Attachment B - Staff Report - Z-14-20-2.pdf
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
54802 characters
Staff Report Z-14-20-2
Kierland Sky PUD
October 23, 2020
Paradise Valley Village Planning
Committee Meeting Date:
November 2, 2020
Planning Commission Hearing Date:
November 5, 2020
Request From:
CP/GCP PCD (7.80 acres)
Request To:
PUD (7.80 acres)
Proposed Use:
Planned Unit Development to allow office
with minor commercial uses
Location:
Southeast corner of Kierland Boulevard and
Marilyn Road
Owners:
Kierland Sky, LLC./Ted Akiba
Applicant:
Larry Lazarus/Lazarus and Silvyn P.C.
Representative:
Larry Lazarus/Lazarus and Silvyn P.C.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval, subject to stipulations
General Plan Conformity
General Plan Land Use Map Designation
Industrial
Street Map
Classification
Kierland Boulevard
Collector
35 and 40-foot east half street
71st Street
Local
40-foot west half street
Marilyn Road
Local
30-foot south half street
STRENGTHEN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY CORE VALUE; JOB CREATION
(EMPLOYERS); LAND USE PRINCIPLE: Support General Plan Land Use Map and
zoning changes that will facilitate the location of employment generating uses in
each of the designated employment centers.
The requested PUD will facilitate ongoing investment and development of the greater
Kierland area, which is located within a major employment center.
Attachment B
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 2 of 18
BUILD THE SUSTAINANLE DESERT CITY CORE VALUE; TREES AND SHADE;
DESIGN PRINCIPLES: Integrate trees and shade into the design of new
development and redevelopment projects throughout Phoenix.
The Kierland Sky PUD proposes enhanced landscaping around the development and
internal landscaped areas. A detached sidewalk along Kierland Boulevard, 71st Street
and Marilyn Road includes landscape areas with shade trees on both sides of the
sidewalk to provide thermal comfort for pedestrians. The PUD also requires that a
minimum of 30, 000 square feet of the site reserved as open space, accessible to the
public.
CONNECT PEOPLE & PLACES CORE VALUE; BICYCLES DESIGN PRINCIPLE:
Development should be designed to included convenient bicycle parking.
The PUD contains minimum bicycle parking standards, and the property owner will be
required to install several bicycle infrastructure enhancements on 71st Street.
Applicable Plans, Overlays and Initiatives
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Desert Ridge and Kierland Employment
Center – See background item No. 5 below.
Tree and Shade Master Plan – See background item No. 8
Complete Streets Guiding Principles – See background item No. 9
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan – See background item No. 10
Reimagine Phoenix Initiative – See background item No. 11
Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning
Land Use
Zoning
On Site
Commercial Office
CP/GCP PCD
North (across
Marilyn Rd)
Commercial Office
CP/GCP PCD
South
Commercial Office/Multifamily
Residential
CP/GCP PCD, R-3A PCD
East
Commercial Office
CP/GCP PCD
West (across
Kierland Blvd) Commercial Office
CP/GCP PCD
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 3 of 18
Background/Issues/Analysis
SUBJECT SITE
1.
This is a request to rezone a 7.80-acre
property located on the southeast
corner of Kierland Boulevard and
Marilyn Road. The request is to rezone
from CP/GCP PCD (Commerce
Park/General Commerce Park,
Planned Community District) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) to allow
office with commercial uses.
2.
The subject site consists of one parcel that is under the ownerships of Kierland Sky,
LLC. The site currently contains a two-story office building with surface parking. The
subject site was annexed into the City of Phoenix on October 15, 1961. At that time
the subject site and the surrounding area vastly consisted of vacant land. This area
was planned in 1975 as a Planned Community District (PCD) of 1,082 acres,
previously known as the Desert Springs PCD and now known as the Kierland PCD,
through Rezoning Case No. Z-11-75. Subsequently, the Kierland PCD went through
several amendments since its original approval. The current CP/GCP zoning
designation was established through Amendment F, Rezoning Case No. Z-11-F-75
on February 19, 1997. Maricopa County Historical Aerials indicate that the first
property to develop near the site was in approximately 1997 and the subject property
began development in approximately 1999. The PCD Zoning District is intended to
establish a development pattern for a larger area while permitting flexibility for specific
developments and safeguards that adequate infrastructure needs are met for the
area. The proposed PUD also proposes to remove the property from the PCD and the
developer will be required to provide updated infrastructure as needed and
determined through the Planning and Development Department’s site development
process.
Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 4 of 18
3.
The General Plan Land
Use Map designation for
the subject site is
Industrial. The proposal is
not consistent with the
General Plan Land Use
Map designation but is
consistent with current land
uses in the area. A General
Plan Amendment is not
required because the site
is under the 10 acre
requirement.
The General Plan Land
Use Map designation on all
sides of the subject parcel
are also Industrial, with
some Residential 15+
dwelling units per acre
southwest of the site.
SURROUNDING ZONING AND USES
4.
North
The property to the north of the subject site, across Marilyn Road, is a single-story
office building zoned CP/GCP PCD (Commerce Park/General Commerce Park,
Planned Community District). Further north, across Greenway Parkway, several
developments exceed 56 feet in height and include a mixture of residential and
commercial uses.
Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 5 of 18
South
Directly south of the subject site is a two-story office building called the Offices at
Kierland, zoned CP/GCP (Commerce Park/General Commerce Park, Planned
Community District). Southwest of the site, across Acoma Drive, is a two-story
multifamily development zoned R-3A PCD (Multifamily Residence District, Planned
Community District) through Rezoning Case No. Z-48-91-2.
East
Directly to the east of the subject site is a two-story commercial office complex zoned
CP/GCP PCD (Commerce Park/General Commerce Park, Planned Community District)
West
West of the subject site, across
Kierland Boulevard, are two
commercial office complexes
with two and three story
buildings known as Mesquite
Corporate Center and Element
at Kierland zoned CP/GCP
PCD (Commerce Park/ General
Commerce Park, Planned
Community District).
Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 6 of 18
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Desert Ridge and Kierland Employment
Center
5.
The subject site falls
within the boundaries of
the Maricopa Association
of Governments
designated Desert
Ridge/Kierland major
employment center and
is in close proximity to a
City of Phoenix
designated employment
center. The Desert
Ridge/Kierland
employment center runs
east from 36th Street to
Scottsdale Road
between Deer Valley
Road and the Central
Arizona Project Canal,
including the area from
64th Street to Scottsdale
Road between the CAP
canal and Acoma Drive.
A mix of employment types
are encouraged in employment
centers and commercial corridors.
The Desert Ridge/Kierland employment center profile provided by the City of Phoenix
Community and Economic Development Department identifies that the Kierland area
is comprised of a highly educated, executive and professional workforce with a large
inventory of Class A office space. Providing additional Class A office space options in
close proximity to the nearby workforce housing will add to the sustainability of
established employment center the Kierland area overall.
PROPOSAL
6.
The proposal was developed utilizing the PUD zoning designation. The PUD is
intended to create a built environment that is superior to that produced by
conventional zoning districts and design guidelines. Using a collaborative and
comprehensive approach, an applicant writes a document proposing standards and
guidelines that are tailored to the context of a site on a case by case basis.
Source: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 7 of 18
Where the Kierland Sky PUD Development Narrative is silent on a requirement, the
applicable Zoning Ordinance provisions shall be applied.
7.
Below is a summary of the proposed standards for the subject site as described in the
attached PUD Development Narrative date stamped October 16, 2020. The proposed
standards were designed to allow for a commercial development that continues
enhancement along the Kierland Boulevard corridor for a more pedestrian-friendly
environment and provides a transition from the adjacent residential uses to the south
and southwest.
List of Uses
The Development Narrative proposes a primary land uses of commercial office and
retail. In the event the property is not developed with commercial office uses, C-1
zoning uses found in Section 622 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance shall be
permitted.
Prohibited Uses
The Development Narrative proposes restricting residential uses. Prohibiting these
uses helps to make this proposal more consistent with adjacent commercial office and
retail uses.
Conceptual
Site Plan
The
development’s
main access
points are along
Kierland
Boulevard and
Marilyn Road
via the private
drive bordering
the eastern
boundary of the
subject site.
The project
proposes a six-
story, 88-foot
tall commercial
office building
with retail on
the ground
level, a six-
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 8 of 18
story, 84-foot tall commercial
office building with retail on the ground level and 40-foot tall parking garage that is
partially underground (two levels underground, five levels above ground) and is
completely wrapped in living greenery to soften the aesthetics of the structure. The
subject site proposes 30,000 square feet of open space, which includes a plaza
between the two commercial office buildings activated by ground level restaurants
and retail spaces. A southern courtyard is proposed and is reserved as an open
community space accessible front the public
sidewalk. There is an open garden space
with a pathway that provides access from the
public sidewalk into the site for bicycles and
pedestrians. Kierland Boulevard will contain
an enhanced streetscape with a minimum
eight-foot detached sidewalk framed by
landscape areas that will include trees,
shrubs and live ground cover.
Height limits are proposed adjacent to
residential uses to the south and southwest
with the structures gradually gaining height
to the north. The specific setbacks to
residential, as depicted in the graphic to the
right, is 560 feet from the portion of the proposed project
that is 56 feet tall and 700 feet for the portion of the building that is 84 feet tall.
Terraces are screened with live vegetation reducing the urban heat island effect,
providing a buffer to nearby residential uses and adding to the aesthetics of the area.
Development Standards
The PUD development narrative proposes a single development option with separate
tables for development standards and design guidelines. The comparative zoning
district is CP/GCP. These standards vary from the CP/GCP standards in relation to
height, lot coverage, open space and building setbacks. All other development
standards are comparable.
The proposed maximum height of the project is 88 feet. The CP/GCP standards allow
a maximum height of 80 feet with a use permit. Staff is supportive of the additional
height due to the design and placement of the buildings. Stepbacks have been
incorporated into the design with the lowest portion of the building, closest to
residential, having a maximum height of 56 feet, which is consistent with the base
height permitted in the Commerce Park zoning district. Further, the stepbacks
incorporate shrubbery, which provide an additional buffer from nearby residential
uses.
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 9 of 18
The lot coverage proposed for the project is 52 percent. The CP/GCP standards
require a maximum lot coverage of 50 percent. The additional lot coverage is offset
by a generous open space standard of 30,000 square feet. The CP/GCP standards
are silent on open space. Therefore, the open space proposed far exceeds ordinance
standards and will serve as an amenity to surrounding residents and the local
workforce.
The proposed interior building setbacks are 10 feet and 30 feet where 0 feet is
required in the CP/GCP district standards. A 30 foot building setback is proposed
along Kierland Boulevard, which is comparable to the CP/GCP district requirement.
Landscape Standards
The Development Narrative includes increased landscape setbacks adjacent to the
nearby existing residential uses. Minimum landscape setbacks of 30 feet will be
provided along Kierland Boulevard whereas a 25-foot setback will be provided along
the 71st Street property line. Both areas will utilize existing trees in addition to
replacement 3-inch caliper trees along all public rights-of-way and new 2-inch caliper
trees in all landscape areas. In addition to the landscape setback area along the
western property line, the developer shall install shrubbery and groundcover plants on
terraces – thereby creating additional buffer area to the residential properties to the
south and west.
The streetscape along Kierland Boulevard and Marilyn Road will include a minimum
8-foot wide detached sidewalk and a minimum 3-inch caliper trees along the public
rights-of-ways. This exceeds minimum tree size requirements in the CP/GCP district.
The landscaping will provide for a pedestrian-friendly environment with 75 percent
shade at maturity along the sidewalks, pedestrian pathways and common amenity
areas. The PUD proposes landscaping in these areas with a minimum planting size of
2-inch caliper, with 20 percent 3-inch caliper trees and 50 percent live ground cover.
Healthy large mature trees on the subject site shall be preserved in place.
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 10 of 18
Design Guidelines
and Standards
The Development
Narrative includes
design standards
that promote the use
of community open
space adjacent to
the single-family
neighborhood to the
southwest,
multifamily
development to the
south, across Acoma
Drive and for
pedestrians walking
to and from transit
stops located along
Greenway Parkway
and Scottsdale
Road. The graphic to
the right illustrates
the proposed
pedestrian network
for the site.
Design standards ensure that the building facade will blend with the natural desert
environment and contain 20 percent natural stone, 20 percent metal with a natural
patina finish and 60 percent glazing, as depicted in the graphic below. Elevations of
the building will provide terraces that step back from the residential uses to the south
and southwest and shall be screened with vegetative elements on the rooftops. The
final elevations and building plans submitted to the City will incorporate the provisions
outlined in the development narrative and shall follow the Design Guidelines of
Section 507.Tab A of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 11 of 18
Parking Standards
The proposed parking is less than what is required by Section 702 of the zoning
ordinance. However, staff is supportive of the reduction due to the close proximity of
residential uses, the close proximity of public transit and the site located along a bike
route. The PUD proposes a minimum of one bicycle space per 25 parking stalls with a
maximum of 50 spaces and shall comply with Section 1307.H. of the City of Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance.
Fences/Walls
All site fences and walls will be consistent with Section 703.A of the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance. In addition, all refuse locations will be screened by a six foot minimum
height decorative screen wall that complements the design and character of the
primary building.
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 12 of 18
Amenities
The PUD proposes amenities intended for
use by the general public to include picnic
areas, seating areas, a minimum of four
pieces of public art and community open
space. The graphic to the right depicts
one of the public open space amenity
areas outlined in the applicant’s narrative.
Shade
The proposed shade standards require that a minimum of 75 percent of shade cover
be provided at maturity over pedestrian pathways, both public and private. Further, 50
percent of occupiable roof areas shall be shaded, and 50 percent of all accessible
public and private open space areas shall be shaded.
Lighting Plan
All lighting will be consistent with the standards of Section 704 (Environmental
Performance Standards) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance and Section 626.G.5. (Site
Lighting). Sidewalk lighting shall have a maximum of 20 feet. Uniform pedestrian
scale lighting shall be used for all on-site lighting at building entrances and exits and
in public assembly and parking areas.
Signage
The proposed sign standards are as follows:
• New signage will directly complement the surrounding area and future
residential development.
• Signage within the PUD will maintain a sense of architectural continuity by
using similar architectural styles to adjacent buildings and structures.
• Signs shall utilize complementary colors, textures, and materials.
• Sign locations should be integrated with and not visually dominate the adjacent
structures and streetscape.
• Signs should be oriented to promote readability and serve their intended
purpose.
• Nothing herein shall affect the Owners’ ability to use trademarked font or styles
in their signage.
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 13 of 18
• Illumination of signs will be carefully designed to provide a soft, indirect glow
that does not negatively impact the community or surrounding properties and
conform to
• Section 705.C.6 of the City of Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.
Sustainability
The Development Narrative proposes several options to incorporate sustainability
principals including desert adapted landscaping, vegetated terraces and other open
space areas, which will reduce the heat island effect. The project also proposes
biophilic design principles, the utilization of low flow water fixtures and bicycle
amenities among other features.
PUD Compatibility to Zoning Ordinance
The PUD proposes building setbacks that are comparable or greater than what is
required by the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance in the CP/GCP zoning district. The interior
setbacks are proposed at 10 feet, where the zoning ordinance is 0 feet and the street
setbacks are proposed at 20 to 30 feet where the zoning ordinance requires a 20 foot
setback. All property boundaries adjacent to public streets will include enhanced
landscaping with eight foot and six foot wide detached sidewalks. Shade at 75
percent coverage at maturity will be provided to increase pedestrian comfort and
activity. The open space standards are greater, requiring a minimum of 30,000 square
feet and 30 percent on the rooftop where the CP/GPC code section does not require
open space. The PUD landscape setbacks proposed are comparable or greater
compared to the minimum requirement of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance and require
that 3-inch caliper trees be planted along all public rights-of-way to include Kierland
Boulevard, Marilyn Road and 71st Street.
Phasing
The project will be constructed in two phases. Phase
1 includes the northern most building and a portion of
the parking garage to include the two subterranean
levels and two above ground levels of parking.
Phase 2 includes the southern most building and
three levels of parking, which will complete the
parking structure.
Source: Shepley Bulfinch
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 14 of 18
AREA PLANS, OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AND INITIATIVES
8.
Tree and Shade Master Plan The Tree and Shade Master Plan has a goal of treating
the urban forest as infrastructure to ensure that trees are an integral part of the city’s
planning and development process. In addition, a vision in the master plan is to raise
awareness by leading by example. The proposal includes landscaped pedestrian
walking paths, open space areas and greater planting standards than otherwise
required by the City of Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.
9.
Complete Streets Guiding Principles
In 2014, the Phoenix City Council adopted the Complete Streets Guiding Principles.
The principles are intended to promote improvements that provide an accessible,
safe, and connected transportation system to include all modes, such as bicycles,
pedestrians, transit, and vehicles. There are proposed detached sidewalks adjacent
to the public streets and multiuse pathways throughout the site which provides a safer
and more comfortable pedestrian experience.
10.
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan
The Comprehensive
Bicycle Master Plan
also supports options
for both short-and
long-term bicycle
parking as a means of
promoting bicyclist
traffic to a variety of
destinations. The
proposal requires
bicycle parking spaces
be provided on the
site. A bicycle repair
station (“fix it station”)
shall be provided
along the 71st Street
frontage and be
maintained in an area
of high visibility,
convenient pedestrian access, and available from the public sidewalk.
Bicycle racks shall consist of an inverted-U or other decorative design
and installed per the requirements of Section 1307. H.
Source: Dero
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 15 of 18
11.
Reimagine Phoenix Initiative
As part of the Reimagine Phoenix initiative, the City of Phoenix is committed to
increasing the waste diversion rate to 40 percent by 2020 and to better manage its
solid waste resources. Section 716 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinances establishes
standards to encourage the provision of recycling containers for multifamily,
commercial and mixed-use developments meeting certain criteria. The provision of
recycling is not addressed in the PUD other than building materials and construction
waste.
COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
12.
Staff has received 1 letter of support and 8 letters of opposition with concerns related
to building height, density, line of site to existing residential, buffering, proximity to
Scottsdale Municipal Airport, traffic, and noise. The applicant has worked with
concerned neighbors to mitigate these concerns. Staff has not received any further
letters of concern since the last neighborhood meeting.
INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
13.
The Street Transportation Department has proposed stipulations requiring that all
streets within and adjacent to the development, shall be constructed with all
mandatory elements. All improvements shall meet ADA requirements. No preliminary
approval of plans shall be granted until a Traffic Impact Study/Statement is reviewed
and approved by the City. These are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 2 and 3.
14.
Based on concern from nearby residents, the applicant has voluntarily proposed
funds for traffic mitigation in the area. The applicant has worked with the Street
Transportation Department to develop a phased approach to funding of traffic
mitigation controls around the subject site.
15.
The City of Scottsdale Aviation Department expressed concern with the location of
this project as it relates to the airports flight paths and the 55 and 60 DNL noise
contours of Scottsdale Airport. The City of Scottsdale comments and proposed
stipulations were provided to the City of Phoenix Aviation Department for review.
16.
The City of Phoenix Aviation Department has noted that the site is within the
Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) traffic pattern airspace, therefore, the developer
shall provide notice to prospective purchasers of the existence and operation
characteristics of the Scottsdale Airport and shall provide documentation that Form
7460-1 from the FAA. The requirements are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 4 and 5.
17.
The Phoenix Fire Department has noted that they do not anticipate any problems with
this case and that the site and/or buildings shall comply with the Phoenix Fire Code.
18.
The City of Phoenix Floodplain Management division of the Public Works Department
has determined that this parcel is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), but is
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 16 of 18
Findings
1.
The proposed development is consistent with several General Plan goals and policies
and contains enhanced standards that will result is a more walkable, shaded and
pedestrian-friendly environment.
2.
The proposed development will provide additional employment opportunities in a
designated Major Employment Center area.
3.
The proposed development provides additional protection for nearby residential uses
through site design and enhanced development standards.
Stipulations
1.
An updated Development Narrative for the Kierland Sky PUD reflecting the changes
approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and Development
Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request. The updated
Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development Narrative date
stamped October 16, 2020, as modified by the following stipulations:
a. Front Cover: Remove “HEARING DRAFT” and revise submittal date information on
bottom of the cover page as follows:
1st Submittal: May 17, 2020
2nd Submittal: June 20, 2020
located in a Shaded Zone X, on panel 1760 L of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM) dated October 16, 2013.
19.
The City of Phoenix Water Services Department has noted the property has existing
water and sewer mains that can potentially serve the proposed development.
However, there is potential need to up size existing water and sewer infrastructure
mains so that any remodels or new buildings will be able to meet domestic and fire
code requirements.
OTHER
20.
The site has not been identified as being archaeologically sensitive. However, in the
event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, all ground
disturbing activities must cease within 33-feet of the discovery and the City of Phoenix
Archaeology Office must be notified immediately and allowed time to properly assess
the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 6.
21.
Development and use of the site is subject to all applicable codes and ordinances.
Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements. Other formal actions
such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and abandonments, may be required.
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 17 of 18
Hearing Draft: September 11, 2020
City Council adopted: TBD
b. Add the landscape setbacks to the comparative development standards table.
c. Provide a dimensioned landscape plan depicting distance between sidewalk and
back of curb and landscape setbacks. Include caliper sizes of trees, number of
shrubs under each tree, groundcover percentages in a table format on the plan.
d. Provide landscape standards for the terraces to include minimum 5 gallon shrubs,
with 50% live coverage at maturity.
2.
The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development 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.
3.
The developer shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this development.
No preliminary approval of plans shall be granted until the study had been reviewed
and approved by the City. Additional off-site improvements and right-of-way dedications
may be required as identified in the approved traffic study. Development shall be
responsible for the cost associated with these improvements and dedications.
4.
The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and operational
characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) 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.
5.
The developer shall provide documentation to the City of Phoenix prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a “No Hazard Determination” from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the permanent structure a
separate Form 7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA and a “No Hazard Determination”
obtained prior to the construction start date.
6.
In the event archaeological 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 Archaeologist, and allow time for the Archaeology Office
to properly assess the materials.
Writer
David Simmons
October 23, 2020
Staff Report: Z-14-20-2
October 23, 2020
Page 18 of 18
Team Leader
Samantha Keating
Exhibits
Zoning Sketch Map
Zoning Aerial Map
Community Correspondence (14 pages)
Kierland Sky PUD Development Narrative date stamped October 16, 2020
Z-11-C-75
Z-48-A-91
Z-48-91
Z-11-C-75
Z-11-F-75
Z-48-91
Z-48-91
Z-11-F-75
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
PCD
PCD
GC/PCD
PCD
PCD
PCD
CP/GCP
PCD
CP/GCP
PCD
C-2
CP/GCP
R1-10
R-3A
ACOMA DR
71ST ST
KIERLAND BLVD
69TH ST
SCOTTSDALE RD
ACOMA DR
GREENWAY PKWY
MARILYN RD
DEER VALLEY DR
SR 101
UNION HILLS DR
BELL RD
GREENWAY RD
THUNDERBIRD RD
CACTUS RD
SHEA BLVD
S
Q
U
A
W PEAK PKWY (SR 51)
16TH ST
24TH ST
32ND ST
40TH ST
TATUM BLVD
56TH ST
64TH ST
SCOTTSDALE RD
PARADISE VALLEY VILLAGE
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 2
I
APPLICANT'S NAME:
APPLICATION NO.
Z-14-20
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
7.80 Acres
MULTIPLES PERMITTED
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
CP/GCP PCD
PUD
CONVENTIONAL OPTION
N/A
N/A
* UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
N/A
N/A
Larry Lazarus/Lazarus and Silvyn P.C.
DATE:
3/25/2020
REVISION DATES:
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
QS 34-44
ZONING MAP
L-12
REQUESTED CHANGE:
FROM: CP/GCP PCD ( 7.80 a.c.)
TO:
PUD ( 7.80 a.c.)
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-14-20.mxd
Z-14-20
0.055
0
0.055
0.0275
Miles
Z-11-C-75
Z-48-A-91
Z-48-91
Z-11-C-75
Z-11-F-75
Z-48-91
Z-48-91
Z-11-F-75
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
PCD
PCD
GC/PCD
PCD
PCD
PCD
CP/GCP
PCD
CP/GCP
PCD
C-2
CP/GCP
R1-10
R-3A
ACOMA DR
71ST ST
KIERLAND BLVD
69TH ST
SCOTTSDALE RD
ACOMA DR
GREENWAY PKWY
MARILYN RD
Maricopa County Assessor's Office
DEER VALLEY DR
SR 101
UNION HILLS DR
BELL RD
GREENWAY RD
THUNDERBIRD RD
CACTUS RD
SHEA BLVD
S
Q
U
A
W PEAK PKWY (SR 51)
16TH ST
24TH ST
32ND ST
40TH ST
TATUM BLVD
56TH ST
64TH ST
SCOTTSDALE RD
PARADISE VALLEY VILLAGE
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 2
I
APPLICANT'S NAME:
APPLICATION NO.
Z-14-20
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
7.80 Acres
MULTIPLES PERMITTED
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus
CP/GCP PCD
PUD
CONVENTIONAL OPTION
N/A
N/A
* UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
N/A
N/A
Larry Lazarus/Lazarus and Silvyn P.C.
DATE:
3/25/2020
REVISION DATES:
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
QS 34-44
ZONING MAP
L-12
REQUESTED CHANGE:
FROM: CP/GCP PCD ( 7.80 a.c.)
TO:
PUD ( 7.80 a.c.)
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2020\Z-14-20.mxd
Z-14-20
0.055
0
0.055
0.0275
Miles
1
David O Simmons
From:
Amy Satterfield <mamsat5@cox.net>
Sent:
Friday, June 5, 2020 1:19 PM
To:
David O Simmons
Subject:
#Z-14-20
David,
Thank you for providing the staff notes on the Kierland Sky project, case #Z‐14‐20. I appreciate having the opportunity to
review and share with others on the Kierland Community Alliance (KCA) board.
As you may be aware, this project has been discussed with Larry Lazarus at length on several occasions. Mr. Lazarus and
his client, Mr. Akiba, met with the KCA Board early on to make us aware of the project and gather feedback. We have
since met on other occasions and appreciate their willing to collaborate and allow us the opportunity to be involved in
this process as the project unfolds.
I was quite concerned about a comment you made during our phone call the other day regarding the KCA’s approval of a
project height of 70’. The KCA has never issued a formal statement on the acceptable height. The board has expressed
serious concerns to the applicant regarding the proposed height and have suggested they find ways to significantly
lower the heights of both buildings. The board would prefer a bigger footprint with lower height or stepped back heights
from the street and residential neighborhood. We were encouraged by staff comments that recommended a maximum
height of 56’.
When Mr. Lazarus first came to us, he shared what you confirmed in our conversation, that the developer could go
through a use permit process with the current zoning and build up to a height of 80’. While I understand that to be the
case, it is also my understanding that by going through the use permit process utilizing the current zoning, the higher the
building, the greater the setbacks. I would appreciate some clarification on this requirement.
This was taken from the applicant’s narrative:
“Maximum height for current zoning CPD/GCP 18' within 30' of perimeter lot line; 1' increase per 3' additional setback,
maximum 56' to 80' with use permit and site plan”
It is my understanding is as a result of those set back requirements, the developer would be severely limited on the
buildable space on that lot. Utilizing the PUD process allows the developer to potentially expand the footprint of the
buildings and increase height.
Our concerns for our neighborhood are many.
Precedent Setting
While the projects north of Greenway have been generally agreed upon at heights not exceeding 70’, that area is not
close to single family homes and has a completely different dynamic. This is the first rezoning case we have seen for the
commercial development bordered by Kierland Parkway on the west, Scottsdale Road to the east, Greenway to north
and Acoma to the south. Whatever is approved on this property will be setting a precedent for future development in
the area.
Height
In addition to my comments above regarding height, as noted by staff, the height is a serious concern this close to single
family homes. Not only are site lines a concern with the privacy of residents yards and homes, but as noted the reflective
glass would shine into homes and yards as well. Additionally, there is a rise in elevation from the single family homes to
2
this property which would make the buildings appear much higher than the proposed height. There is also concern
regarding outdoor patio space and noise that might be generated as a result without means to mitigate that noise from
traveling.
Traffic
With the increase of development in the area on both sides of Scottsdale Road, there has been an increase in cut
through traffic in and around our neighborhood. A traffic study was done recently (approximately within the last year or
so) by the City of Phoenix because of neighborhood concerns relating to traffic volume and speed along 68th Street
north of Thunderbird and on Acoma from 64th Street to Kierland Parkway. It is important to note that Sandpiper
Elementary School sits on the corner of 68th Street and Hearn Road and has a large population of open enrollment
students who are driven to the school by their parents.
The traffic study supported the installation of several speed humps along 68th Street and three on Acoma. The speed
humps were installed on 68th Street but only one was installed on Acoma. I am not sure where the other two speed
humps would have been located and why they were not installed.
The other street that is frequently traveled is 69th Street from Thunderbird north to Acoma. I was informed by Tony
Hernandez in the Street Transportation Department that there were no traffic mitigation options available for 69th
Street as it has a drainage area down the center of the street. This is of great concern when the applicant is proposing
over an 80% increase in the available square footage on the site.
Additionally, as noted in the traffic study provided by the developer, the traffic lights at both Kierland Parkway and
Greenway Road as well as Acoma and Scottsdale Road, have both received a failing rating, causing cars to wait a
significant amount of time to exit the area. The traffic study did not include the light at Scottsdale and Thunderbird
which, during rush hour, has significant back ups in both east and west bound directions causing traffic to filter through
our neighborhood.
Given that only 68th and 69th Streets have access from Thunderbird to Acoma, north and south bound cut through
traffic only filters on those streets. Acoma is the only street between Thunderbird and Greenway that has access from
64th Street to Scottsdale Road. While this may be classified as a collector street, it has a speed limit of 25 mph. The
street is fronted by six residential homes and is highly frequented by both pedestrians and bicyclists.
Timing
The current situation with COVID‐19 has brought with it many new processes including virtual meetings with the City.
While this may work well in certain situations, since this is a new and potentially precedent setting development in our
area, we feel very strongly that this rezoning case necessitates an in‐person community meeting. It is critical that the
surrounding neighborhood be involved in this process. We have conveyed our desires to Mr. Lazarus and Mr. Akiba and
ask that the City honor that request as well.
David, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this PUD application in the early stages of this process. We look
forward to future discussions and hopefully reaching a mutually agreed upon development project.
Sincerely,
Amy Satterfield
On behalf of the Kierland Community Alliance Board
6932 E. Hearn Rd.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
cc:
Mr. Larry Lazarus
1
David O Simmons
From:
Ami Mikhail <amikhail19@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, June 22, 2020 6:23 PM
To:
LLazarus@lslawaz.com; David O Simmons
Subject:
Case #2-14-20-2 conerns
Dear David,
I am one of the residents in Desert Paradise Estates in Scottsdale with concerns over a project that is scheduled to be
developed just outside of my quiet and safe neighborhood in the near future. I am concerned and disappointed to know
that the heights of the proposed buildings will exceed 70' which has historically been agreed upon not to do. Since this
new height is being proposed and considered, this will distort the neighborhood and set a precedent for further
buildings to be built above this height in the future. The proposed height of these buildings poses a major concern when
being so close to homes lived in by families, such as myself. Not only would our privacy be invaded upon, but I would
imagine the glare from the windows would shine into our homes and that there will be an increase in the ground noise
and foot/car traffic as a result of such a large building structure. I for one, like many homeowners, would prefer not
having increased traffic and noise in their neighborhood, especially for the safety of my young children. Being from a
large city with tall buildings is the reason I moved to Scottsdale where I could raise my family in a neighborhood setting
without these buildings looking down upon the privacy of my backyard.
With all of this being said, I think that despite our current virtual world, we should have an in‐person community
meeting so that all of the neighbors in the area can be aware, informed and have the chance to convey their thoughts on
the matter on the rezoning of this case. It has been previously conveyed to Mr. Lazarus and Mr. Akiba that the City
honor this request as well.
I appreciate your time and opportunity to leave my comments on this PUD application in the early stages of the
case. I hope that we can come to an agreement in the near future regarding my concerns on this project and how it will
impact me and my family and our safety. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ami
1
David O Simmons
From:
Amy Satterfield <mamsat5@cox.net>
Sent:
Tuesday, July 7, 2020 3:32 PM
To:
David O Simmons
Subject:
Kierland Sky project
Follow Up Flag:
Follow up
Flag Status:
Flagged
David,
Have there been any additional notes from the City on the Kierland Sky project? Has the developer made any changes to
their application?
I understand they plan to present to the PVVPC on August 3rd for informational purposes and again on August 31st for a
vote. I would imagine that these meetings will continue to be virtual. Is there a link that I can provide to our
neighborhood so people may be able to participate?
Thank you.
Amy Satterfield
1
David O Simmons
From:
Amy Satterfield <mamsat5@cox.net>
Sent:
Wednesday, July 15, 2020 10:55 AM
To:
David O Simmons
Subject:
Kierland Sky project
David,
We had a follow up call with Larry Lazarus and crew yesterday regarding the Kierland Sky project. There seems to be
some discrepancy about the height the city would approve. He said the last round of comments indicated the city
wouldn’t approve anything higher than 80’. I thought the city said nothing higher than 56’. Can you clarify? Would you
also send me the latest round of staff notes? They are still planning to ask for 90’ and 84’ which are higher than either
number.
Additionally, could you let me know how many parking spaces are currently on the site and how many they are
proposing? How many are they required to have based on the amount of office space they want to build?
Has notification been sent to the Plaza Residences on Acoma? I think they are within 600’ of the property.
Thank you.
Amy Satterfield
1
David O Simmons
From:
David O Simmons
Sent:
Thursday, July 23, 2020 3:32 PM
To:
davidekropp@gmail.com
Cc:
Samantha Keating; David Urbinato; Kristi Trisko; Larry Lazarus
Subject:
RE: Zoning request and new development in KIERLAND
Attachments:
080320_reviseda.pdf
Mr. Kropp,
Thank you for reaching out in regard to Rezoning Case No. Z‐14‐20‐2, Kierland Sky PUD. Your opposition has been noted
and added to the case file to be included as part of the public record. I have also forwarded your email to the applicant
as well as to the members of the Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee so they are aware of your concerns. This
case has not been scheduled for public hearings for recommendation. However, it has been scheduled to be heard in
front of the Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee on August 3, 2020 at 6:00 pm via WebEx in order for the
applicant to gain critical feedback from the community and Village Planning Committee.
If you wish to speak at the virtual meeting, please submit a request to myself, David Simmons, Paradise Valley Village
Planner, via email at David.Simmons@phoenix.gov at least 48 hours prior to the start of the meeting. Please indicate the
item(s) number on the agenda if you wish to speak. In this instance, it is agenda item number 3 (see attached agenda).
Staff will provide you further instructions on the process for public comment during the virtual meeting. Staff will make
every effort to accommodate requests to speak submitted beyond the 48 hour period. Due to the added demands of
facilitating the virtual environment for the public, applicants and other staff members, we cannot consider any request
less than six business hours before the start of the meeting.
Staff does not have a position on the case as of yet. We will not have a recommendation until we have a hearing draft of
the development narrative. We are currently at the very beginning of the second review cycle. Once we have a hearing
draft, I will be able to draft the staff report with a staff recommendation and schedule public hearing dates for
recommendation.
The applicants narrative is available for review on the City’s website:
https://www.phoenix.gov/pdd/planning‐zoning/pzservices/pud‐cases
Please let me know if you have additional comments or concerns.
Respectfully,
David Simmons, MA
Planner II* Village Planner
200 West Washington Street
3rd Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85003
602‐262‐4072
david.simmons@phoenix.gov
2
From: Jim Waring <Jim@JimWaring.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2020 9:02:53 AM
To: Brian T Schmitt <brian.schmitt@phoenix.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Zoning request and new development in KIERLAND
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: David <davidekropp@gmail.com>
Date: July 18, 2020 at 5:33:14 AM MST
To: Jim Waring <info@jimwaring.com>
Subject: Zoning request and new development in KIERLAND
This new development creates two issues for me
1. Acoma Road is already too busy, during morning and afternoon hours, and sometime at nights when
we get back to, normal bar hours.
If this and maybe other developments go through. The part of Acoma road that goes through the single
family part of Kierland will become much more dangerous. Already we have had numerous
accidents on the road. If this development is approved, Acoma will need multiple Multiple speed
bumps or become a one way road or cut off from traffic At the east end where it turns.
2. Much more high ride buildings for the Student to pilots to crash into. Since the FAA set the flight
path out of the airport numerous years ago. The developments Are dramatically changed. The FAA
needs to change the flight path to a left hand turn out the the Airport. Yes that are is developed too,
but mostly low rise commercial instead of schools, hotels and high rise condos and now office buildings.
David E.Kropp,
KIERLAND homeowner
480‐209‐0333..mobile
1
David O Simmons
From:
Steve <steve@HEALTHCAREDEFENDER.COM>
Sent:
Monday, June 1, 2020 2:04 PM
To:
David O Simmons
Subject:
Opposition to Kierland Sky, Z-14-20n
Dear Mr. Simmons,
I am writing in opposition to Kierland Sky, Z-14-20n, a project being considered at the southeast
corner of Marilyn Road and Kierland Blvd. I live about ½ mile from that area and drive by it
twice at day, six days a week.
The development is problematic. The intersection of Acoma Drive and N. Kierland Blvd. has
become much busier over the 25 years I have lived a short distance away even with the
relatively small contribution from the single story garden office complex. The traffic on E.
Greenway Parkway is considerable. The proposed development would increase the traffic
several fold and that does not take into account the dramatic increase that will follow the
completion of the Westin Kierland Resort addition.
It should also be pointed out that Marilyn Road is nothing more than the entrance to the office
complex. It is not a reasonable alternative to get to Scottsdale Road.
At this rate of development, two things will happen. First, the streets will no longer be
negotiable. Second, this area will continue its metamorphosis from Phoenix/Scottsdale into New
York City. I do not believe anyone living in this area wants that.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Steve
Steven B. Perlmutter, M.D., J.D., LL.M.
Attorney at Law
Physician and Surgeon
9141 East Hidden Spur Trail
Scottsdale, AZ 85255
(480) 346-1212 (Office)
(480) 304-4827 (Fax)
(602) 330-3800 (Text)
steve@healthcaredefender.com
https://boardcomplaint.com [boardcomplaint.com]
This email is confidential and subject to attorney-client privilege -- is it meant for you? If not, please delete it, and
kindly contact me! Don't use the advice contained in this email to avoid tax penalties.
2
1
David O Simmons
From:
Joseph Griffith <joegriffith@cox.net>
Sent:
Monday, August 3, 2020 6:17 PM
To:
David O Simmons
Cc:
llazarus@lslawaz.com; MGreen@lslawaz.com
Subject:
Kierland Sky Project Concerns
From: Joe and Michelle Griffith, 6510 East Spring Rd, Scottsdale, AZ 85254
To: Village Planning Committee
Our property backs up to East Acoma Dr. We are very concerned about the amount of additional traffic this project will
cause through our neighborhood. Traffic has already increased due the significant development in the Kierland area.
Most of the current traffic is well over the posted speed limit of 25mph.
We respectfully request the Committee reject this proposal.
Regards,
Joe and Michelle Griffith
602‐820‐7751
1
David O Simmons
From:
Kathi Haas <kathi.haas.az1@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, August 3, 2020 4:10 PM
To:
llazarus@lslawaz.com; MGreen@lslawaz.com; David O Simmons
Subject:
Concerns re: Kierland Sky development - TRAFFIC, DENSITY, NOISE
We are original owners of our home at 6907 E Evans Dr that was built in 1993. Granted the area has changed greatly
since that time (Westin, Kierland Commons, etc.), but none of those developments have had an immediate and negative
impact on our quality of life like the proposed Kierland Sky development will.
The major concerns are traffic and potential noise, not to mention the loss of the low‐density, low‐height
commercial space that currently frames our residential neighborhood. It's definitely not going to feel the same with 80‐
foot tall buildings on that corner.
HEIGHT
The Desert Paradise Estates community ‐ and adjacent community of UDC homes ‐ have enjoyed the open space
provided by the Kierland Golf Course and low‐level office buildings since they were created. Building 80‐foot or taller
office buildings on this parcel ‐ that mimic what is being built along Scottsdale Road and 71st Street north of Kierland ‐ is
simply not compatible with our neighborhoods. High rise buildings belong on busy streets (like Scottsdale Road), or in
multi‐family neighborhoods like Optima and the nearby areas that originally were built as dense living projects. They are
not appropriate for our single‐family neighborhoods.
TRAFFIC
Acoma is already a very busy (supposed to be 25 mph neighborhood street) during morning and evening commuting
times. Despite the recently added speed hump between 68th and 69th streets, drivers often race down that street
regardless of time of day. Adding more office space and commuters is sure to greatly increase the traffic on Acoma. And,
since 69th Street is the closest clear shot to Thunderbird Road, we will continue to see increasing numbers of cars on
this street.
We've been advised that due to drainage on 69th Street, adding speed humps there is not an option ‐ meaning there is
no way to deter non‐neighborhood residents from using 69th street. We also can't add a gate at the T‐intersection of
69th & Acoma since those are public streets. Since Acoma (as a collector street) provides an easy shortcut (and no traffic
light delays) to Scottsdale Road on the east, and up to Greenway road on the west/north (becoming 66th Street) that
route is sure to see a substantial increase in cars. There already are times in the morning/afternoon, where I often have
to wait for traffic at the stop sign at Acoma/Kierland to turn north or east to exit the neighborhood to Greenway or
Scottsdale Roads.
Mandating a "no left turn" out of the complex onto Kierland is going to be very hard to police, unless there are periodic
enforcement blitzes that punish offenders and tenants get the message that making a left turn there is definitely a "no‐
no".
Is adding speed humps on Acoma west of 68th street (up towards Greenway Road) ‐ which doesn't have neighbors
within 100‐fee on either side who would have to be consulted/approve ‐ be an option? The golf course is on the
north/east sides of that road and the other side doesn't have houses facing the street. At least that would make
drivers heading south from Greenway or from the side Acoma entrance endure an enforced slower speed, and maybe
convince them they should just make the turn south off of Greenway at Kierland.
NOISE
2
Our neighborhoods recently had to endure more than 2 years of excessive, loud, rock 'n roll music noise from live bands
that played outdoors at BLK Live, an entertainment venue about a mile away on Butherus Drive at the Scottsdale Airport
that closed in August 2019.
Your plan calls for retail/restaurant space on the lower level. While those are wonderful amenities for both workers and
nearby residents, having outdoor entertainment on that property would likely be a nightmare for residents in our
neighborhood.
I would like to see prohibitions in the zoning and/or leases for this space that specifically prevent outdoor concerts or
other events (ie, car auctions, etc. ‐ anything that has loudspeakers/announcers during the event).
NIGHT TIME COMMERCE
Restaurants operating in the complex should have mandated closing times that protect the neighborhood from late
night traffic on Acoma and our neighborhood streets. It seems that most of the restaurants in Kierland Commons close
at 8 pm weekdays and 9 pm on weekends. I would hope that those hours of operation could be stipulated at Kierland
Sky as well.
Thank you,
Kathi Haas
480‐399‐6716