View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text

Public Hearing - Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Expansion of
Nonconforming Mobile Home Developments - Z-TA-3-23-Y (Ordinance G-7134)

Request to hold a public hearing on a proposed text amendment Z-TA-3-23-Y and to
request City Council approval per the Planning Commission recommendation which
amends Chapter 9 (Nonconformities) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance regarding
expansion of nonconforming mobile home developments.

Summary
Application: Z-TA-3-23-Y
Proposal: Amend Chapter 9, Section 902 (Expansion of Nonconforming Use) of the
Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to allow existing mobile home developments to increase
the number of units by 50 percent with administrative review and approval by the
Zoning Administrator.

Applicant: City of Phoenix, Planning Commission
Representative: City of Phoenix, Planning and Development

Staff Recommendation: Approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y as shown in Exhibit A of the staff
report (Attachment B).
VPC Action: Eight Village Planning Committees (VPCs) considered the request. Four
VPCs recommended approval, per the staff recommendation; one VPC recommended
approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction to require site improvements for
improved safety such as lighting, signage, walls and landscaping; one VPC
recommended approval, per the staff recommendation with a modification to add a use
permit requirement; one VPC recommended approval, per the staff recommendation
with a modification to add a notification requirement for administrative review and to
strengthen the provisions related to the review; two VPCs recommended denial; and
six VPCs did not have a quorum, as reflected in Attachments C and D.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on June 1, 2023, and
recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 7-1.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Alan Stephenson and the Planning and
Development Department.

Page 676
ATTACHMENT A

THIS IS A DRAFT COPY ONLY AND IS NOT AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE FINAL,
ADOPTED ORDINANCE

ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF PHOENIX, ARIZONA, PART II, CHAPTER 41, THE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX BY AMENDING
CHAPTER 9, SECTION 902 (EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMING
USE) TO ALLOW EXISTING MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENTS TO
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS BY 50% WITH
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as

follows:

SECTION 1: That Chapter 9, Section 902 (Expansion of Nonconforming Use), is

amended to read:

Amend Chapter 9, Section 902 (Expansion of Nonconforming Use) as follows:

A nonconforming use shall not be expanded or extended beyond the floor area or lot area
that it occupied on the effective date of these regulations, the effective date of any
amendment to these regulations, or the effective date of annexation into the City
rendering such use nonconforming, except that:

A. A structure housing a nonconforming single-family residential use may be
expanded up to fifty percent beyond the floor area or lot area that it occupied on
the date it was rendered nonconforming, subject to obtaining a use permit in
accordance with the procedures and standards of section 307; and

B. An accessory structure for a nonconforming single-family residential use may be
expanded up to fifty percent beyond the floor area or lot area that it occupied on
the date it was rendered nonconforming, subject to obtaining a use permit in
accordance with the procedures and standards of section 307.

C. AN EXPANSION OF A MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED
TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF MOBILE HOME UNITS BY UP TO FIFTY
PERCENT OF THE UNITS THAT LEGALLY EXISTED BEFORE JULY 1, 2023
WITH ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ZONING

-1- Ordinance ________
Page 677
ADMINISTRATOR. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SHALL REVIEW AND HAVE
DISCRETION TO ENSURE THAT THE ADDED UNITS MEET THE INTENT OF
ADEQUATE SETBACK BETWEEN UNITS, PERIMETER SETBACKS, AND
OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THAT
MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT.

No provision in this chapter shall be construed to permit expanding or extending a
nonconforming use beyond the confines of the lot or parcel of land upon which it was
located on the date the use became nonconforming or to permit any expansion of a
nonresidential or multiple-family residential nonconforming use.
***

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 28th day of June, 2023

________________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________City Attorney

REVIEWED BY:

____________________________City Manager

-2- Ordinance ________
Page 678
ATTACHMENT B

Staff Report
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
Z-TA-3-23-Y
(Expansion of Nonconforming Mobile Home Developments)
April 21, 2023

Application No. Z-TA-3-23-Y: Amend Chapter 9, Section 902 (Expansion of
Nonconforming Use) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to allow existing mobile home
developments to increase the number of units by 50% with administrative review and
approval by the Zoning Administrator.

Staff recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y as shown in
Exhibit A.

BACKGROUND
Residents of mobile home communities throughout the City of Phoenix have faced
displacement due to the redevelopment of mobile home park sites. In response to
community concerns and in coordination with the Mayor and City Council, an
internal work group was formed on September 28, 2022, to determine how the city
could assist families facing imminent displacement and to identify measures to reduce
future risk.

The Work Group was comprised of City staff from throughout the organization and
included the Phoenix Industrial Development Authority (IDA). The team was charged
with evaluating all legal and financial assistance the City could offer to the tenants of the
displaced communities. The team also reviewed and evaluated options to develop long-
term strategies to prevent this issue from happening in the future. The resulting
research report from the internal work group was issued November 25, 2022, and an
updated report was issued on February 23, 2023 (Exhibit B).

The report detailed programs, initiatives, and strategies to address the displacement of
mobile home residents in the city of Phoenix. However, due to limitations from Arizona
Revised Statutes, the city is limited from taking certain actions. The report included legal
analysis and also covered approaches taken by other jurisdictions to address similar
challenges in their communities. Each proposed program and strategy were detailed in
this report along with a set of recommended actions. Recommended programs and
strategies were organized by the following:

1. Immediate Solutions - Financial Assistance and Support Services;
2. Medium Term Solutions - Planning and Zoning Initiatives;
3. Long Term Solutions - Ownership and Acquisition Strategies.

Page 679
Z-TA-3-23-Y
June 1, 2023 Planning Commission

On March 22, 2023, Mayor and Council directed staff to move forward with 12 viable
recommended actions outlined in Exhibit B. Action Item #8 recommended modifications
to nonconforming Zoning Ordinance provisions.

Staff obtained input from various stakeholders and held four meetings to review and
request additional input on the proposed text amendment. Stakeholders included
individuals from the following organizations:

• Manufactured Housing Communities of Arizona (MHCA)

• Manufactured Housing Industry of Arizona (MHIA)

• Arizona Department of Housing Board of Manufactured Housing Member

• Affordable Housing/Private Developers

• Arizona State University, Real Estate Development

PURPOSE
The intent of the proposed text amendment is to allow for the expansion of legal non-
conforming mobile home developments by increasing the number of mobile home units
and other types of units like Park Models (aka Tiny Homes) in existing mobile home
developments. Many existing mobile home developments within the City of Phoenix are
considered nonconforming. Many were annexed from Maricopa County or were
developed under different zoning requirements which rendered them nonconforming. An
expansion of a nonconforming use is limited to a structure housing a nonconforming
single-family residential use or an accessory structure for a nonconforming single-family
residential use. Existing mobile home developments are frozen in time at the time they
became nonconforming. Any expansions or changes would require bringing the site into
compliance with existing requirements for offsite manufactured home developments,
adding significant costs for improvements. The proposed text amendment would allow
existing mobile home developments to expand by adding additional units through an
administrative review to ensure that the added units meet the intent of adequate
setback between units, perimeter setbacks, and other development standards that are
consistent with that mobile home development.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED TEXT
The proposed text provides an administrative process for existing legal nonconforming
mobile home developments to increase the number of mobile homes units that existed
legally before July 1, 2023, up to 50%. The administrative review would include
adequate setbacks between units, perimeter setbacks, and other development
standards that are consistent with that mobile home development.

CONCLUSION
The proposed text amendment will allow existing mobile home developments to
increase the number of units by 50% with administrative review and approval by the
Zoning Administrator.

Page 680
Z-TA-3-23-Y
June 1, 2023 Planning Commission

Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y as proposed in Exhibit A.

Writer
T. Gomes
4/21/23

Exhibits
A. Proposed Language
B. Research Report City Manager’s Office dated 2/23/23

Page 681
EXHIBIT A
Text Amendment Z-TA-3-23-Y:
Expansion of Nonconforming Mobile Home Developments

Proposed Language:

Amend Chapter 9, Section 902 (Expansion of Nonconforming Use) as follows:

A nonconforming use shall not be expanded or extended beyond the floor area or lot area
that it occupied on the effective date of these regulations, the effective date of any
amendment to these regulations, or the effective date of annexation into the City
rendering such use nonconforming, except that:

A. A structure housing a nonconforming single-family residential use may be
expanded up to fifty percent beyond the floor area or lot area that it occupied on
the date it was rendered nonconforming, subject to obtaining a use permit in
accordance with the procedures and standards of section 307; and

B. An accessory structure for a nonconforming single-family residential use may be
expanded up to fifty percent beyond the floor area or lot area that it occupied on
the date it was rendered nonconforming, subject to obtaining a use permit in
accordance with the procedures and standards of section 307.

C. AN EXPANSION OF A MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED
TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF MOBILE HOME UNITS BY UP TO FIFTY
PERCENT OF THE UNITS THAT LEGALLY EXISTED BEFORE JULY 1, 2023
WITH ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SHALL REVIEW AND HAVE
DISCRETION TO ENSURE THAT THE ADDED UNITS MEET THE INTENT OF
ADEQUATE SETBACK BETWEEN UNITS, PERIMETER SETBACKS, AND
OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THAT
MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT.

No provision in this chapter shall be construed to permit expanding or extending a
nonconforming use beyond the confines of the lot or parcel of land upon which it was
located on the date the use became nonconforming or to permit any expansion of a
nonresidential or multiple-family residential nonconforming use.
***

Page 682
EXHIBIT B

RESEARCH REPORT
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE DATE ISSUED
2/23/23
TO: FROM:
SUBJECT
Mobile Home Resident and Mobile Home Park Displacement Options

Introduction

Residents of mobile home communities throughout the City of Phoenix have faced displacement
due to the redevelopment of mobile home park sites. Residents of three communities, including
Periwinkle, Weldon Court, and Las Casitas, are under imminent threat of displacement. Many
residents of these communities have contacted the City of Phoenix to seek assistance. In
response to these concerns and in coordination with the Mayor and City Council, an internal
work group was formed on Sept. 28, 2022, to determine how the City of Phoenix can assist
families facing imminent displacement and to identify measures to reduce this risk in the future.

Background

The Work Group is comprised of City staff from throughout the organization and includes the
Phoenix Industrial Development Authority (IDA). The team was charged with evaluating all legal
and financial assistance the City could offer to the tenants of the three properties mentioned
earlier in this report. The team also reviewed and evaluated options to develop long-term
strategies to prevent this issue from happening in the future.

This report details programs, initiatives, and strategies to address the displacement of mobile
home residents in the City of Phoenix. However, due to limitations from Arizona State Statutes,
the City is constrained from taking certain actions. This report includes legal analysis and also
covers approaches taken by other jurisdictions to address similar challenges in their
communities. Each proposed program and strategy is detailed in this report along with a set of
recommended actions. Recommended programs and strategies are organized by the following:

1. Immediate Solutions - Financial Assistance and Support Services;
2. Medium Term Solutions - Planning and Zoning Initiatives;
3. Long Term Solutions - Ownership and Acquisition Strategies.

Page 250
Staff also recommends supporting Arizona State legislative changes that would increase the
State-administered displacement funds for each resident that is impacted by redevelopment of
mobile home parks, as well as any legislative changes that would allow for a Right of First
Refusal Purchase by the existing residents when mobile home park developments are offered
for sale.

The section entitled Viable Options details the actions staff recommends the City implement to
assist families facing displacement. The section entitled Non-Viable Options provides
information on programs and strategies that were evaluated but determined to be non-viable
options. Attachment A provides an overview of staff recommendations as well as the evaluated
programs which were determined to be non-viable options, based on legal analysis and the
research conducted by the Work Group.

Legal Analysis and Discussion

The Work Group on mobile home parks asked the Law Department to analyze the legal risks of:

1. Imposing a development moratorium on redeveloping mobile home parks;
2. Eliminating non-mobile home park zoning entitlements from existing mobile homes;
3. Requiring mobile home park landlords to pay relocation assistance exceeding the amount
required by Arizona Revised Statute;
4. Using City funds to pay residents additional relocation assistance exceeding the amount
required by Arizona Revised Statute.

First, the City cannot impose a development moratorium on any private property, including
mobile home parks, without clear justification. The Arizona State Legislature has declared
development moratoriums a matter of statewide concern, because moratoriums could negatively
affect property rights and property owners. The City would have to determine that a moratorium
is justified (e.g., a lack of adequate infrastructure, among other things), and limit the location and
duration of any moratorium.

Second, the City can eliminate non-mobile home park zoning entitlements from an existing
mobile home park without exposing the City to potentially significant claims for diminution of
property value under Prop. 207. However, any land use law that diminishes a landowner’s
existing rights to use, divide, sell or possess their land would require the City to compensate the
landowner for the diminished value.

Third, the State established a regulatory system for all mobile landlord-tenant relationships,
including a relocation fund to pay relocation assistance to tenants displaced from a mobile home
park. Thus, the City is potentially preempted from requiring landlords to pay more than what is
available from the site relocation fund.

Page 251
Finally, the Arizona Constitution prohibits the City from giving or loaning its public resources
(e.g., general fund dollars) to aid, donate, or subsidize individuals or companies. The City may
be subject to a challenge for violation of the gift clause if the City expends general funds to
provide additional relocation assistance to mobile home park tenants.

Viable Options

This section details recommended actions for the City of Phoenix to implement to assist
individuals and families facing displacement from mobile home communities.

Immediate Solutions: Financial Assistance and Support Services

1. Rental/Utility Deposit and Rental Payment Assistance

Staff recommends two financial assistance programs which can be implemented
immediately to support impacted residents. Using already approved American Rescue
Plan Act (ARPA) Tranche One and remaining Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA)
funds, the proposed programs include rent and utility (water/sewer, gas and electric)
deposits, and rental/utility payments for up to 15 months (inclusive of three months
forward rent and utility credits) or 12 months lump sum rental payment.

The following eligibility requirements will be used for deposit and payment assistance:
• Must be a Phoenix resident.
• Must have an income at or below 120 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) or
$106,560 for a family of four.
• Must qualify for unemployment benefits, experience a reduction in income, or
experience other financial hardships caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Must demonstrate risk of homelessness or housing instability.
• Must have incurred rent (including deposits, move-in costs, legal and late fees) and
utility bills after March 13, 2020. (If rent has not been charged, they are not eligible
for assistance beyond help securing a new dwelling unit.)

2. Case Management and Housing Navigation Services

Staff recommends a new program to provide case management and housing navigation
services in partnership with a local, community-based non-profit that specializes in
providing these types of services. If approved, the Human Services Department will
request Council Approval to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for up to
$300,000 using American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Tranche One funding with the City of
Phoenix Industrial Development Authority (IDA) to contract with Helping Families in Need
(HFIN). Currently, Trellis is providing these services through a contract with Grand
Canyon University (GCU) for Periwinkle residents.

With Council approval, HFIN would provide services to residents of the Las Casitas and
Weldon Court communities. The services would include case management that supports

Page 252
housing needs, access to physical healthcare, behavioral healthcare, nutrition
assistance, cash assistance, workforce development, emergency rental assistance and
vouchers, etc.

3. Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV)
Staff recommends providing Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV) to assist individuals and
families facing displacement from mobile home parks. The EHV program is available
through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) via the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD). The vouchers are available to assist individuals and families
who are homeless, at risk of homelessness, recently homeless or have a high risk of
housing instability. The program is managed through a direct referral process from the
Continuum of Care (CoC) regional Coordinated Entry (CE) System and could potentially be
utilized by displaced residents, pending availability and meeting eligibility requirements.

Eligibility for use of the voucher program is determined through the CoC CE System. At
least one family member must be a U.S. Citizen or eligible non-citizen to utilize the
program. Once eligibility has been determined, referrals are made to the Housing
Department through designated coordinated entry points. This resource is limited and will
be utilized until exhausted.

4. Communication Strategy and Action Protocol
Staff recommends developing a communication strategy and action protocol to inform
residents of critical information related to their potential displacement as well as available
assistance programs and other resources.

In 2019, the City of Apache Junction and Arizona State University completed a study on
Mobile Home Parks. The study focused on preserving affordable housing, improving the
conditions of mobile home parks, increasing the quality of life for residents, and promoting
the redevelopment of parks when appropriate. One of the key recommendations was the
creation of a communication strategy and action protocol for the notification and provision of
resource assistance for mobile home residents when the park in which they reside
becomes available for sale.

This recommendation is to develop communication strategies that connect mobile home
residents with resources and inform residents at risk of displacement of opportunities for
other affordable housing options. The information would include an overview of the rights of
mobile home residents, approved programs within this report and other available resources,
such as the State of Arizona’s Mobile Home Relocation Fund. This fund provides monetary
assistance to mobile home owners when mobile home parks are closed or redeveloped.
The fund provides moving expense assistance, through direct payment to an installer, of up
to $7,500 for a single-wide or $12,500 for a multi-section home.

Page 253
5. Homeownership Down Payment Assistance

A. Open Doors Down Payment Assistance Program

Staff recommends providing residents information and assistance to participate in the
Open Doors Down Payment Assistance program, which is designed to assist eligible first-
time homebuyers with the purchase of an affordable home in the City of Phoenix.
The program, funded by the federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program, provides
down payment and/or closing cost assistance to households earning at or below 80
percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). The beneficiary must be a U.S. citizen or
eligible non-citizen. To utilize program funding for a manufactured home purchase, the
home must be affixed as real property, on a permanent foundation and connected to
permanent utility hook-ups.

Total assistance is based on eligibility and individual need. Homebuyers will be required
to attend pre-purchasing counseling provided by a U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) certified housing counseling agency and certified housing
counselor. Homeownership down payment assistance funds are offered as a deferred
payment loan that:
• Has an interest rate of 0 percent with no monthly principal payments;
• Provides up to 10 percent of the purchase price of a home;
• Is fully forgiven after the period of affordability;
• Can be layered with other homeownership down payment assistance programs.

B. Additional Support through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)

Staff also recommends pursuing the possibility of supplementing the Housing
Department’s Open Doors Down Payment Assistance Program with available CDBG
funding. The additional assistance could be provided to eligible families interested in
homeownership. Beneficiary must be a U.S. citizen or eligible non-citizen.

CDBG funds can assist low- to moderate-income households with the following
homeownership activities for the purchase of single-family homes:

• 50 percent of the lender required down payment;
• Payment of closing costs, which must be deemed reasonable;
• Subsidized interest rates and mortgage principal amounts.

Note: The following medium- and long-term recommended solutions would be included
in the City’s overall strategy to assist residents of mobile home communities. However,
these recommendations would not address the current concerns related to the imminent
displacement of residents at the three identified communities.

Page 254
Medium Term Solutions: Planning and Zoning Initiatives

6. Modify Existing Special Permit Mobile Home Park Development Requirements

Staff recommends the consideration of modifying existing Special Permit Mobile Home
Park Development requirements to make it easier to continue to operate, expand, or
create new mobile home parks. This could be done by modifying the existing special
permit allowances.

Staff recommends modifying the existing special permit allowances for mobile home
parks through a text amendment to the zoning ordinance. This text amendment would
address current zoning ordinance requirements to look for ways to increase market
viability so that developers could develop new mobile home parks. This amendment
would look at zoning requirements for items such as but not limited to minimum acreage
size, spacing between units, and common open space. It could also allow other housing
types within the new mobile home park. This could allow for new parks to be built that
would offer more affordable housing than traditional homes. The expansion could include
additional relocation requirements if developed under the new text amendment
provisions.

7. Create A Mobile Home Park Zoning Overlay Incentive District

Staff recommends the consideration of drafting a Mobile Home Park Zoning Overlay
Incentive District with incentives for property owners of existing mobile home parks to opt
into the overlay and operate as a mobile home park.

With the Overlay District, property owners could “opt in” and obtain greater property
entitlements in one of two ways. The first option would be the property owner would
maintain the existing mobile home park for (e.g., 10 years) in exchange for additional
density, height, or setbacks, etc. after the specified timeframe was met. The second
option would allow the property owner to redevelop the site in exchange for additional
density, height, or setbacks, etc., before the specified timeframe was met, if onsite
affordable housing was provided or funds were allocated for relocation fees. In order for
this option to be viable, logistical challenges would need to be remedied through robust
stakeholder meetings and feedback, to discuss any potential incentive for additional
setbacks, height requirement, density, etc. As a result, there could be significant
challenges associated with this option.

Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S.) 12-1134 precludes the City from requiring the overlay
be applied to existing mobile home parks but incentivizes the maintenance of existing
mobile home parks.
8. Modify Legal Non-Conforming Zoning Ordinance Provisions

Staff recommends modifying Legal Non-Conforming Zoning Ordinance provisions to
allow for expansion of existing mobile home parks. Staff recommends a text amendment
that specifically allows for the expansion of legal non-conforming zoning rights to cite

Page 255
additional mobile home units and other types of units like tiny homes in existing mobile
home parks. This effort will also allow for a review of the on-site development code and
infrastructure requirements to ensure that minimum requirements are as safe and
efficient as possible. Staff recommends expanding the allowable housing types such as
tiny homes (Park Models) to replace existing mobile homes. Tiny homes provide an
affordable alternative to mobile or manufactured homes. Currently, Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance allows existing mobile home parks to replace older mobile homes (built prior to
June 15, 1976) with a manufactured home (built after June 15, 1976, per U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards) by right.

Additionally, most existing mobile home parks are considered nonconforming. Many were
annexed from Maricopa County or were developed under different zoning requirements
which rendered them nonconforming. An expansion of a nonconforming use is limited to
a structure housing a nonconforming single-family residential use or an accessory
structure for a nonconforming single-family residential use. Existing mobile home parks
are frozen in time at the time they became nonconforming. Any expansions or changes
would require bringing the site into compliance with existing requirements for mobile
home parks, adding significant costs for improvements. An amendment to the Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance to allow existing mobile home parks to expand by adding additional
units and make proportional improvements could also be considered.

9. Explore Opportunities to Partner with Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF)

Staff recommends exploring opportunities to partner with a Qualified Opportunity Fund
(QOF) to invest in purchasing mobile home park land when a property owner desires to
sell for redevelopment. Purchase by the fund would allow for additional time to help
impacted mobile home residents move to another location or pursue other options. Any
purchased land would take advantage of the Mobile Home Park Zoning Overlay Incentive
District allowances to enhance their interest in purchasing the parcel.

Long Term Solutions: Ownership and Acquisition Strategies

10. Partner with Nonprofit(s) to Purchase Mobile Home Parks

Staff recommends working to identify nonprofit partners to purchase existing mobile
home parks to stabilize the existing park operations and/or allow for redevelopment of the
property that limits displacement of existing residents.

If redevelopment is pursued, the City can partner by offering funding assistance for new
affordable housing development that prioritizes new housing options for mobile home
park residents. Available funding for purchase and/or redevelopment must be identified
and may have residency requirements. Due to the timing associated with redevelopment,
residents may need to be temporarily relocated and potentially pursue alternative housing
options.

Page 256
The Phoenix Industrial Development Authority (IDA) has agreed to work with the City to
develop financing options that may assist non-profits or other community partners in their
purchasing efforts.

11. Establish Resident Owned Communities (ROC USA)

Staff recommends engaging with ROC USA, which is a national nonprofit that assists
existing mobile homeowners in forming a cooperative entity to finance the purchase of a
mobile home park.

ROC USA works with regional technical assistance affiliates to study the feasibility of
purchasing mobile home parks, helping residents form a cooperative association, and
identifying funding sources for the purchase. ROC USA may be able to provide loans to
assist with the resident purchase of a mobile home park. To pursue resident purchase of
a mobile home park, park ownership concurrence and traditional and/or nonprofit funding
sources must be identified. Increasing land values and potential for park redevelopment
could make it difficult to find park owners who are willing to participate in this program.

12. Develop a Comprehensive Strategy and Action Plan

Staff recommends the development of a Comprehensive Strategy and Action Plan
related to mobile home communities and manufactured housing. This Comprehensive
Strategy and Action Plan would be developed through the formation of a steering
committee comprised of City staff, community members, and housing experts.

The City of Boulder, Colorado developed a Manufactured Housing Strategy with an
Action Plan focused on efforts that encourage the preservation of existing manufactured
home communities, facilitating the development of new manufactured home
communities, increasing opportunities for Resident Owned Communities (ROCs),
reducing or eliminating health and safety issues, and rehousing displaced households.

By engaging in a comprehensive study and analysis the City will be better prepared to
take a proactive approach in assisting residents of mobile home and manufactured
housing communities.

Non-Viable Options

This section provides information on the programs and strategies that were evaluated by staff
but determined to be non-viable options to assist individuals and families facing displacement
from mobile home communities.

Financial Assistance and Support Services

1. City of Phoenix Affordable Housing Units and Housing Choice Vouchers

Page 257
Staff evaluated the possibility of providing displaced mobile home residents access to
public housing or affordable units by housing displaced communities at City properties.
Staff also evaluated providing Housing Choice Vouchers to eligible individuals and
families. Both strategies were determined to be non-viable solutions.

Currently all public housing and affordable housing properties have high occupancy rates
and a wait list of interested residents. Similarly, the Housing Choice Voucher wait list is
currently closed. The current U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) approved Administrative Plan for wait list local preferences does not include
private displacement action, therefore mobile home park residents being displaced by
private action could not be directly placed into vacant units or provided a Housing Choice
Voucher.

Ownership and Acquisition Strategies

2. City Purchase of At-Risk Mobile Home Parks

Staff evaluated the possibility of the City of Phoenix purchasing mobile home parks that
are at risk of investor purchase, which would potentially result in the displacement of
residents. This option would prevent resident displacement and increase stability while
preserving affordable housing.

However, staff determined this was a non-viable solution due to the following challenges:
• Current park owners would need to agree to sell to the City of Phoenix.
• There is a high number of mobile home parks Citywide.
• There would be additional costs including required infrastructure improvements,
replacement of unsafe units, contract with third-party management companies, etc.
• It would be inconsistent with previous community planning efforts.
• Long-term financial costs associated with being a mobile home park owner are not in
line with City priorities.

3. City Acquisition of Land for Mobile Home Use

Staff evaluated the possibility of the City of Phoenix purchasing land for mobile home
use. This option would increase affordable housing options. However, staff determined
this was a non-viable solution due to the following challenges:
• It would be an inefficient use of land and subsidy when higher density housing could
be developed to address the current housing shortage more effectively.
• There is limited availability of suitable sites (10-acre minimum, correct zoning, etc.).
• There would be additional costs including required infrastructure improvements,
replacement of unsafe units, contract with third-party management company, etc.
• It would be inconsistent with previous community planning efforts.

Page 258
4. City-Owned Property for Use as Manufactured/Mobile Home Park or Tiny Homes

Staff reviewed the list of City-owned properties for use as a manufactured home park and
the requirements for use including development, relocation of units, and
management. The minimum site size for development of an average 100-space park is
seven and one-half acres.

Staff concluded the use of City-owned property for use as a manufactured home park is
non-viable since the City does not have excess land suitable for this purpose.
Furthermore, the high cost and risk associated with this type of development, as well as
ongoing management and maintenance, are impediments to using City-owned
property. The current inventory of City-owned land is comprised of sites that are either
too small to accommodate a manufactured home park or larger sites set aside for
affordable housing, future fire stations, water facilities, other public uses, or located within
a residential neighborhood and originally planned for a neighborhood park.

Utilizing City-owned property would require homes currently facing displacement to be
physically moved from their current locations. This type of move is estimated to cost
approximately $10,000 to relocate a mobile home. In most situations, moving
professionals have been unwilling to relocate these structures due to the age and
associated risk of moving these units. Additionally, development cost of a 100-space
manufactured home park is estimated to be approximately $1.8 million. Considering the
gift clause, the use of City-owned land as a manufactured home park would require
leases at market rent. Management fees are generally seven to ten percent of collected
rents, plus ongoing operation and maintenance costs, reserves for replacement, liability,
and risk. As a result, residents would still face affordability challenges. For these reasons,
staff determined the utilization of City-owned property is a non-viable option.

Planning and Zoning Initiatives

5. Exclusive Zoning District for Mobile Home Parks

Staff does not recommend the consideration of drafting a Mobile Home Park Zoning
District and rezoning existing mobile home parks because it would be a new land use that
diminishes the value of the properties zoning entitlements, and the City would be required
to pay for the diminished value under Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S.) 12-1134.

This exclusive zoning district would limit the allowed land use to mobile home parks and
accessory uses for the park (e.g., clubhouse, pool, etc.). Most existing mobile home
parks are entitled with multifamily or commercial zoning which makes the land extremely
vulnerable to redevelopment, loss of low-income housing options, and contributes further
to resident displacement. This approach was found not to be a regulatory taking in the
State of Washington under LAUREL PARK COMMUNITY v. CITY OF TUMWATER;
however, the City is liable to diminution of property value under Arizona Revised Statute

Page 259
(A.R.S.) 12-1134 if new zoning district is applied retroactively, meaning landowners
would need to be compensated. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds are likely not a
source of compensation for affected landowners.

Recommendations

Based on legal analysis and the research conducted by the Work Group:

Staff recommends the following immediate programs:
• Utilizing American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA)
funding for Rental/Utility Deposit, Rental Payment Assistance, Case Management and
Housing Navigation Services. It is important to note that the amount of funds available is
limited, as is the timeframe the funds are available.
• Providing Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV) to individuals facing displacement.
• Developing a Communication Strategy and Action Protocol.
• Focusing outreach efforts of the Open Doors Down Payment Assistance Program to
benefit mobile home park residents, and possibly supplementing the program with
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding.

Staff recommends the following medium-term programs:
• Addressing existing Special Permit Mobile Home Park Development requirements,
making it easier for landowners to continue to operate, expand, or create new mobile
home parks.
• Creating a Mobile Home Park Zoning Overlay Incentive District to provide incentives for
property owners to delay redevelopment of existing mobile home parks.
• Addressing Legal Non-Conforming Zoning Ordinance provisions to allow expansion of
existing mobile home parks and tiny homes.
• Explore opportunities to partner with a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF) to invest in
purchasing mobile home park land when a property owner desires to sell for
redevelopment.

Staff recommends the following long-term programs:
• Partnering with nonprofit(s) to purchase mobile home parks.
• Working with residents at risk of displacement to engage with and create Resident
Owned Communities (ROC USA).
• Developing a comprehensive strategy and action plan to take a proactive approach in
assisting residents of mobile home and manufactured housing communities.

Staff also recommends supporting Arizona State legislative changes that would the State-
administered displacement funds for each resident that is impacted by the redevelopment of
mobile home parks, as well as any legislative changes that would allow for a Right of First
Refusal Purchase by the existing residents when mobile home park developments are offered
for sale.

Page 260
Attachment A

Based on legal analysis, staff recommends the following proposed programs and strategies to
assist mobile home residents in the City of Phoenix:

RECOMMENDED PROGRAMS TIMELINE
Rental/Utility Deposit and Rental Payment Assistance Immediate
Case Management and Housing Navigation Services Immediate
Emergency Housing Vouchers (EHV) Immediate
Communication Strategy and Action Protocol Immediate
Homeownership Down Payment Assistance Immediate
Modify Existing Special Permit Mobile Home Park Development
Medium Term
Requirements
Create A Mobile Home Park Zoning Overlay Incentive District Medium Term
Modify Legal Non-Conforming Zoning Ordinance Provisions Medium Term
Explore Opportunities to Partner with Qualified Opportunity Fund
Medium Term
(QOF)
Partner with Nonprofit(s) to Purchase Mobile Home Parks Long Term
Establish Resident Owned Communities (ROC USA) Long Term
Develop a Comprehensive Strategy and Action Plan Long Term

Staff evaluated the following programs and strategies but determined they are non-viable
options to assist families facing displacement from mobile home communities:

EVALUATED PROGRAMS – NON-VIABLE OPTIONS TIMELINE
City Affordable Housing Units and Housing Choice Vouchers N/A
City Purchase of At-Risk Mobile Home Parks N/A
City Acquisition of Land for Mobile Home Parks N/A
City Property for Manufactured/Mobile Home Park or Tiny Homes N/A
Exclusive Zoning District for Mobile Home Parks N/A

Page 261
ATTACHMENT C
TA-3-23: Nonconforming Mobile Home Developments
-
Village Planning Committee Summary Results

Village Date Recommendations Vote
Paradise Valley Approved, per the staff recommendation with
direction to to require that any expansion of
illegal and legal non-conforming parks have
5/1/23 11-2
site improvements for improved safety,
including lighting, signage, walls and
landscaping
Encanto Approved, per the staff recommendation with
5/1/23 a modification to add a use permit 11-3
requirement
Camelback East 5/2/23 Denied 9-5-3
Desert View Approved, per the staff recommendation with
a modification to add a notification
5/2/23 requirement for administrative review and to 9-0
strengthen the provisions related to the
review.
Central City 5/8/23 No Quorum N/A
Laveen 5/8/23 Denied 4-3
Rio Vista 5/9/23 Continued to June 13, 2023 6-0
6/13/23 Approved, per the staff recommendation 3-1
South Mountain 5/9/23 No Quorum N/A
Maryvale 5/10/23 No Quorum N/A
Deer Valley 5/11/23 Approved, per the staff recommendation 7-1
North Gateway 6/8/23 Approved, per the staff recommendation 5-0
Estrella 5/16/23 No Quorum N/A
North Mountain 5/17/23 Approved, per the staff recommendation 13-0
Ahwatukee Foothills 5/22/23 No Quorum N/A
Alhambra 5/23/23 No Quorum N/A

Page 695 6/14/2023
ATTACHMENT D

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 22, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION:
No quorum.

Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 696
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 23, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

No quorum.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 697
REVISED
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 2, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Denial
VPC Vote 9-5-3

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

STAFF PRESENTATION

Sarah Stockham provided a presentation on mobile home developments, the status,
background and non-conforming conditions and text amendment changes. Ms.
Stockham mentioned that existing mobile homes originally in the County were not built
to City standards and had limitations for expansion. Ms. Stockham stated that mobile
homes would be allowed to expand but still be required to meet standards and would
still be subject to administrative review to be consistent with the text amendment.

QUESTIONS FROM COMMITTEE:

Ms. Eichelkraut asked about the administrative review and noted concern about safety
and conditions of mobile home parks, displaced residents and the City’s response. Ms.
Stockham responded that increasing density would require an administrative review for
compliance with site standards by the Zoning Administrator. Ms. Eichelkraut asked if
site conditions would be taken into consideration for the review. Ms. Stockham
mentioned that all conditions would be considered for safety and access.

Ms. Jurayeva ask if a two- or three-story development could be added to increase
density. Ms. Stockham responded that it would depend on the standards of the zoning
district they are in.

Ms. Schmieder asked if a mobile home could currently be added to a residential zoned
district to increase density for a future expansion and what is the time frame to be
considered non-conforming. Ms. Stockham responded that the date for a legal non-
conforming addition is July,1 2023.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 698
Mr. Grace asked about density on a site and if you can add other alterative home types
on a site. Ms. Stockham responded that it would depend on the density and the space
depending on the development type.

Ms. Schmieder asked about parking standards on a site. Ms. Stockham responded
that parking requirements would have to follow underlying standards for the zoning
district.

Ms. Nye stated that this amendment does not seem to address housing needs and only
intends to respond to site requirements.

Mr. O’Malley stated that this amendment as presented is going to raise public concerns
and he is not in support of the measure and this should have been brought to the
Committee a couple of times to frame the problem and explore solutions and engage
with other parties.

Mr. Sharaby stated that more information is needed for this text amendment.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:

Neal Haddad with the Arcadia Osborn Neighborhood Association introduced himself
and provided background on the text amendment and noted that cities are responding
to legislative actions to eliminate local control of zoning. Mr. Haddad stated that there is
a push because cites do not operate fast enough and the administrative review will be
very important in the text amendment process in moving forward.

STAFF RESPONSE:

Ms. Stockham responded that the intent is to address displacement of residents and
for the issue of timing that the Council wants to hear this matter before the summer
break.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND VOTE:

Chair Swart stated that he agrees with Mr. Sharaby when it comes to text amendment
introductions and movement and there are concerns because the details need to be
vetted and there needs to be time for review. Chair Swart stated that amendments need
time and members cannot support these measures if they have not studied the actions.

Ms. Stockham stated that all the Committee comments will be shared and noted that
the Committee expressed a need to hear the amendments as information only prior to
voting.

MOTION:

Committee member Vic Grace motioned to recommend denial of T-TA-3-23-Y.
Committee member Sharon Schmieder seconded the motion.

VOTE:

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 699
9-5-3; motion to recommend denial Z-TA-3-23-Y passed with Committee members
Baumer, Eichelkraut, Garcia, Grace, Paceley, Schmider, Sharaby, Fischbach, and
Swart in favor, Committee Member Augusta, Beckerleg Thraen, Langmade, Miller, Nye
in opposition, and Committee Member Abbott, Jurayeva and O’Malley in abstention.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 700
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 8, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION:

No quorum.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3 rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 701
REVISED
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 11, 2023
Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
Request
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 7-1

No members from the public registered to speak on this item.

VPC DISCUSSION:
Mr. Matteo Moric, staff, provided an overview of the proposed text amendment.

Keith Greenberg asked what legal nonconforming meant.

Mr. Moric explained that it meant a structure was built legally at the time of construction
- either it was done while it was part of the County or when the City rules were different,
but no longer complied to the requirements of today. Mr. Moric explained that not all the
parks would be able to expand the 50 percent.

Will Novak stated that homes in his neighborhood were legal nonconforming and asked
if this would be to allow more units.

Mr. Moric stated that the applicant would have to submit a site plan for review by the
Zoning Administrator.

Racelle Escolar, staff, explained that this is more of an opportunity for more options
where they could go. Ms. Escolar indicated that the City Managers Report shows how
there are many efforts related to mobile home parks, and this is just one effort.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.

MOTION:
Brandon Shipman motioned to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff
recommendation. Will Novak seconded the motion.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 702
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

VOTE:
7-1; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff recommendation
passes with Committee Members Davenport, Greenberg, Novak, Shipman, Virgil and
DiLeo in favor; and Field in opposition.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 703
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 2, 2023
Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
Request
address nonconforming mobile home developments
Approval, per the staff recommendation with
VPC Recommendation
modifications
VPC Vote 9-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

One member of the public registered to speak on this item.

STAFF PRESENTATION
Anthony Grande, staff, described the proposed text amendment and provided an
overview of the purpose and intent of the request and the details of the proposed
changes to the text.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE
Vice Chair Lagrave asked about setback requirements and about the process. Mr.
Grande stated that the Zoning Administrator would review and that the intent would be
to maintain existing setbacks.

Chair Bowser asked about a process to ensure that manufactured homes will follow
life and safety requirements. Mr. Grande replied that the developments would all be
reviewed to ensure safety.

Committee Member Dickson asked about notification requirements. Mr. Grande
replied that the process would be administrative and would not require notifications.

Committee Member Reynolds expressed concern that the proposed text could lead
to further displacement as property owners make changes to their existing mobile
home parks. Mr. Grande stated that the intent was to allow additional units, which
would expand affordable housing options.

Committee Member Israel asked about the potential for stacking units vertically. Mr.
Grande stated that vertically stacking units would go beyond the definition of
manufactured homes and would be considered multifamily housing.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882

Page 704
Desert View Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 2, 2023
Page 2

Committee Member Kollar asked about density limits for developments approved for
expansion and about the rationale for allowing a 50 percent increase. Mr. Grande
replied that density limits may not be relevant for nonconforming developments, but
that each instance would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Racelle Escolar,
staff, stated that the 50 percent increase is the same as what the code allows for
expansion of nonconforming single-family uses.

Committee Member Kollar noted that the example mobile home park in the
presentation seemed dense and may not be appropriate for expansion. Mr. Grande
replied that the example aerial photo demonstrates that the Zoning Administrator would
have to review and determine if any additional mobile homes were appropriate, rather
than simply allow the 50 percent increase.

Chair Bowser asked for clarification on how mobile homes are nonconforming. Mr.
Grande replied that it could be that they are in a district that doesn’t allow mobile
homes or that they don’t meet the development standards in the code.

Committee Member Kirkilas asked about the number of nonconforming mobile home
parks in Phoenix. Mr. Grande replied that staff wasn’t able to provide that number.

Committee Member Nowell asked about setbacks and whether the Desert View
Village has any mobile home parks. Mr. Grande replied that setbacks would be based
on the existing perimeter of the development, rather than a fixed standard in the code,
noting that nonconforming mobile home parks often wouldn’t have a standard to
reference in their zoning district. Committee Member Dickson stated that there is one
mobile home park in Desert View.

Vice Chair Lagrave stated that any reference to allowing the Zoning Administrator to
enforce requirements should be changed to make it a mandate.

Committee Member Kollar asked about compliance with the rest of the code for
mobile home parks allowed to expand. Mr. Grande stated that they would not
necessarily be required to meet all the site and development standards.

Chair Bowser provided a hypothetical example of a mobile home park with some
unused space that could be filled in with some additional units, noting that it would be
difficult to bring the rest of the site up to code.

Committee Member Nowell noted there is significant cost with site improvements and
that is an issue for providing affordable housing.

Committee Member Reynolds stated that the application of setbacks and other
standards should not be discretionary.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 705
Desert View Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 2, 2023
Page 3

Committee Member Kirkilas asked whether nonconforming setbacks would be
allowed to continue and apply to new units in this scenario. Mr. Grande replied that the
setbacks would be related to the existing build-out of the site, rather than a fixed
standard in the code. Chair Bowser noted the example that it might not make sense to
apply standards from an industrial district to a mobile home use if a nonconforming
mobile home park were in that district.

Vice Chair Lagrave suggested that the language in the proposed text should be
changed to “Zoning Administrator shall review and mandate that the added units”
rather than “Zoning Administrator shall review and have discretion to ensure that the
added units.”

Committee Member Dickson stated that a notification requirement should be included
in the text, noting that the existing residents of the community deserve to be notified.

Committee Member Kollar suggested that the proposed text should be changed to
“meet the existing setbacks,” rather than “meet the intent of adequate setbacks.”

Committee Member Reynolds suggested revising the word “shall” to “may” in the first
sentence of the added text and asked about the height requirements. Mr. Grande
replied that height would be included in the development standards under review in this
process.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Lee Reynolds introduced himself and stated that he supported the modifications
discussed by the committee members to remove discretion from the process.

STAFF RESPONSE
None

MOTION
Vice Chair Lagrave made a motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y with
modifications. Committee Member Israel seconded the motion.

Modifications:
1. “An expansion of a mobile home development shall may be permitted to increase
the number of mobile home units by up to fifty percent of the units that legally
existed before July 1, 2023 with administrative review and approval by the Zoning
Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall review and have discretion to ensure
mandate that the added units meet the intent of adequate existing setback between
units, perimeter setbacks, and other development standards that are consistent with
that mobile home development.”

2. That language is added for a requirement that all residents of a mobile home park
be notified prior to any changes and provided the opportunity to make comments to
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 706
Desert View Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 2, 2023
Page 4

the Zoning Administrator.

VOTE
9-0, motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y with modifications passed;
Members Barto, Dickson, Israel, Kirkilas, Kollar, Nowell, Reynolds, Lagrave, and
Bowser in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 707
REVISED
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 1, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 11-3

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

STAFF PRESENTATION

John Roanhorse, staff, provided a presentation on Z-TA-3-23-Y. Mr. Roanhorse
explained that the request to allow the expansion of non-conforming mobile home
developments which includes increasing the number of mobile home units, review by
the Zoning Administrator and allowing alternative units. Mr. Roanhorse discussed the
schedule for moving the text amendment to the Planning Commission and City Council.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

John Roanhorse, staff, provided a presentation on Z-TA-3-23-Y. Mr. Roanhorse
explained that the request to allow the expansion of non-conforming mobile home
developments which includes increasing the number of mobile home units, review by
the Zoning Administrator and allowing alternative units. Mr. Roanhorse discussed the
schedule for moving the text amendment to the Planning Commission and City Council.

Committee Member Drew Bryck asked how the underlying zoning for density would
be addressed and would there be any requirements to rezone a site. Mr. Roanhorse
said that development standards would still be applicable and the amendment is to
allow flexibility for mobile home residents.

Committee Member Jorge Picos inquired about the addition of tiny homes and
container homes and if they are viable options that can be brought into existing parks.
Mr. Bednarek responded that it would be allowable but they would be subject to
development standards.

Committee Member Paul Benjamin questioned the status of mobile home parks and
the situations for owners and residents who lease the space and how the expansion
would impact them. Mr. Bednarek stated that the changes are intended to provide
flexibility and to include mobile and manufactured homes as affordable home options.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 708
Committee Member Paul Benjamin referenced the distinction of manufactured homes
and how they are treated in trailer parks where they are commonly more expensive.

Committee Member Jeremy Thacker asked if park owners could increase lease prices
and drive out residents, are there any protections to prevent divestment, and will there
be a shift away from mobile homes. Mr. Thacker asked how costs for changes would be
handled. Mr. Bednarek stated that the amendment is to provide housing options and
development and changes are subject to review and approval.

Committee Member Rick Mahrle asked will this change effect lots where mobile
homes are leased and will property lines be created to identify individual homes. Mr.
Roanhorse stated that any changes or additions would be subject to development
standards so it not expected that there will be substantial changes in current mobile
home parks.

Committee Member Drew Bryck asked are the text amendments clear and ready to
move forward, and can they be brought back at a later date. Mr. Bednarek stated that
the amendments are set for Council review and that the process for developing the
language has been extensive and they are ready to move forward.

Chairperson Opal Wagner asked is there a map of where mobile homes are located,
and how many units are located in the City. Committee Chair Opal Wagner mentioned
that the text amendment allows the Zoning Administrator to make decisions on zoning
issues and there should be more public input. Mr. Roanhorse responded that there is
no current inventory of mobile parks and the amendment will allow improvements and
continued use as available housing. Mr. Bednarek stated that they are bringing the text
amendments to all the Villages expect to get feedback in the process.

Chair Opal Wagner asked is there a map of where mobile homes are located and is it
known how many units are located in the City. Chair Wagner mentioned that the text
amendment allows the Zoning Administrator to make decisions on zoning issues and
there should be more public input. Mr. Roanhorse responded that there is no current
inventory of mobile parks and the amendment will allow improvements and continued
use as available housing. Mr. Bednarek stated that they are bringing the text
amendments to all the Villages and expect to get feedback in the process.

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

MOTION:

Committee Brent Kleinman made a motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y
per the staff recommendation. Committee Member Paul Benjamin seconded to the
motion.

DISCUSSION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 709
VOTE:

11-3; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff recommendation
passes with Committee Members Benjamin, Bryck, Jewett, Kleinman, Matthews,
Procaccini, Schiller, Searles, Tedhams, Thacker, and Chair Wagner in favor; and
Committee Members Cothron, Mahrle, and Picos opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 710
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 16, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION:
No quorum.

Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 711
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 8, 2023
Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
Request
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Denied
VPC Vote 4-3

VPC DISCUSSION:

Committee Member Rebecca Perrera entered during this item, bringing quorum to 7.

Staff Presentation:

Nayeli Sanchez Luna, staff, described the proposed text amendment and provided an
overview of the purpose and intent of the request and the details of the proposed
changes to the text. Mrs. Sanchez Luna concluded the presentation by providing
staff’s recommendation and the text amendment hearing dates.

Questions from the committee:

Dean Chiarelli noted that the meeting agenda had ‘by 50 percent’ and the
presentation had ‘up to 50 percent’ and asked for what language would be used when
making a motion. Mrs. Sanchez Luna stated that the language proposed in the staff
report would be language used. Mr. Chiarelli asked for clarification on the language in
the staff report. Tricia Gomes, the Deputy Director for the Planning and Development
Department, stated that the language was ‘up to 50 percent’. Ms. Gomes added that
the intent would be to allow up to 50 percent but there would still have to be an
analysis based on technical requirements.

Patrick Nasser-Taylor noted that the example could allow up to 15 additional units
but wanted clarification on where those units would be located. Mr. Nasser-Taylor
stated that most mobile home developments were at capacity and asked if all units
within one development would be moved to accommodate the additional units. Ms.
Gomes noted that the example was not presented to the City Council, but the
example was an existing mobile home park within the city. Ms. Gomes noted that
some mobile home parks will be at capacity and will not allow for any additional units,
but others would. Ms. Gomes added that the current example will probably not have
the capacity for 15 additional units. Ms. Gomes stated that many nonconforming
mobile home parks came in through the county and in the mid 1960’s and 1970’s the
requirements for mobile home developments changed significantly. Ms. Gomes noted
200 West Washington Street, 3 rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 712
Laveen Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 8, 2023
Page 2

that additional research would be required to determine the number of units allowed.
Mr. Nasser-Taylor asked how this would affect nonconforming mobile home parks.
Ms. Gomes stated that nonconforming means that it currently doesn’t meet current
standards. Ms. Gomes noted that whatever was permitted legally in the past code,
then that would be analyzed.

JoAnne Jensen asked what the review process would be and what involvement
would village planning committees have in the process. Ms. Gomes stated that the
entire review process has not been finalized, but that it would be done
administratively. Ms. Gomes stated that staff would review the requests. Ms. Jensen
asked for clarification on the committee’s role in the process. Ms. Gomes stated that
the committee’s role would be to provide a recommendation for the proposed text
amendment. Ms. Gomes stated that the proposal would be like a site plan review
where numerous staff reviewing a proposal.

Mr. Nasser-Taylor asked if the City has done any research on the impact on mobile
home parks based on distance requirements and other design requirements. Ms.
Gomes stated that each proposal will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Ms.
Gomes noted that there were numerous items to be reviewed.

Carlos Ortega stated that any text amendment approved should also protect
individuals living in existing mobile home parks. Mr. Ortega asked for additional
policies to protect mobile home renters.

Mr. Nasser-Taylor asked if a property owner could remove all existing units and
redevelop the site with the 50 percent additional units and displace individuals. Ms.
Gomes stated that if someone owns the mobile home and rents the space, the owner
can’t sell the mobile home unit. Ms. Gomes noted that if the property owner also owns
the mobile home unit, then they can remove the old unit and create a new one. Ms.
Gomes reiterated that the property owner cannot remove a mobile home unit if it
owned by a different individual. Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that if an individual owns the
mobile home but not the lot, the owner could still evict the individual. Ms. Gomes
stated that the proposed text amendment would not change who owns the property.

Rebecca Perrera stated that proposed text amendment could incentivize mobile
home park owners to redevelop their properties, creating displacement. Ms. Gomes
stated that redevelopment would eliminate any nonconforming rights. Ms. Gomes
noted that the text amendment would maintain existing parks by allowing a modest
expansion.

Mr. Ortega noted that the example provided was a poor.

Ms. Perrera stated that she would like to see some sort of staff policy in the review
process to prevent property owners from pushing out existing renters. Vice Chair
Hurd stated that it hard to understand the review process since one hasn’t been
finalized.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 713
Laveen Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 8, 2023
Page 3

Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that an analysis of all mobile home parks could help with
the assessment. Ms. Gomes stated that existing mobile home parks cannot expand
their number of units. Ms. Gomes summarized numerous design features that would
be reviewed for any additional units.

Public Comment:

Phil Hertel asked if an existing mobile home park development is nonconforming,
would any changes have to meet current code requirements. Ms. Gomes stated that
staff would be reviewing the distances between units and other requirements. Mr.
Hertel asked if the new units would have to meet the nonconforming standards. Ms.
Gomes stated that there would be a staff analysis on spacing, access, but that the
setbacks would be to the nonconforming standards. Mr. Hertel asked if the number of
units would change if a double-wide mobile home was removed and replace it with two
single units. Ms. Gomes stated that staff is looking at the number of units. Mr. Hertel
asked if only a portion of the site was modified, then the other half would be
nonconforming. Ms. Gomes noted that each additional unit would be reviewed by staff
through the administrative process.

Jon Kimoto stated that the majority of mobile home parks in Laveen are
nonconforming. Mr. Kimoto added that he would like to see improvements in existing
mobile home parks and requested a public hearing process to review any changes to
mobile home parks. Ms. Gomes clarified that the text amendment would allow the
expansion through an administrative review and not a public hearing process. Ms.
Gomes stated that the intent is not to cram units into one development but to allow for
a modest expansion.

Staff Response:

None.

Committee Discussion:

Vice Chair Stephanie Hurd asked for clarification on the intent of Z-TA-3-23-Y. Ms.
Gomes stated that it would allow existing mobile home parks up to a 50 percent
expansion and the requirements are reviewed through an administrative process in a
case by cases basis to improve existing parks.

JoAnne Jensen asked for clarification if the purpose would be to improve existing
mobile home parks. Ms. Gomes stated that if the existing units don’t meet the
requirements, then staff would work with the property owner, so all units meet
standards.

Mr. Ortega stated that the text amendment would be an opportunity to improve
existing mobile home parks.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 714
Laveen Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 8, 2023
Page 4

Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that the allowed expansion of 50 percent would encourage
property owners to evict existing renters. Mr. Nasser-Taylor asked if there are
existing nonconforming mobile home parks in Laveen. Ms. Gomes stated that the City
does not map mobile home park locations. Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that the idea
was great in theory but that there would be a lot of unintended consequences to this
text amendment.

Vice Chair Hurd asked if the analysis would consider the type of mobile home units
proposed to avoid displacing people. Ms. Gomes stated that the review would include
setbacks, building code, and other requirements.

Motion:
Francisco Barraza made a motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the
staff recommendation. Carlos Ortega seconded the motion.

Vote:
3-4-0, Motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-2-23-Y, per the staff recommendation,
did not passed with Committee Members Barraza, Ortega, and Hurd in favor and
Committee Members Chiarelli, Jensen, Nasser-Taylor, and Perrera in opposition.

Mr. Chiarelli stated that he voted no because he would like to see some opportunity
to remove hazards and improve existing mobile home developments and bring them
up to current code. Mr. Chiarelli stated that the proposal is a good idea, but it needs
modifications to prevent unprecedented consequences. Ms. Jensen voiced her
agreement.

Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that he voted no because of the proposal could lead to
exploitation based on the vagueness of the language.

Ms. Perrera stated that she voted no because she had concerns with the proposal
creating more harm than good.

Ms. Perrera asked if the committee could make a motion with a recommendation. Ms.
Jensen asked why the motion failed. Ms. Gomes stated that the proposed motion
failed. Ms. Perrera stated that the committee could make a motion to recommend
denial or a motion to recommend approval with a certain recommendation. Ms.
Jensen stated that the committee should recommend denial or approval.

Vice Chair Hurd asked if a new motion needed to be made. Mrs. Sanchez Luna
stated that if the committee did not make a new motion, then there would be no
recommendation since the previous motion failed. Ms. Sanchez Luna stated that if the
committee did not support the text amendment, the committee could make a motion to
recommend denial.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 715
Laveen Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
May 8, 2023
Page 5

Motion:
JoAnne Jensen made a motion to recommend denial of Z-TA-3-23-Y. Patrick
Nasser-Taylor seconded the motion.

Vote:
4-3-0, Motion to recommend denial of Z-TA-2-23-Y passed with Committee Members
Chiarelli, Jensen, Nasser-Taylor, and Perrera in favor and Committee Members
Barraza, Ortega, and Hurd in opposition.

Vice Chair Hurd asked if both motions will be provided to Planning Commission. Mrs.
Sanchez Luna confirmed that the village planning committee summary would include
both motions. Vice Chair Hurd asked if the reasoning would also be included. Mrs.
Sanchez Luna confirmed.

Mr. Ortega asked if this would go through all villages. Vice Chair Hurd confirmed.

Vice Chair Hurd asked what recommendations were received by the other villages.
Ms. Gomes stated that the majority recommended approval, but others have
approved with recommendation or modifications. Ms. Gomes noted that one other
village has recommended denial.

Mr. Nasser-Taylor stated that more research should be done on the current land uses
and existing mobile home developments.

Vice Chair Hurd stated that the text amendment would still go to Planning
Commission and City Council and that members could still provide comments at the
public hearings. Mr. Ortega voiced his agreement.

Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 716
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 10, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION:
No quorum.

Staff comments regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 717
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 11, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Meeting was cancelled
VPC Vote Meeting was cancelled

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

None.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

Meeting was cancelled due to a lack of quorum.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 718
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting June 8, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 5-0

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Staff Presentation:
Mr. Zambrano provided an overview of text amendment case Z-TA-3-23-Y, describing
the request and the purpose and intent of the request. Mr. Zambrano shared the
proposed changes and displayed an example of an existing nonconforming mobile
home park. Mr. Zambrano shared the upcoming hearing schedule, noting that the
Planning Commission already heard this item on June 1, and that this item was
supposed to be heard by the Committee last month, but was not able to be heard due to
the meeting being cancelled because of a lack of quorum. Mr. Zambrano then stated
that staff recommends approval per the language in Exhibit A of the staff report.

Questions from Committee:
None.

Public Comments:
None.

Staff Response to Public Comment:
None.

Discussion:
None.

MOTION – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
Mr. Johnson motioned to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff
recommendation. Ms. Simon seconded the motion.

VOTE – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
5-0; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y passes with Committee members
French, Johnson, Simon, Ricart and Read in favor.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 719
North Gateway Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 720
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 17, 2023
Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
Request
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 13-0-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

No speaker cards were received on this case.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mr. Klimek, staff, provided an overview of the text amendment and the staff
recommendation.

APPLICANT PRESENTATION
None.

QUESTIONS FROM COMMITTEE

Committee Members noted the example should be replaced with one that does not
appear so overcrowded and expressed concern that the proposal may allow non-
conforming mobile home parks to replace their amenity areas with new units and that
parks without amenity areas would not be required to install amenities. Committee
Members O’Hara and Freeman noted that the staff report clearly states that amenities
are required and that non-conforming parks will need to be brought into compliance
before adding additional units.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.

APPLICANT RESPONSE
None.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 721
North Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

MOTION:
Committee Member Matthews made a motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y
per the staff recommendation. Committee Member Perez seconded the motion.

DISCUSSION:
None.

VOTE: 13-0-0, motion to approve Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff recommendation passes
with Committee Members Alauria, Freeman, Larson, Matthews, McBride, O’Connor,
O’Hara, Perez, Member Veidmark Whitney, Wiedoff, Vice Chair Fogelson, and Chair
Jaramillo in favor; none in opposition, and none abstaining.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 722
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 1, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 11-2

VPC DISCUSSION:

Staff Presentation:

Mr. Zambrano provided an overview of text amendment case Z-TA-3-23-Y, describing
the request and the purpose and intent of the request. Mr. Zambrano shared the
proposed changes and displayed an example of an existing nonconforming mobile
home park. Mr. Zambrano shared the upcoming hearing schedule and stated that staff
recommends approval per the language in Exhibit A of the staff report.

Questions from the Committee and Discussion:

Ms. Sepic asked how there could be a 50% increase for the mobile home park example
if it is already nonconforming and not meeting minimum requirements and who would
cover the price of relocating mobile home residents. Mr. Zambrano responded that the
request is a change to the nonconforming section of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance and
that there are provisions that allow other nonconforming developments to expand to a
certain extent. Mr. Zambrano stated that the request is to allow the same kind of
expansion that other nonconforming developments are already allowed.

Mr. Goodhue asked if the request would also make existing violations of mobile home
parks exceeding their maximum allowed density to become legalized administratively.
Mr. Zambrano responded that he was unsure if that was part of the intent of the
request, but that theoretically they would become legalized as long as it does not
exceed the 50% expansion.

Ms. Gerst asked what prompted the initiation of this text amendment. Mr. Zambrano
responded that the Planning Commission initiated this request to address the housing
crisis and housing affordability. Mr. Zambrano stated that the request is addressing
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 723
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

equity as well to allow existing nonconforming mobile home parks to expand as other
types of nonconforming developments are already allowed per Chapter 9 of the Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Gerst asked if the 50% expansion would allow mobile home
parks to expand as long as they stay within the required setbacks and do not overcrowd
the property. Mr. Zambrano responded affirmatively, adding that some mobile home
parks may have been built while under Maricopa County jurisdiction, and when annexed
into the City of Phoenix jurisdiction, it did not meet the current standards for the City of
Phoenix, making it legal non-conforming. Mr. Zambrano added that they can remain
legal non-conforming and expand up to 50% with the proposed text amendment. Mr.
Zambrano stated that if a mobile home park were illegally non-conforming, the City
would need to verify how the park existed during annexation to verify what needs to
come into conformance.

Ms. Stockham stated that part of the request is the Zoning Administrator administrative
review which will look at certain requirements such as setbacks, landscaping,
separation requirements, access, and safety. Ms. Stockham stated that with the
expansion there still has to be the administrative review which would look at all these
elements.

Mr. Gubser asked if review of legal non-conforming mobile home park expansions
would look at other items that may be non-conforming, such as landscaping. Ms.
Stockham stated that it depends on proportionality and depends on what part of the
site is non-conforming, and that the Zoning Administrator may ask to bring it up to code
depending on the specific site in question. Mr. Gubser asked for clarification that the
administrative review may potentially ask to bring certain items up to code. Ms.
Stockham responded that it depends on how much the property owner wants to
change on the site.

Abram Bowman asked if there is a push to have a greater number of smaller dwelling
units, such as tiny homes. Ms. Stockham responded that the request is just to allow
more density where possible in these types of developments.

Vice Chair Anita Mortensen asked if a mobile home could be removed and replaced
with two tiny homes. Ms. Stockham responded that she believes the intent is to allow a
mobile home park to expand if they have enough vacant land to expand.

Mr. Gubser recommended that a better example be used.

Mr. Wise stated he believes the request may allow a place for residents to relocate to
from mobile home parks that are being closed down and redeveloped.

Chair Popovic concurred.

Ms. Sepic stated that she would like to make a motion that the language be updated to
have a maximum limitation on illegal non-conforming mobile home parks and to require
code violations to be brought up to code. Ms. Sepic stated that a lot of mobile home
parks that are being developed have a lot of issues such as insufficient lighting and

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 724
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

landscaping. Ms. Sepic stated that she believes it should be a requirement that these
items should be improved. Ms. Sepic stated that pushing more people into an unsafe
neighborhood does not benefit anyone.

Mr. Zambrano asked for clarification if Ms. Sepic was only referring to illegal non-
conforming mobile home parks. Ms. Sepic responded affirmatively, adding that other
non-conforming mobile home parks should also require lighting improvements and a
minimum standard for landscaping improvements.

Mr. Goodhue added that signage should also be improved to City code standards.

Ms. Sepic stated that there is an old mobile home park on 40th Street and McDowell
Road which has fencing that is falling down, insufficient lighting, and overgrown and
excessive weeds. Ms. Sepic stated that the proposed language is generic and needs to
address major City code issues that exist in these older parks so they can be brought
up to code.

Ms. Stockham asked if Ms. Sepic was referring to the entire site being brought up to
code. Ms. Sepic responded affirmatively. Ms. Stockham asked for clarification that Ms.
Sepic was referring to both illegal and legal non-conforming mobile home parks. Ms.
Sepic responded affirmatively. Ms. Sepic reiterated that adding density alone does not
help these communities if they are already crowded and not designed well. Ms. Sepic
stated that she does not believe it helps the situation to remove a mobile home and
place two tiny homes in its spot without doing anything else to improve those residents’
lives.

Mr. Goodhue stated that the use permit is reviewed by several departments, including
the Neighborhood Services Department, and that if there were an active violation case,
the Neighborhood Services Department would advise the Hearing Officer to stipulate
the improvements per the violation. Mr. Goodhue stated that if there are any violations
that the City is aware of, it would be taken care of during the use permit review process.

Ms. Sepic stated that if the special permit process was kept, it would be required to go
through a more in-depth analysis.

Ms. Stockham stated that a special permit is a rezoning case.

Mr. Zambrano stated that the use permit goes to the Zoning Hearing Officer also at a
public hearing, but is a quasi-judicial process, whereas the special permit would require
three different public hearings that the rezoning process requires.

Ms. Sepic stated that she will have to change her vote to be opposed to the prior
request, Z-TA-2-23-Y, based on that information.

Public Comment

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 725
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Staff Response:

None.

MOTION – Z-TA-3-23-Y:

Ms. Sepic motioned to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff
recommendation, with direction to require that any expansion of illegal and legal non-
conforming parks have site improvements for improved safety, including lighting,
signage, walls and landscaping. Ms. Gerst seconded the motion.

Discussion:

Ms. Hall stated that she cannot understand the purpose for this text amendment. Ms.
Hall stated that adding 50% more density to non-conforming mobile home parks is a lot.
Ms. Hall stated that the previous text amendment allowed more flexibility for these types
of parks to come in and that now this text amendment is allowing older mobile home
parks to add a lot more smaller units.

Mr. Goodhue clarified that the 50% allowance does not mean they would be allowed up
to 50% due to varying factors.

Ms. Hall stated that she is not comfortable with the request.

Mr. Goodhue stated that various mobile home parks may have added more units over
the years without City approval, and the request is a way of now allowing those
additional units. Ms. Hall responded that it would be awarding bad behavior.

Mr. Goodhue stated that the 50% increase allowance is misleading because there are
other factors to consider.

Ms. Sepic stated that theoretically more units could be added if the mobile homes are
being changed to tiny homes.

Mr. Goodhue stated that it could be possible to add more units to a park if removing
mobile homes and replacing them with tiny homes but would depend on if the property
owner wants to go through redevelopment of the property.

Ms. Sepic stated that the request is allowing that additional density and with a very
limited public process. Ms. Sepic stated that she believes that is very important and that
the language needs to be clarified to understand if the unit would be affixed or not, if
units would be moving in and out of the park and having all the different types of
housing options in the park. Ms. Sepic stated that tiny homes could constantly be
coming in and out of the park versus manufactured homes that are affixed. Mr.
Goodhue responded that manufactured homes are not affixed. Mr. Goodhue stated that
modular homes are built to building code standards and are affixed whereas
manufactured homes are on a chassis with skirting to block the view underneath them.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 726
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Mr. Goodhue stated that manufactured homes could be permanent, but in mobile home
parks they are not permanent and can be moved out. Mr. Goodhue stated that
manufactured homes are more permanent than park models were, which were
seasonal, but are now more long-term and tiny homes are now falling into these parks.
Ms. Sepic responded that she has a problem with those definitions being lumped
together and believes it should be updated to differentiate all the different types of
housing.

Mr. Bowman asked if staff knows how many non-conforming park developments there
are for the Paradise Valley Village. Mr. Zambrano responded that staff does not know
and that the request is general City-wide.

VOTE – Z-TA-3-23-Y:

11-2; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff recommendation,
with direction, passes with Committee members Bustamante, DeMoss, Gerst, Goodhue,
Gubser, Mazza, Sepic, Soronson, Wise, Mortensen and Popovic in favor and
Committee members Bowman and Hall opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 727
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting May 9, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Continued
VPC Vote 6-0

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

MOTION:
Jeff Riederer motioned to continue Z-TA-3-23-Y to the next Rio Vista Village Planning
Committee meeting date. Massimo Sommacampagna seconded the motion.

VOTE:
6-0; motion to continue Z-TA-3-23-Y to the next Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
meeting date passes with Committee members Holton, Riederer, Scharboneau,
Sommacampagna, Virgil and Lawrence in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

The committee members continued the item because the meeting facility was closing
and there was no time to hear the case..

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 728
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Date of VPC Meeting June 13, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 3-1

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Staff Presentation:
Mr. Zambrano provided an overview of text amendment case Z-TA-3-23-Y, describing
the request and the purpose and intent of the request. Mr. Zambrano shared the
proposed changes and displayed an example of an existing nonconforming mobile
home park. Mr. Zambrano shared the upcoming hearing schedule, noting that the
Planning Commission already heard and voted on the item on June 1, and that the
Committee was supposed to hear and vote on this item last month but had to continue it
due to time constraints. Mr. Zambrano then stated that staff recommends approval per
the language in Exhibit A of the staff report.

Questions from the Committee:
Chair Lawrence asked for clarification that mobile home park owners would be allowed
the additional units but would not be able move all the units and separate them. Chair
Lawrence asked how it would be allowed and stated he does not see the benefit of
increasing the number of units.

Mr. Virgil stated that another text amendment to allow a reduction in parking may allow
them to add additional units in place of the parking spaces.

Chair Lawrence stated that mobile home parks are already tight enough as they are
and asked why they should be allowed an increase of units by 50%. Mr. Zambrano
responded that 50% is the theoretical number of units that could be added, but that they
would still need to comply with setbacks and other development standards. Mr.
Zambrano added that although they would be allowed a 50% increase in units, it would
not mean that they would be able to fit in that many units. Chair Lawrence asked about
the intent of the text amendment. Mr. Zambrano responded that it is trying to address
housing affordability by allowing mobile home parks to expand if they have enough
room. Chair Lawrence asked what makes a mobile home park considered to be
nonconforming. Mr. Zambrano responded that it means that certain development

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 729
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

standards are not being met, such as setbacks or lot coverage. Chair Lawrence stated
that he does not see how spending all the money to reconfigure the lots would address
affordability, unless there is vacant land on a property. Mr. Zambrano responded that in
the presentation example, they likely would not be able to fit many more units on the
property. Chair Lawrence asked if there are existing zoning development standards for
mobile home parks. Mr. Zambrano responded affirmatively, adding that new mobile
home parks are currently limited to the R-2 and R-3 zoning districts. Chair Lawrence
stated that he understands that it would provide more affordable housing units in the
City but does not understand how owners of these developments would be able to
spend all the money to reconfigure their site and still keep it affordable. Chair Lawrence
added that the presentation example does not meet fire access. Mr. Zambrano
responded that those items would be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and other
City departments to ensure that the development is still meeting required vehicular
access and circulation, in addition to life and safety requirements.

Mr. Virgil asked where the mobile home park in the presentation example is located.
Mr. Zambrano responded that he does not know.

Vice Chair Perreira stated that he does not think of crammed modular home
developments when thinking about his vision of Phoenix. Vice Chair Perreira
acknowledged that there is a housing shortage but stated that this proposal is not a
permanent solution and is not fixing the problem.

Mr. Zambrano stated that the text amendment is also trying to address a problem that
has been occurring with nonconforming mobile home developments. Mr. Zambrano
stated that many nonconforming mobile home developments have wanted to expand
but were not allowed to with the current provisions in the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Zambrano continued that what has happened is that nonconforming mobile home
developments are being redeveloped and are displacing all of the lower-income people
that lived in the nonconforming mobile home developments. Mr. Zambrano stated that
the main intent behind this text amendment is to help avoid displacement of lower-
income people.

Chair Lawrence stated that he is supportive of nonconforming mobile home parks
being able to add units as long as they meet requirements for fire and life and safety.
Chair Lawrence added that he does not understand how it would make sense financially
to revamp a mobile home development to be able to add additional units.

Mr. Virgil added that if mobile home developments would need to spend money to
revamp the site to add additional units, it will not be low-income housing anymore
because they would want to get top dollar for their housing units after having to spend
that much money.

Mr. Zambrano clarified that not every nonconforming mobile home development would
be able to expand and that it would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis based on if
there is enough room to allow that expansion.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 730
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Vice Chair Perreira stated that he has a problem with the language because of the
potential being a 50% increase. Vice Chair Perreira added that he would be more
supportive if it was a 25% increase.

Chair Lawrence added that the language could say that the expansion is allowed
based on what would realistically be able to fit on an individual site.

Mr. Zambrano stated that density is the same, since a maximum density allows a
certain number of units, but based on the size of the lot, setbacks, lot coverage, and
building height limitations, sometimes developers are not always able to get the
maximum density allowed on a lot.

Chair Lawrence stated that the 50% expansion would only require administrative
review by the Zoning Administrator, indicating that no one else would look at it except
the City of Phoenix internally. Mr. Zambrano responded affirmatively, stating that the
Zoning Administrator and other designated staff in the City would be reviewing these
requests to ensure they are still meeting life and safety requirements.

Mr. Virgil stated that the City has not denied any project that have come through.

Chair Lawrence stated that he would support the proposal if it resulted in
improvements to the park. Chair Lawrence asked how many mobile home
developments would be successful in following this process. Mr. Zambrano responded
that in the presentation example, they may only be able to add a couple units, but in
other mobile home developments across the City, they may have more room to be able
to expand.

Vice Chair Perreira stated that the picture of the mobile home park development in the
presentation example looks like the homes are already crammed into the site and
indicated a different example could have helped the Committee to better understand
how many additional units would be able to fit in an existing nonconforming mobile
home park.

Chair Lawrence stated that this proposal is only for nonconforming mobile home parks.
Mr. Zambrano responded affirmatively, stating that a development is considered
nonconforming because they are not meeting certain development standards, such as
perimeter setbacks. Chair Lawrence asked if the additional units would have to
conform to current standards. Mr. Zambrano responded that they could conform with
the development standards of the nonconforming mobile home park. Chair Lawrence
asked if there are existing development standards for RV parks. Mr. Zambrano
responded that RV parks are different because they are actual vehicles with wheels. Mr.
Zambrano stated that mobile homes would be on a chassis and typically would be
skirted. Chair Lawrence asked what the existing development standards would be for a
new mobile home park. Mr. Zambrano responded that new mobile home parks are
currently only allowed in the R-2 and R-3 zoning districts, and that the previous text
amendment, Z-TA-2-23-Y, was to allow new mobile home developments in all
multifamily and commercial zoning districts. Mr. Zambrano added that with the previous

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 731
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

text amendment, it would change the process to require a Use Permit, which would be a
public hearing process. Mr. Zambrano clarified that the text amendment currently being
discussed would be for existing nonconforming mobile home developments. Chair
Lawrence asked if the intent is to try to improve existing nonconforming mobile home
developments so they can become conforming. Mr. Zambrano responded that it would
allow nonconforming mobile home developments to expand to a certain number of
units, reiterating that mobile home parks have wanted to expand, but cannot with the
current Phoenix Zoning Ordinance provisions, so they are being closed and sold to
developers, resulting in displacement of all the low-income people that lived in those
parks. Mr. Zambrano added that there is a housing affordability issue as well which
does not help this problem.

Vice Chair Perreira stated that the residents would still be displaced if the owners of
these mobile home developments have to spend so much money to reconfigure and
rearrange their site to be able to fit the additional units, which would result in the owners
wanting a higher rent or mortgage for the homes, especially if the newer homes look a
lot nicer.

Mr. Virgil stated that the City would get more money.

Mr. Zambrano stated that it would only allow a 50% increase, and after that it would
require the site to be brought up to current standards.

Vice Chair Perreira asked how the City currently addresses nonconforming mobile
home developments. Mr. Zambrano responded that currently nonconforming mobile
home developments are not allowed to add any additional units.

Chair Lawrence stated that this allowed expansion could potentially keep some of
these nonconforming mobile home developments from being sold.

Mr. Zambrano stated that the 50% increase comes from the existing nonconformities
chapter of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, which allows nonconforming single-family
homes to expand up to 50%.

Chair Lawrence stated that adding additional square footage to a house is different
than adding additional units, and that for a development with 100 units, it would allow 50
more units. Chair Lawrence added that he likes the idea of trying to save the mobile
home developments from being sold to developers that would redevelop them. Chair
Lawrence stated that he would want to ensure these developments are still meeting fire
and life and safety requirements. Mr. Zambrano responded that those requirements
would still be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and designated staff in those
disciplines.

Mr. Sommacampagna asked what the Planning Commission vote was. Mr. Zambrano
responded that the Planning Commission recommended approval, per the staff
recommendation.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 732
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y

Public Comments:
None.

Staff Response:
None.

MOTION – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
Mr. Virgil motioned to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff
recommendation. Mr. Sommacampagna seconded the motion.

VOTE – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
2-2; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff recommendation fails
with Committee members Sommacampagna and Virgil in favor and Committee
members Perreira and Lawrence opposed.

MOTION – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
Chair Lawrence motioned to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff
recommendation. Mr. Virgil seconded the motion.

VOTE – Z-TA-3-23-Y:
3-1; motion to recommend approval of Z-TA-3-23-Y per the staff recommendation
passes with Committee members Sommacampagna, Virgil and Lawrence in favor and
Committee member Perreira opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 733
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-TA-3-23-Y
Date of VPC Meeting May 9, 2023
Request Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to
address nonconforming mobile home developments
VPC Recommendation No quorum
VPC Vote No quorum

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

No quorum.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

None.

Page 734
ATTACHMENT E

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
June 1, 2023

ITEM NO: 14
DISTRICT NO.: Citywide
SUBJECT: Text Amendment

Application #: Z-TA-3-23-Y
Proposal: Amend Chapter 9 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to address
nonconforming mobile home developments.
Applicant: City of Phoenix, Planning Commission
Representative: City of Phoenix, Planning and Development Department

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, per Exhibit A.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Ahwatukee Foothills 5/22/2023 No Quorum.
Alhambra 5/23/2023 No Quorum.
Camelback East 5/2/2023 Denial. Vote: 9-5-3.
Central City 5/8/2023 No Quorum.
Deer Valley 5/11/2023 Approval, per the staff recommendation. Vote: 7-1.
Desert View 5/2/2023 Approval, per the staff recommendation with modifications. Vote: 9-0.
Encanto 5/1/2023 Approval, per the staff recommendation with a modification. Vote: 11-3.
Estrella 5/16/2023 No Quorum.
Laveen 5/8/2023 Denial. Vote: 4-3.
Maryvale 5/10/2023 No Quorum.
North Gateway 5/11/2023 Meeting Canceled.
North Mountain 5/17/2023 Approval, per the staff recommendation. Vote: 13-0.
Paradise Valley 5/1/2023 Approval, per the staff recommendation with direction. Vote: 11-2.
Rio Vista 5/9/2023 Continued to June 13, 2023. Vote: 6-0.
South Mountain 5/9/2023 No Quorum.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the staff recommendation.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Jaramillo made a MOTION to approve Z-TA-3-23-Y, per the staff
recommendation.

Maker: Jaramillo
Second: Gorraiz
Vote: 7-1 (Perez)
Absent: Howard
Opposition Present: No

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact Angie
Holdsworth at (602) 329-5065, TTY use 7-1-1.

Page 735

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.

View on Agenda Online ↗

Meeting Economic Development and Equity Subcommittee-6/28/2023 complete

1. ¶ Summary

Item text

Supporting documents

2. ¶ Liquor License - Anyway Smoke Shop

Item text

Supporting documents

3. ¶ Liquor License - La Oaxaquena Mexican Food

Item text

Supporting documents

4. ¶ Liquor License - Julio G's / Julio's Too

Item text

Supporting documents

5. ¶ Liquor License - MJ Mini Mart

Item text

Supporting documents

6. ¶ Liquor License - Hana Japanese Eatery

Item text

Supporting documents

7. ¶ Liquor License - Island Grill AZ

Item text

Supporting documents

8. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Puppy Love Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

9. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Puppy Love Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

10. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Puppy Love Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

11. ¶ Liquor License - 7- Eleven #18117N

Item text

Supporting documents

12. ¶ Liquor License - Da KiTcHiN Grill

Item text

Supporting documents

13. ¶ Liquor License - Trevor's

Item text

Supporting documents

14. ¶ Liquor License - Latitude Wines

Item text

Supporting documents

15. ¶ Liquor License - NICK THE GREEK

Item text

Supporting documents

16. ¶ Liquor License - LeDu Thai Restaurant

Item text

Supporting documents

17. ¶ Liquor License - Taqueria Obregon

Item text

Supporting documents

18. ¶ Bingo License - Christian Care Apts

Item text

Supporting documents

44. ¶ Proposed I-17 and Jenny Lin Road Annexation (Ordinance S-50004)

Item text

Supporting documents

45. ¶ Proposed 35th Avenue and Elliot Road Annexation (Ordinance S-50028)

Item text

Supporting documents

46. ¶ Agreements with Aspirant Partners for Development of Property Located at 2nd

Item text

Supporting documents

47. ¶ Request to Enter an Intergovernmental Agreement with Arizona State University

Item text

Supporting documents

48. ¶ V-Desk II System Operator - RFA 19-021 - Amendment (Ordinance S-49983)

Item text

Supporting documents

49. ¶ Amend Chapter 43, Articles II and III, Phoenix City Code Relating to Formal

Item text

Supporting documents

50. ¶ Amend Chapter 2, Article I, Phoenix City Code Relating to Payment Ordinance

Item text

Supporting documents

51. ¶ Payment Ordinance for Summer Recess (Ordinance S-49939)

Item text

Supporting documents

52. ¶ Amend Personnel Rule 15, Merit Pay Increase (Ordinance S-49971)