Attachment D - VPC Summary - Z-TA-1-20-8.pdf
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
6283 characters
City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-TA-1-20-8 Date of VPC Meeting September 14, 2020 Request Amend Section 1202.D. (Regulating Maps, Density Map) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to replace the Downtown Code Density Map to amend density provisions from 218 maximum dwelling units per acre to No Density Limit at the southeast corner of 6th Street and Garfield Street and amend Section 1214.B. (Evans Churchill East, Development Standards) to allow for a height bonus up to ten percent and to increase the maximum lot coverage south of Garfield Street from 50 percent to 90 percent. VPC Recommendation Approval VPC Vote 7-4 VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS: Committee members Chris Colyer, Nate Sonosky and Wayne Rainey recused themselves for this item, bringing quorum to 11. Four speaker cards were submitted in favor wishing to speak. Three speaker cards were submitted, wishing to speak. Sarah Stockham, staff, presented a brief overview of the sustainability bonus points in the Downtown Code. She displayed an aerial map of the subject site, reviewed surrounding land uses, and elaborated on the request to update the density map, allow for a height bonus and increase the maximum lot coverage south of Garfield Street. She ended her presentation by reviewing the schedule for the case for the remaining hearing bodies. Nick Wood, representing the applicant with Snell & Wilmer, displayed an aerial map, conceptual renderings and reviewed surrounding land uses. Mr. Wood displayed the development standards table and parking standards table, explained the site layout on the site plan, and the items they are including in the project to meet the proposed sustainability points. Mr. Wood explained that they are requesting no density limit because when the density map was originally proposed with the implementation of the Downtown Code, there was not a vision for smaller units at a higher density that is seen today. Mr. Wood continued that the request for increased lot coverage protects Attachment D Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-TA-1-20-8 September 14, 2020 Page 2 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 the areas north of Garfield Street while the area south of Garfield Street, which was originally included in the Bio Med Character Area of the Downtown Phoenix Plan, would have a higher maximum lot coverage. Mr. Wood explained that the applicant will have to incorporate more items in the project to meet the sustainability points required for increased height and concluded his presentation with images for the proposed art at the northwest corner of the site. Eva Olivas asked if there was a name for the building. Mr. Wood responded that the proposed building does not have a name yet, but they will be working on that. Shannon Dubasik asked if the developer who will be building this project has worked on any projects in Phoenix, and if any of the units will be affordable. Mr. Wood replied that the developer is from Chicago and this will be their first project in Phoenix. He continued that this project has applied for a GPLET and will provide 31 units of workforce housing, in addition the developer would like to make a $100,000 contribution to the Housing Department to aid the development of affordable housing. Patrick Panetta asked how many additional units would be obtained with the proposed 25 feet of extra height. John McLinden, with Hubbard Street Group, replied that the actual height increase they will be using is 15 feet which is absorbed by the restaurant, amenity area, co-working space, and the 9-foot ceiling heights in the units. Chair Rachel Frazier Johnson asked the applicant to elaborate on why they are requesting no density, stating that while the proposed project is for 309 units, with the no-density designation could exceed that in the future. Mr. Wood replied that the density they are proposing is similar to what is designated south of the subject site, and that the smaller units will be more affordable. Vice Chair Janey Pearl Starks asked what the estimated rent will be. Mr. McLinden replied that the estimated rent for the smaller units will be $1,000 and ranging to $3,000 for the largest units. Dana Johnson asked if the units are strictly rentals. Mr. McLinden replied affirmatively. Public Comment: Wayne Rainey shared that downtown Phoenix should be dense, as utilities such as water and power work best when they are distributed in a dense environment. He added that as a City we have fought for density and he invites density and views it as a gift. Bramley Paulin stated that he likes the proposed project and asked what the terms for the GPLET will be and how it will not be unconstitutional like the Derby case. Mr. Wood explained the Derby case and stated that GPLETs are now limited to an 8-year abatement and necessary as high-rise construction is risky with thin profit margins. Central City Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary Z-TA-1-20-8 September 14, 2020 Page 3 City of Phoenix • Planning & Development Department 200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 Andie Abkarian, Downtown Voices Inc and Roosevelt Action Association, shared concern with the proposed density as spot-zoning, with affordability of the units, and concluded that she was in favor of the large-caliper tree size. Motion: Dana Johnson motioned to recommend approval per the staff recommendation. Michael Langley seconded the motion. Discussion: Chair Rachel Frazier Johnson shared concern with the no-density designation and how that will play out in the surrounding area. Vote: 7-4, Motion to approve passed, with committee members Burns, Johnson, Langley, Lockhart, Martinez, Olivas, and Panetta in favor and committee members Dubasik, R. Johnson, Starks and Uss opposed. STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS: None.