Filed by John Fox - Case # Z-58-24-8
Fy M <fym2429@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 12:31 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Good£afternoon Samuel Rogers,
Regarding the opposition to the Case # Z-58-24-8, there is a voting process in tomorrow (9/10)
meeting at South Mountain Community Library.
May I cast the vote through this email to oppose the case because I am still out of town by
then? Or, could I pass the voting right to others?
Your response£is appreciated.£ Thanks.£
Sincerely,£
Funyung Mon,£
Home owner at 8115 S 21st Dr, Phoenix, AZ 85041
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024, 4:54 PM Fy M <fym2429@gmail.com> wrote:
Good morning Samuel Rogers,
Please see attached for the opposition letter.
I, Funyung£Mon, the resident and homeowner at 8115 S 21st Drive, Phoenix, AZ
85041. I missed the past two meetings because the meeting notice was mailed out
very£late. When I received the notice, the meeting date was already£past.
Respectfully,
Funyung£Mon,
8115 S 21st Dr, Phoenix, AZ 85041
9/10/24, 12:46 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAALQIdTpXuJIiYkKB6uKHaU…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 10:34 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>; H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com> 
My name is Jai Goudeau and I live at 2013 W. Harwell Road Phoenix, 85041.  I am writing in
opposition to the Rezoning request as it has been currently filed for approximately 4.5 acres site
located at 700’ feet north and 305’ feet west of the northwest corner of South Mountain Ave and
20th Ave, rezoning case number Z-58-24 to change zoning from S1 to R1-10. 
Mr. Fox has not made a genuine effort to work with the community regarding our concerns and I
believe he has not acted in good faith to address the community and involve us in the process.
In the first meeting he arranged at a Barro’s Pizza parlor on a Saturday afternoon in which I
received notice 4 days prior and some did not receive notice at all.  There was loud music
playing and very few people could hear his presentation or respond.  I requested that we have
another meeting in a more suitable location so I reserved a meeting room at Caesar Chavez
Library on May 28th for June 15th and he said he would send out notices. 
At the second meeting on June 15th, John Fox was in attendance with Mike Haer.  In the
meeting several attendees addressed their concerns as well as I and Mike Haer said he wanted
to take this information and address his team and he and John Fox agreed to have another
meeting to discuss their findings prior to the hearing.
I contacted John Fox as I saw a survey crew doing measurements on 06/18/24.  I asked John if
he was still having another community meeting as he requested or if he was moving forward
with the Village Planning Committee meeting to which he replied that he was not going to have
another neighborhood meeting because he wanted to have a constructive meeting and was
tired of getting beaten up.  I reminded him that he and Mike requested that we have another
meeting and he told me that he had not spoken to Mike and that Mike would be out of town
during the Village Planning Committee Meeting.
Mr. Fox repeatedly stated during the meeting that he would not work with us five times before
finally agreeing after continual requests from the Village Planning Committee members.  Mr.
Fox would not initially set up the meetings, so he requested that the committee chairman set up
the meetings and mediate the meetings.
We met with Mr. Fox and we tried to have him incorporate elements of the Rio Montana
guidelines to the plans to which he made very few changes.  Mr. Fox did not show up to the
Village planning meeting but told the chairman that he wanted a continuance to the next Village
Planning Meeting over the phone. 
We set up meetings every week for the next month with Mr. Fox and members of the Village
Planning Committee to work together to come up with a plan to which Mr. Fox would make
some changes, then come up with excuses to change them back at the last minute.  At the last
meeting Mr. Fox did not show up and refused to continue working with us. 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
9/10/24, 12:53 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHXBJBmHgQpOvanywFoFdJ…
1/2

zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan. The neighborhood, and not the
Planning Office exclusively, should be involved in crafting beneficial development since we
understand the complexities and needs of our area best.
We feel that because the development can only be entered through our community that it would
be seen as an extension of our development and it should have the same rural feel.
As the plan currently is applied It is not “sensitive to the scale and character of the surrounding
neighborhoods.” The proposed development is bordered by S-1 established homes on the east
and south (which is currently a horse farm) and R1-10 neighborhoods with densities no higher
than 3.27 DU/AC on the north and east. This development would have a density of 4.4 DU/AC
in the middle of established low-density neighborhoods.
It does not “protect and enhance the character of each neighborhood and its various housing
lifestyles through new development that is compatible in scale, design, and appearance.”  This
plan, in its current form, fails the most basic tenets of the above requirements and should not
move forward.
Thank you
9/10/24, 12:53 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHXBJBmHgQpOvanywFoFdJ…
2/2

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
Opposition to zoning application Z-58-24-8
H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@fastmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 10:39 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the Committee Members of the SMVPC,
My name is Jewel Clark, and my address is 2020 W. South Mountain Ave., Phoenix, AZ and I
remain opposed to Z-58-24-8.
Jai Goudeau, HOA president of Wyndham Square to the immediate north of the proposed
development, and I have been involved in multiple meetings with the broker, Mr. Fox, and
members of the SMVPC to try and find some common ground on his proposal. After 2
continuances and multiple meetings, it appeared on Monday that Mr. Fox intends to move
forward with his original 20 house plan and has rejected any changes that would incorporate
the Rio Montana Area plan, get community support, and result in a better development.
I have consistently stressed to Mr. Fox how inappropriate the density proposed is based on my
knowledge of our area and what I’ve been told by neighbors, not only for compatibility to the
surrounding communities on multiple levels, but also in how that density prevents meaningful
inclusion of Rio Montana Area Plan criteria.
The community is united in opposition, albeit on different levels. Some neighbors don't want
any development until a street can punch through to W. South Mountain Ave. but everyone I
have talked to agrees that significantly fewer houses would be better for our community overall
to create a transition density between the established S-1 homes on the east and the low
density R1-10 homes to the north and west and would allow for better traffic relief for
Wyndham Square and again, inclusion of Rio Montana criteria.
In an attempt at reasonable compromise, the conversations I have had with neighbors and have
conveyed at our meetings is that a max of 16 houses is something we could live with in addition
to including other Rio Montana criteria.
While I would prefer a lower number of houses, I can support:
·££££££ Max 16 houses.
·££££££ Limiting 2 story houses to 20% of the total and to the western side of the development.
·££££££ Inclusion of the stipulations proposed by the community submitted to the SMVPC.
9/10/24, 12:53 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAB2uJHQW735Au6rLuZp827s…
1/2

We have tried to work with Mr. Fox and our requests have been aligned with our village plan,
what our community feels is appropriate, and a sincere desire to see a quality development
built. Mr. Fox’s plan has been exclusively focused on getting as many lots on the property as
possible. He stated more than once that the city said he “could have” 20 lots and it seems he
thinks that's all the approval he needs.£Mr. Fox appears to have only financial justifications for
his rejection of£ Rio Montana criteria and has not listened to the communities impacted by his
application. We are not opposed to development, but we want development to follow our area
plan and provide reasonable compatibility with our existing neighborhoods.
Please add the stipulations proposed by the community to the application or vote no.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Jewel Clark
2020 W. South Mountain Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85041
£
--£
£ H. Jewel Clark
££hjewelclark@fastmail.com
9/10/24, 12:53 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAB2uJHQW735Au6rLuZp827s…
2/2

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Julie Willcox <jwillcox1227@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 7:37 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Julie Willcox and I live at£9050 S 23rd Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I am opposed to the rezoning application Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio
Montana criteria and is opposed by the majority of the surrounding community.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the
Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We would support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you,
Julie
9/10/24, 12:41 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAIWu4K9QfI1JpmKCUTWBpis…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
stephanie rubio <stephrubio23@hotmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 5:23 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Miguel Rubio£and I live at 8020 S. 20th Ave Phoenix AZ, 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
9/10/24, 12:51 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAABn46HPTRFJgW5NVNvJO…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Mike Josic <mikejosic@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 10:58 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Mike Josic£and I live at 2020 W. South Mountain Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and
this criteria must take precedence over one person's£pursuit of profit at the expense£of the
many current residents. The applicant does not and will not live there and would flip the
property to another developer, extract his profit and leave the current residents with a
completely incompatible£development in their£backyards.
I welcome development in our area, but I want development to be compatible with the existing
character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the
Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
I support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total exclusively on the west side to
preserve the privacy of the existing acre lots on the east side.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Mike Josic
9/10/24, 12:54 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABqIPaxjBhJLmt4orJv2haQ%3D
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
chevera trillo <cheveratrillo@gmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 11:19 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Ntonyt <NtonyT@aol.com>
TO: SMVPC
VIA: Samuel Rogers:
Our names are Nick and Chevera Torrez.£
We live at 2311 West Dobbins Road.£
We are writing to state our opposition to the rezoning application Z-58-24-8.£
No different than the last submission, which we also opposed, that was subsequently withdrawn
from the August 13th SMVP meeting, this current plan does not comply with Rio Montana
criteria and is opposed by the majority of the surrounding community.
As has been the recurring voice within the community, we do welcome responsible
development in our area that adheres to the spirit and intent of the Phoenix General Plan and
the Rio Montana Plan. We continue to ask that£SMVPC be respectful of the community's voices
and input and vote no to Z-58-24-8.£
We join the neighbors of this proposed development and support the following:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you for your time and attention,£
Regards,£
Nick & Chevera Torrez
2311 West Dobbins Road
Phx, AZ 85041
***
9/10/24, 12:43 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANv5fveMKtpIqV0zJMBe410%…
1/2

9/10/24, 12:43 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANv5fveMKtpIqV0zJMBe410%…
2/2

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Robert Branch <branch25rob@yahoo.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 8:21 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Robert and I live at 2012 w harwell rd, Phoenix 85041.£
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you,
RCB
9/10/24, 12:52 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAE7sd3tbJSVLlkWjtt7nlMo%3D
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
stephanie rubio <stephrubio23@hotmail.com>
Mon 9/9/2024 5:21 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
o the SMVPC,
£
My name is Stephanie BellI live at 8020 S. 20th Ave Phoenix AZ, 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
9/10/24, 12:50 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKlCmYEIGxRGkvEdlKV6k6s…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Andrew Maifield <andrewmaifield@yahoo.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 2:10 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
I Andrew Maifield opposed the zoning.£ Density to high for the area.£ The property should be
left as s1 property.£ S1 property is the sole of South Phoenix and should remain that way.££
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]
9/11/24, 4:42 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAA%2Bb1u0xO6VAhFjgZz0%…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Rubio, Arlene <arlene_rubio@uhc.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 4:32 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: mikejosic@gmail.com <mikejosic@gmail.com>; Arlene Rubio <josejr_arlene@yahoo.com> 
 
To the SMVPC,
 
My name is Arlene Rubio and I live at 8230 S. 20th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85042.
 
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
 
We support:
x  A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
x  Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
x  Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you,
 
Arlene Rubio
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity
to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended
recipient or intended recipient’s authorized agent, the reader is hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.
9/11/24, 4:46 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAIyHvatTm%2BhLsVV12MRQf…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Ceasar Acedo <ceasar_acedo88@yahoo.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 4:48 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: Mike Josic <mikejosic@gmail.com> 
To the SMVPC,
 
My name is Ceasar Acedo and I live at 8230 S. 20thAve Phoenix, AZ 85042.
 
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
 
We support:
x  A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
x  Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
x  Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you,
Ceasar Acedo
9/11/24, 4:47 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAE8Jnf2PnylHuWr8gKJ%2FP…
1/1

To the SMVPC, 
  
My name is Ravinder Sharma and I live at 8012 S 20th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85041. 
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria 
and we were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons. 
 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with 
the existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the 
requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan. 
 
We support: 
x A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana 
criteria to be implemented. 
x Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total. 
x Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai 
Goudeau to the zoning application. 
Thank you, 
 
Ravinder Sharma

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Lorraine Gloria <lorigloria@cox.net>
Tue 9/10/2024 12:09 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPc, 
Our name is Ernie and Lori Gloria and we live at 7813 S. 20th Ln., Phoenix, AZ 85041.
We are both opposed to Z-58-24-8.  The current plan does not comply with Rio, Montana 
criteria, and we are not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the 
existing and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the 
Phoenix general plan, and the real Montana plan.
We support the maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the real Montana 
criteria to be implemented.
Limiting two-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC chair by jewel Clark and Jai Goodeaux.
Thank you
Ernie and Lori Gloria
Sent from my iPhone
9/10/24, 1:05 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAFqcTwtT905IpRdcr08Ub6U%…
1/1

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
Re: Opposition to Z-58-24-8
James Betterment <jamesbetterment@gmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 1:04 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is James Betterment and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave. Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. The broker has not made
changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain opposed to this development in
its current form. Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana
Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a
compatible level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan. 
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 8:48 AM Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> wrote:
Good morning, 
Thank you for your leƩer. I will add it to the oﬃcial ﬁle and forward it to the applicant and the
members of the South Mountain Village Planning CommiƩee.
Thank you,
Samuel Rogers, AICP
Village Planner II*
City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Samuel.Rogers@phoenix.gov
602-534-4010
From: James BeƩerment <jamesbeƩerment@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 7:48 AM
9/10/24, 1:08 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPDVeS2CTHhGn5heAyvoziY…
1/2

To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Subject: OpposiƟon to Z-58-24-8
£
My name is James Betterment and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave. Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am writing in opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. The broker has not made
changes to his plans that the neighbors can support.  I remain opposed to this development in
its current form. Development that is compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana
Plan and the design elements and goals that govern our area is welcome. This plan is not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a
compatible level or include other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan. 
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
9/10/24, 1:08 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPDVeS2CTHhGn5heAyvoziY…
2/2

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
Outlook
Re: Presentation for SMVPC meeting, case Z-58-24-8 - Jewel Clark
From H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@gmail.com>
Date Tue 9/10/2024 10:59 AM
To
Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (7 MB)
Z-58-24-8 opposition presentation Sept 10 2024.pptx;
Okay, updated presentation, as best I could do with things changing so much! Ack!
Thanks!
Sincerely,
Jewel
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:19 AM H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh my, that's not the information we had yesterday. I will need to update everyone and my
slides. I'll resend ASAP.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024, 9:58 AM Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> wrote:
Good morning,
Received, thanks for sending this over. The latest site plan I have looks like it was included as slide
No. 11 in your presentaƟon.
Thank you,
Samuel Rogers, AICP
Village Planner II*
City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor [google.com]
Phoenix, Arizona 85003 [google.com]
Samuel.Rogers@phoenix.gov
602-534-4010
9/30/24, 3:45 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAGIvPELEH0xGs6VcXjrRNR0…
1/2

From: H. Jewel Clark <hjewelclark@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:52 AM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
Subject: PresentaƟon for SMVPC meeƟng, case Z-58-24-8 - Jewel Clark
£
Hi Samuel,
This may be a duplicate. I tried replying with my presentation to our thread and I'm not
seeing my reply in my sent box. Trying again.
This presentation has been prepared based on the information provided yesterday that Mr.
Fox has not submitted any new site plan or made any changes to his original application. If
that information is incorrect, would you please let me know so I can quickly amend my
presentation to reflect those changes? If it is more convenient to call me, my number is
480.664.9436 or if there is a good time to call you today to check in I am happy to do that.
If you have time, I would also really appreciate any heads up if he submits a presentation. I'll
make a records request regardless, just to check, but I can make it earlier if I know when it's
submitted.
I've got supplemental slides on the end that with some blanks in between that I don't plan
to show but are there in case it would help to project an image not readily available in
another presentation should a committee member have specific questions where a slide
would be helpful.
Thank you!
Jewel Clark
9/30/24, 3:45 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAGIvPELEH0xGs6VcXjrRNR0…
2/2

Z-58-24-8
Neighborhood Opposition
SMVPC 
Sept. 10, 2024

Latest conceptual site plan/proposal:
• 18 homes on 4.54 acres (reduced from 20 to 
accommodate central open space).
• Density not compatible per Rio Montana 
Community Vision, Land Use Plan, PHX 
General Plan (Certainty & Character).
• Rio Montana criteria still not met- no 
justification other than financial and no 
sincere efforts to incorporate them.
• Community remains opposed for the above 
and other reasons.
Any development that happens should follow 
the Rio Montana area plan and have 
community support. Neither should be ignored 
or be an afterthought.

Certainty & Character
• Green borders represent approved 
development since approx. 2021.
• Densities in the surrounding area do 
not exceed 3.5 DU/AC for R1-10.
• Approved developments include Rio 
Montana criteria.
The community deserves a level of 
certainty on what they can rely on in 
terms of compatible development and 
to have their input listened to. 
We have to live with what gets built.

If development is going to happen with this application, let’s make it something 
the community can live with that is better quality and aligned with our area plan:
• Limit the density to a more appropriate 16 homes (3.5 du/ac). 
• Limit 2-story homes to 20%, aligning with the Rio Montana plan and surrounding 
communities. 
• Adopt the stipulations (inc. density and housing height) submitted by the 
community to address Rio Montana criteria, which will result in a better-quality 
development and more community support.
• Otherwise, please vote no. 
We want compatible and quality development with Rio Montana criteria and 
community support. The applicant’s plan still fails on both counts.

Additional slides for reference.

On-lot retention in 
Wyndham Square.

Satellite view of the area
Proposed development in red border.

PlanPHX 2025 Certainty & Character (pg. 90)
Land use
New development and expansion or redevelopment of existing development in or near residential 
areas should be compatible with existing uses and consistent with adopted plans.
Design
Create new development or redevelopment that is sensitive to the scale and character of 
the surrounding neighborhoods and incorporates adequate development standards to 
prevent negative impact(s) on the residential properties.
Design
Protect and enhance the character of each neighborhood and its various housing lifestyles 
through new development that is compatible in scale, design, and appearance.
Design
Promote neighborhood identity through planning that reinforces the existing landscaping and 
character of the area. Each new development should contribute to the character identified for 
the village.
Design
Require appropriate transitions/buffers between neighborhoods and adjacent uses.
Land use
Protect residential areas from concentrations of incompatible land uses that could 
change their character or destabilize land values.

Contextualism matters. Our area plan matters.
City zoning is a one-size fits all across the valley.
Language in the General Plan and the Rio Montana Plan like, “compatible in scale, 
design and appearance”, exist to protect communities from inappropriate 
development. 
Just because someone can apply for something like bonus density doesn’t mean it’s 
right for that area. 
Developers should not be rewarded when they ignore the community or our area 
plan.

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Jose Perea <jpe.landscaping@gmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 7:07 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Jose Angel Perea and I live at 8004 S 20th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85041.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria to be
implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to the
zoning application.
Thank you.
Jose Angel Perea
9/11/24, 4:49 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPJD5QxELlNFgFReh6m2XE…
1/1

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
Opposition to Zoning case Z-58-24-8
julian galindo <julian.galindo64@gmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 5:26 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Julian Galindo£and I live at 7808 S 20th Lane.
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we
were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by£Jewel£Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Sincerely,£
Julian Galindo
602-413-7791
9/11/24, 4:47 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQACZa9rVbk%2BlCvUrf%2BQ7…
1/1

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
Opposition to zoning case Z-58-24-8
Kara Moreu <kagiovan@hotmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 3:19 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
Cc: ISH326 <imoreu326@gmail.com>
To the SMVPC,
£
My name is Kara Moreu and I live at 7824 S. 20th Lane Phoenix, AZ 85041.£
My husband, Ismael Moreu and I are opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply
with Rio Montana criteria and we were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical
reasons.
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the
existing character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for
zoning, the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.
We support:
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the RIo Montana criteria
to be implemented.
Limiting 2-story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau to
the zoning application.
Thank you.
Kara Moreu
9/11/24, 4:45 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQANIy6dfyoB1CvKrcwkHDShc…
1/1

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
Rezoning case Z-58-24-8
Lisa Cullen <cullen_a_lisa@yahoo.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 4:07 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To whom it may concern,
£ £ £I am writing to express my concerns with the possibility of the construction in our
neighborhood. We have lived in this neighborhood since 2011 and have loved the quiet,
welcoming and safe area. We have built a community that not only knows each other but is
aware of our surroundings and if anything is out of place. There are many children in this
neighborhood that are able to comfortably play 'anywhere'.£
£ £ £ Knowing that the possibility of construction for up to two years or more and the additional
homes and traffic that will bring is going to be a huge safety issue. We have one entry point into
our subdivision and that entry point has a "calming circle" which means cars will be flying down
20th Lane. The congestion entering and exiting baseline is also a safety hazard that will only get
worse.£
£ £ £I don't see why it's such a hurry to develop in this location with it being such a small space.
What's the benefit to you besides money. I know I can speak on the whole community that we
ask that you see it from our point of view that this is not a good idea. Having an£ additional 20
homes with lots half the size of what's existing doesn't create a positive environment. I urge you
to reconsider until the current property owner sells the other half of the property or allows for
another option for entry into what you're trying to build.£
A concerned neighbor, mother, advocate
/R
Lisa Cullen
Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer [mail.onelink.me]
9/11/24, 4:46 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAGvMpyz4WH5Hv%2FOAJgQ…
1/1

Date Sept 9, 2024 
 
To the SMVPC, 
  
My name is Lynnette Myers and I live at 7828 S 20th Lane, Phoenix, AZ 
85041. 
 
I am ABSOLUTY 100% opposed to Z-58-24-8.  
The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and we were 
not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons. 
 
We welcome development in our area, but we want development to be 
compatible with the existing character and quality of the existing 
neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning, the Phoenix General 
Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan. 
 
We could possibly support: 
A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the 
RIo Montana criteria to be implemented. 
Density- problems 
• 
This property is bordered on 2 sides (east and south) by established homes on 
S-1 properties. The north and west sides are bordered by homes on R-10 
property at no more than standard 3.5 density. This development proposes a 
bonus density of 4.5 (20 homes) in addition to ADUs.  
o This density is inconsistent with the surrounding developed land (at 
traditional <=3.5) and an inappropriate transition density for all east and 
southern neighbors with homes on S-1 property. 
o It is not aligned with the Rio Montana Plan which recommends lower 
densities towards South Mount Park and gradual density steps between 
lower and higher density areas. (Rio Montana Plan, pg. 17) 
Traffic- problems 
• 
In relation to inappropriate density, the only entrance/exit is through a 52-
home neighborhood to the north onto Baseline Rd. The neighborhood 
already suffers severely from difficult entrance/exit due to the heavy traffic on 
Baseline while also directly across from a commercial shopping center 
entrance/exit, which sees greater traffic than a neighborhood.  
o According to the ITE Trip Generation Report 10th Edition (Maricopa’s 
Traffic Impact Study Manual references the ITE report as its guideline), a 
single-family house generates 10 trips per day on average. That will 
increase traffic to an already bottlenecked neighborhood by 200 
trips per day on average, not including traffic potentially generated 
by ADU residents.  
• 
No southbound exit/entrance can be counted on b/c the land is currently 
being lived on for the foreseeable future and waiting to see if that will 
eventually become an option to alleviate traffic issues is not good 
planning.

• 
Fire and emergency vehicles will be subject to the same traffic congestion 
potentially impacting safety, property, and health. 
 
Housing design- problems 
• 
The development proposes an unknown number of 2-story homes, which 
are not compatible with the recommendations of the Rio Montana Plan to 
preserve views to South Mountain (Rio Montana Plan, pgs. 22-23) and are 
inconsistent with the vast majority of the surrounding homes, which are single-
story.  
• 
The designers have not incorporated porches, non-street-facing garage 
entrances or other signature elements recommended by the Rio Montana 
Plan in their conceptual designs. 
Housing design- solutions 
• 
Limit construction to single-story (most important). 
• 
Require deep front porches. 
• 
Require some designs to incorporate garages that do not face the street. 
• 
Require more architectural variety and placement/orientation on lots. 
 
Eliminate 2-story homes, I like others on the south side of our 
community picked our lots for the wonderful views to South Mountain 
– putting 2-story homes anywhere destroys that completely!! 
 
There is also no information regarding my wall on the south side of my 
front yard. What is the plan – I need to understand this specify as my home 
is most affected to the design of this possible neighborhood. 
 
If the owner of this undeveloped land has sold to a developer to rezone and build 
they are entitled within the appropriate guidelines of the Rio Mountain Plan; but 
they need to have their own access to that development – NOT THROUGH OUR 
NEIGHBORHOOD!! They should have arranged with the seller access off of S 
19th Ave or off W South Mountain Ave.  This option of our neighborhood should 
NOT even be a possibility!! 
This development as is would dramatically change the safety of our 
neighborhood and my home! Regardless of random drivers not realizing that the 
neighborhood has no outlet we have come together to make things as safe as 
possible with signs, cameras and communication to help one another in our 
neighborhood. I have suffered both a home burglary and a stolen car – I know 
these kind of crimes will only increase dramatically for all of us with the proposed 
access through our community into another community behind us.  
This MUST NOT HAPPEN!! 
 
 
Thank you, 
Lynnette Myers 
HOME OWNER SINCE 2005 
7828 S 20th Lane, Phoenix AZ 85041

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Melissa Sunia <joeysparents@msn.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 6:02 PM
To: Melissa Sunia <joeysparents@msn.com> 
Cc: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>; Michelle Teodoro <Michelle.Teodoro@associaarizona.com> 
My name is Melissa Sunia and I live at 2022 West Branham Lane Phoenix, AZ 85041.
The neighbors have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes
to the plans that would warrant our support of his development.  I remain opposed to
this development in its current form.
R,
Melissa Sunia
Sent from my iPhone
9/11/24, 4:48 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAINm45KMt%2B1GsMbNzLA…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8
Nicki Sordello <nickisordello@yahoo.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 7:48 AM
To:Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
1 attachments (14 KB)
Opposition-letter2 _Z-58-24-8_8008-S-20th-Ave_Nicole.Sordello 9.10.24.docx;
Good morning,
My name is Nicole Sordello, and I live at 8008 S 20th Ave. Phoenix AZ 85041.
I am writing again in strong opposition to the proposed development Z-58-24-8. The broker has not made changes
to his plans that the neighbors can support. I remain opposed to this development in its current form. Development
that is compatible with the density allowed in the Rio Montana Plan and the design elements and goals that govern
our area is welcome. This plan is not it.
The broker has provided no reasons beyond his financial gain to lower the density to a compatible level or include
other meaningful criteria in the Rio Montana Plan.
I respectfully urge you to vote no.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Nicole Sordello
9/10/24, 12:56 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAPA%2FJ56QPphGmm39cKp…
1/1

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
OPPOSITION to Z-58-24-8
Selena Leon <selenanomas@gmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 2:17 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
My name is Selena Leon and I live at 2009 W. Harwell Rd Phoenix, AZ 85041. The neighbors
have not seen that the developer has made any significant changes to the plans that would
warrant our support of his development. I remain opposed to this development in its current
form.
9/11/24, 4:43 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQABJJ5qXxAZRCtP%2FRIOc2T…
1/1

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
Opposition to Z-58-24-8 From 2009 W. Harwell Road
Jai Goudeau <jaigoudeau@gmail.com>
Tue 9/10/2024 2:58 PM
To: Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov> 
To the SMVPC,
My name is Steven Hernandez, I live at 2009 W Harwell Rd. I am
opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio
Montana criteria and we were not in favor of the cul-de-sac design
for practical reasons. I would support:
- A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements
of Rio Montana criteria to be implemented.
- Limiting 2 story homes to no more than 20% of the total.
- Inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC chair
by Jewel Clark and Jai Goudeau.
Thank you.
9/11/24, 4:44 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAHZDNF4IVd9MoTF6m8OW0…
1/1

To SMVP,  
My name is Susan Knight and I live at 7729 S 20th Ln.  
I am opposed to Z-58-24-8. The current plan does not comply with Rio Montana criteria and 
we are not in favor of the cul-de-sac design for practical reasons. We welcome 
development in our area, but we want development to be compatible with the existing 
character and quality of the existing neighborhoods, uphold the requirements for zoning , 
the Phoenix General Plan, and the Rio Montana Plan.  
We support A maximum density of 16 houses to allow for more elements of the Rio 
Montana criteria to be implemented. 
Limiting 2-Story homes to no more than 20% of the total. 
inclusion of the stipulations submitted to the SMVPC chair by Jewel Clark and Jai   
Goudeau .  
Thank you.

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
Outlook
Application Z-58-24-8
From Gregg Holscher <gregg.holscher@gmail.com>
Date Wed 10/2/2024 8:56 PM
To
Samuel S Rogers <samuel.rogers@phoenix.gov>
HI Samuel:
I'm writing to you today to express my feelings about the zoning change from 4 to 20 per acre
density, for a new subdivision 710 feet west of the northwest corner of 20th Ave & South
Mountain.
I strongly oppose this zoning change!
The developer has not provided any plans for what will be on the site with the new zoning.
Previously, they provided illustrations of homes and the layout of the lots on the property.
The developer should be required to submit the same type of information.
Secondly, this is not compatible with the Wyndham Square subdivision.
This will create
substantial traffic through the subdivision.
It will worsen egress at 20 Dr and Baseline, the only
way in or out.
This is not an appropriate zoning change for this area.
Please reject it.
Gregg Holscher
_______________________________
Gregg Holscher
2021 W Maldonado Rd
Phoenix, AZ 85041
Mobile: 602 903 9600
10/3/24, 2:44 PM
Mail - Samuel S Rogers - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/id/AAQkADNkMzc1MjA2LTRjOTktNGNjNi04OWVkLTM5NzllZmM4N2U4MwAQAKqmw3JQQJhDiixviqntSrU%3D
1/1