View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text

Public Hearing and Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-50-22-4 -
Approximately 180 Feet North of the Northeast Corner of 7th Avenue and
Camelback Road (Ordinance G-7078)

Request to hold a public hearing and amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section
601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, and consider adopting Rezoning
Application Z-50-22-4 to rezone the site from C-2 TOD-1 (Intermediate Commercial,
Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable
Urban Code, Transect 5:5, Transit Uptown Character Area) to allow multifamily
residential.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-2 TOD-1
Proposed Zoning: WU Code T5:5 UT
Acreage: 4.79
Proposed Use: Multifamily residential

Owner: Larkspur Lane Investment Properties, LLC
Applicant: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
Representative: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Alhambra Village Planning Committee heard this case on Dec. 20,
2022, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, with an additional
stipulation, by a vote of 12-4.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Jan. 5, 2023, and
recommended approval, per the Alhambra Village Planning Committee
recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.
The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed for a public hearing by a
community member on Jan. 9, 2023, and by the adjacent property owner on Jan. 12,
2023.

Location
Approximately 180 feet north of the northeast corner of 7th Avenue and Camelback
Road

Page 348

Council District: 4
Parcel Address: 5015, 5025, 5027, 5031, 5033, 5035, 5037, 5041, 5043, 5049, and
5075 N. 7th Ave.

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

Page 349
ATTACHMENT A

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

ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ZONING ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-50-22-4) FROM C-2 TOD-1 (INTERMEDIATE
COMMERCIAL, INTERIM TRANSIT-ORIENTED ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE) TO WU CODE T5:5 UT (WALKABLE
URBAN CODE, TRANSECT 5:5, TRANSIT UPTOWN
CHARACTER AREA).

____________

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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 4.79-acre site located approximately 180 feet

north of the northeast corner of 7th Avenue and Camelback Road in a portion of Section

17, Township 2 North, Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A,” is

hereby changed from “C-2 TOD-1” (Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented

Zoning Overlay District One) to “WU Code T5:5 UT” (Walkable Urban Code, Transect

5:5, Transit Uptown Character Area).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B.”

Page 350
SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,

violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. The developer shall provide a minimum 10,000 square feet of publicly
accessible open space in a forecourt configuration, as described below and as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department. The
publicly accessible open space shall be:

a. Adjacent and accessible to the public sidewalk on 7th Avenue

b. Provided in areas of not less than 500 square feet and 20 feet in width;

c. Shaded to a minimum of 50 percent by vegetative shade;

d. Maintained in perpetuity without fences or barriers;

e. Eligible to qualify as a forecourt frontage type;

f. Improved to contain, at minimum, a drinking fountain for people and
pets, art, and seating.

2. All ground floor dwelling units adjacent to 7th Avenue shall utilize the stoop and
doorwell, forecourt, or porch frontage types, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development Department.

3. Between the public sidewalk and the building fronts, there shall be a 6-foot-
wide landscape area planted with minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees placed
20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development Department to comply with frontage requirements.

4. The development shall incorporate masonry elements into the primary exterior
building materials and shall be reflective of the architectural style in the area, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. The developer shall install traffic calming devices along the driveways of the
property so that vehicle drivers exercise caution prior to crossing the sidewalk
when exiting the property, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The developer shall incorporate bicycle infrastructure, as described below and
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

Page 351
a. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H of the
Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

b. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 required
spaces near entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements of
Section 1307.H of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

c. One bicycle repair station shall be provided and maintained by the
developer in an area of high visibility near the secure bicycle parking
areas.

7. A minimum 35 percent of the uncovered parking lot area shall be shaded by
minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this
development. The TIS shall include evaluation of 7th Avenue peak hour
restrictions and resulting site traffic routing on the surrounding street network
and proposed mitigation to Colter Street. The developer shall be responsible for
all costs for mitigation measure determined by the Study and contribute funds
for the Colter Street Project. No preliminary approval of plans shall be granted
until the study is reviewed and approved by the City.

9. The southern driveway onto 7th Avenue, as depicted on the site plan date
stamped October 31, 2022, shall be restricted to right-in/right-out only and
access shall be coordinated with the Public Transit Department, as approved
by Planning and Development.

10. The developer shall construct a minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk separated from
the curb by a minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area along the east side of 7th
Avenue and planted with minimum three-inch caliper shade trees placed 20
feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved by the Planned and
Development Department.

11. The developer shall dedicate a sidewalk easement to accommodate a
minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk and minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area
located between the back of curb and sidewalk, as approved by the Planning
and Development Department.

12. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping, and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

Page 352
13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.

15. The developer shall work with the Street Transportation and Planning and
Development departments regarding the proposed parking along the north side
of the site so that it does not interfere with traffic flow along the shared
driveway and to potentially stripe the driveway to include a left-turn lane.

SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 1st day of February,

2023.

________________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Julie M. Kriegh, City Attorney

Page 353
By:
_________________________
_________________________

REVIEWED BY:

_________________________
Jeffrey Barton, City Manager

Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (1 Page)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)

Page 354
EXHIBIT A

A PARCEL OF LAND BEING SITUATED WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT A CALCULATED POINT ACCEPTED AS THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17, FROM WHICH A CALCULATED POINT BEARS
NORTH 90 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST, 1324.02 FEET;

THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 17, NORTH 00 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 13 SECONDS WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 170.41 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;

THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 00 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 13 SECONDS WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 476.66 FEET;

NORTH 89 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 47 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40.00
FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 7TH AVENUE;

THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
396.15 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
472.00 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
189.15 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF
12.16 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
114.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 11 MINUTES 13 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
7.50 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
93.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 7TH
AVENUE;

THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 47 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF
40.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 207,870 SQ FT OR 4.772 ACRES.

Page 355
Page 356
Attachment B

Staff Report Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

Alhambra Village Planning December 20, 2022
Committee Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 5, 2023
Request From: C-2 TOD-1 (Intermediate Commercial,
Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay
District One) (4.79 acres)
Request To: WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code,
Transect 5:5, Transit Uptown Character
Area) (4.79 acres)
Proposed Use: Multifamily Residential
Location: Approximately 180 feet north of the
northeast corner of 7th Avenue and
Camelback Road
Owner: Larkspur Lane Investment Properties, LLC
Applicant: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
Representative: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations

General Plan Conformity

General Plan Land Use Map Designation Commercial

Street Map
7th Avenue Arterial 40-foot east half street
Classification
CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS CORE
VALUE; HEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS; DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Establish design
standards and guidelines for parking lots and structures, setback and build-to
lines, blank wall space, shade, and other elements affecting pedestrians, to
encourage pedestrian activity and identify options for providing pedestrian-
oriented design in different types of development.
The proposal includes design and development standards to encourage walking,
bicycling, and transit use. These standards include a shaded streetscape, units
fronting onto the public sidewalk, parking situated away from the public street, and on-
site amenities.
CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; BICYCLES; DESIGN
PRINCIPLE: Development should include convenient bicycle parking.

Page 357
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

The proposal includes bicycle facilities to encourage bicycling and transit use to
become a way of life by leveraging its proximity to the light rail station at 7th Avenue
and Camelback, the Colter Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements, and the
Phoenix Sonoran Bikeway on 3rd Avenue. Features include secure bicycle parking for
residents, convenient racks for guests, and a bicycle repair station for residents.
BUILD THE SUSTAINABLE DESERT CITY CORE VALUE; DESIGN PRINCIPLE:
Integrate trees and shade into the design of new development and
redevelopment projects throughout Phoenix.
The proposal includes robust tree plantings between the back of curb and the building
fronts and a detached sidewalk that will be shaded to 75 percent as stipulated. These
improvements will serve create a comfortable pedestrian environment along 7th
Avenue to make the walk from the adjacent neighborhood to the light rail and other
nearby amenities more comfortable.
CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; OPPORTUNITY SITES; LAND
USE PRINCIPLE: Promote and encourage compatible development and
redevelopment with a mix of housing types in neighborhoods close to
employment centers, commercial areas, and where transit or transportation
alternatives exist.
The subject site is approximately 200 feet from the 7th Avenue and Camelback Road
light rail station, and the proposal to provide multifamily residential meets the goals of
the Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan and the Housing Phoenix Plan.

Applicable Plans, Overlays, and Initiatives

TOD Strategic Policy Framework: Background Item No. 4.

Uptown Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan: Background Item No. 5.

Alhambra Village Character Plan: Background Item No. 6.

Tree and Shade Master Plan: Background Item No. 9.

Complete Streets Guidelines: Background Item No. 10.

Housing Phoenix: Background Item No. 11.

Zero Waste PHX: Background Item No. 12.

Page 358
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
Land Use Zoning
Vacant, former retail suites,
On Site C-2 TOD-1
and other commercial uses
Driveway for multifamily
North residential to the east, WU Code T5:5 UT, R-4
church and school
Liquor and smoke shop,
C-2 TOD-1, WU Code
South mattress store, and
T5:5 UT
multifamily residential
East Multifamily residential WU Code T5:5 UT

Commercial shopping
West (across 7th Avenue) C-2 TOD-1
center

Walkable Urban Code
Transect 5:5 UT
Standards Requirements Site Plan Provisions
Gross Acres 4.79
Total Dwelling Units No maximum 249
Density 52 dwelling units per acre
Building Height 56 foot maximum 54 feet 9 inches (Met)
Building Setbacks
Primary Frontage 12 foot maximum 6 feet (Met, per Stipulation
(7th Avenue) No. 3)
Parking
Primary Frontage Setback 30 foot minimum or behind 30 feet (Met)
building
Parking Spaces 244 spaces required 272 spaces (Met)

97 spaces for studios,
172.5 spaces for 1-
bedroom units, 55.5
spaces for 2-bedrooms

25 percent reduction
permitted, 0.25 miles of
light rail station.

Page 359
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

Walkable Urban Code
Transect 5:5 UT
Standards Requirements Site Plan Provisions
Streetscape Standards
Primary Frontage Minimum sidewalk width of 6-foot-wide sidewalk, 10-
6 feet and a minimum foot-wide landscape area
landscape width of 5 feet (Met, per Stipulation No
10)
Lot Requirements
Lot Coverage 80 percent maximum 26.4 percent (Met)
Primary Frontage 70 percent minimum 78 percent (Met)
Frontage Types All frontages Porch and Storefront (Met,
per Stipulation No. 2)
Open Space Minimum 5 percent of Not listed, 5 percent
gross site area required as publicly
accessible per Stipulation
No. 1
Glazing Requirements
Primary Frontage
Ground Floor 25 percent Not listed
Second Floor 25 percent, 10 percent Not listed
East and West
*Site plan revision, variance, of administrative relief required.

Background/Issues/Analysis

SUBJECT SITE
1. This request is to rezone 4.97 acres located approximately 180 feet north of the
northeast corner of 7th Avenue and Camelback Road from C-2 TOD-1
(Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to
WU Code T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5, Transit Uptown Character
Area) for multifamily residential.

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
2. The subject site contains vacant commercial structures. To the east of the subject
site is a five-story multifamily residential development under construction that was
rezoned to WU Code T5:5 UT through Rezoning Case No. Z-39-19-4. To the north
of the subject site is a driveway to the multifamily residential development to the
east, and a high school and church zoned R-4 (Multifamily Residence District). To
the south of the subject site are multiple commercial properties zoned C-2 TOD-1
and a portion of a multifamily development zoned WU Code T5:5 UT. To the west
of the subject site across 7th Avenue is a commercial shopping center zoned C-2

Page 360
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

TOD-1.

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
3. The General Plan Land Use Map
designates the site as Commercial. The
proposal for multifamily residential is
consistent with the designation. To the
south, west, and east is designated as
Commercial. To the north of the
driveway is designated as Public/Quasi-
Public.

General Plan Land Use Map, Source: Planning and
Development Department

4. Transit Oriented Development Strategic
Policy Framework:
The Transit Oriented Development Strategic
Policy Framework is part of the City’s
General Plan. The framework identifies
planning typologies to describe urban
environments. The subject site is located
within 200 feet from the light rail station
located at 7th Avenue and Camelback Road
which is identified as a Medium Urban Center
Place Type. The Medium Urban Center
Place Type is characterized by high intensity
with building heights typically from three to
six stories with incentive heights of up to 10
stories when bonus criteria are met. The Transit Oriented Development Strategic
Policy Framework, Place Type Map
proposal for four stories is consistent with the Excerpt; Source: Planning and
intensity envisioned by the Medium Urban Development Department
Center Place Type.

5. Uptown TOD Policy Plan: The site is located within the Uptown TOD Planning
Area which is bound by Missouri Avenue on the north, 7th Street on the east,
Indian School Road on the south, and the western edge is generally 7th Avenue
south of the Grand Canal and 15th Avenue north of the Grand Canal. The policy
plan for the Uptown TOD District provides a blueprint for fully achieving the

Page 361
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

transformative potential of light rail in a sustainable manner. Changes advocated in
the plan can lower transportation costs for residents, create new business
opportunities, encourage active, healthy lifestyles, ensure Phoenix increases its
competitive advantage in the global marketplace, and improve prosperity by
growing the economy in locations with existing infrastructure and public services.

With specific regard to the proposed use Uptown TOD Policy Plan, Conceptual Zoning
and the site, the Uptown TOD District Plan; Source: Planning and Development
Department
Plan provides the following guidance.
• The site is depicted on the
Conceptual Zoning Plan with a
recommended Transect of 5:5,
which the applicant has
proposed.
• The plan projects a shortfall of
10,888 housing units by 2035
and articulates a goal for more
housing and employment in
proximity to high-capacity transit.
The proposal would add 249
dwelling units near light rail.
• The plan identifies that only 22
percent of households are within
a 0.25 mile walk of healthy food
and the proposal would bring 249
households within that distance
of the Fry’s Food Store located at
the northwest corner of 7th
Avenue and Camelback Road.

6. Alhambra Village Character Plan:
The Alhambra Village Character Plan was approved and adopted into the Phoenix
General Plan through General Plan Amendment GPA-1-19. The project advances
the following items identified in the Alhambra Village Character Plan:
• Land Use Principle: Locate major traffic-generating land uses on major
streets in areas planned for such uses, or near parkway and freeway access
and transit centers or light rail transit stations, and avoid use of local streets.
• Land Use Principle: Promote and encourage compatible infill development
with a mix of housing types in neighborhoods close to employment centers,
commercial areas and where transit or transportation alternatives exist.
• Design Principle: Integrate trees and shade into the design of new
development and redevelopment projects throughout Phoenix.

Page 362
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

• Design Principle: Locate parking to the rear of a site to create a more
pedestrian environment, when adequate shielding from noise and light can
be provided to adjacent established neighborhoods. On-street parking in
some areas may also promote a pedestrian environment.

The proposal would add new multifamily residential within close proximity to high-
capacity transit, on an arterial street, and in a walkable urban configuration that will
produce a strong and well shaded pedestrian environment with parking situated to
the rear of the site, with the exception of the parking spaces along the driveways at
the far north and south of the site.

PROPOSAL
7. Site Plan
The applicant is proposing 249
dwelling units in a four-story
configuration. The proposal
provides ground-level surface
parking shaded to 35 percent
(per Stipulation No. 7) located
behind or set back from the
building. The vehicular
ingress/egress is from a
driveway at the south edge of
the site and through an access
easement north of the site
shared with the adjacent
multifamily east of the subject
site. The driveway on 7th
Avenue will be restricted to
right-in/right-out (Stipulation No.
9). Further, traffic calming
devices will be installed at
driveways to slow vehicles
down when crossing the Conceptual Site Plan; Source: Wilder Architects
sidewalk, per Stipulation No. 5.

The streetscape along 7th Avenue includes a six-foot-wide sidewalk detached from
the curb with a ten-foot-wide landscape strip (Stipulation No. 10) with a six-foot-
wide landscape setback between the sidewalk and building to accommodate a
double row of trees along the streetscape (Stipulation No. 3). To further activate
the streetscape, the applicant is providing ground-floor units with the porch
frontage type. This frontage type is codified in Stipulation No. 2.

Page 363
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

The applicant is providing 10,000 square feet of publicly accessibly open space,
adjacent to 7th Avenue and shaded to a minimum of 50 percent, at the north and
south corners and at the midpoint of the site. Staff recommends Stipulation No. 1
to ensure that the provided open space areas are developed as proposed.

8. Conceptual Building Elevations

To promote enhanced design and compatibility with the surrounding area, staff is
recommending Stipulation No. 4 which requires that masonry elements be
incorporated into the primary exterior building materials.

Conceptual 7th Avenue Elevation; Source: Wilder Architects

STUDIES AND POLICIES
9. Tree and Shade Master Plan:
The Tree and Shade Master Plan encourages treating the urban forest as
infrastructure to ensure the trees are an integral part of the City’s planning and
development process. Sidewalks on the street frontages should be detached from
the curbs to allow trees to be planted on both sides of the sidewalk to provide
thermal comfort for pedestrians and to reduce the urban heat island effect.

The proposal aligns with the Tree and Shade Master Plan in the following ways.
First, the Walkable Urban Code requires that all public sidewalks be shaded to a
minimum of 75 percent at maturity. Second, as required by Stipulation No. 3 the
applicant will provide a six-foot-wide landscape area along 7th Avenue planted with
minimum three-inch caliper shade trees. Stipulation No. 7 requires that the surface
parking area be shaded to 35 percent by minimum three-inch caliper trees and that
the landscape area between the back of curb and sidewalk be planted with three-
inch caliper trees (Stipulation No. 10).

10. Complete Streets Guidelines:
The City of Phoenix City Council adopted the Complete Streets Guiding Principles.
The principles are intended to promote improvements that provide an
accessible, safe, connected transportation system to include all modes, such as
bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and vehicles.

Page 364
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

The Walkable Urban Code is designed to facilitate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit-
oriented development and includes provisions to advance the goals of the policy
guide. As required by Stipulation No. 5, traffic calming devices will be installed
along the driveways to slow vehicles down when exiting the site. Stipulation No. 6
requires bicycle parking and a fix-it station, and Stipulation No. 10 requires a six-
foot-wide sidewalk detached from the curb with a ten-foot-wide landscape strip.

11. Housing Phoenix:
In June 2020, the Phoenix City Council approved the Housing Phoenix Plan. This
Plan contains policy initiatives for the development and preservation of housing
with the vision of creating a stronger and more vibrant Phoenix through increased
housing options for residents at all income levels and family sizes. Phoenix’s rapid
population growth and housing underproduction has led to a need for over 163,000
new housing units. Current shortages of housing supply relative to demand are a
primary reason why housing costs are increasing.

The proposed development supports the Plan’s goal of preserving or creating
50,000 housing units by 2030 by contributing to a variety housing types that will
address the supply shortage at a more rapid pace while using vacant or
underutilized land in a more sustainable fashion.

12. Zero Waste Phoenix PHX:
The City of Phoenix is committed to its waste diversion efforts and has set a goal to
become a zero-waste city, as part of the city’s overall 2050 Environmental
Sustainability Goals. One of the ways Phoenix can achieve this is to improve and
expand its recycling and other waste diversion programs.

Section 716 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance establishes standards to encourage
the provision of recycling containers for multifamily, commercial, and mixed-use
developments meeting certain criteria. The applicant stated in their application
materials that they anticipate the developer will incorporate recycling options for
residents.

COMMUNITY CORRESONDENCE
13. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received letters or support or opposition
from members of the public.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
14. The Fire Department commented that the site plan must comply with the Phoenix
Fire Code, indicated there are no problems anticipated with the case, but noted
that the applicant should be aware of requirements for fire apparatus access road
turning radius, width, and clear height.

Page 365
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

15. The Street Transportation Department provided a series of stipulations related to
the perimeter conditions of the proposed development including the following:
Stipulation No. 8 to require a Traffic Impact Study to evaluate 7th Avenue peak
hour restrictions, site traffic routing on the surrounding street network and a
contribution of funds for the Colter Street Project; Stipulation No. 9 requiring that
the southern driveway on 7th Avenue be right-in/right-out, Stipulation Nos. 10 and
11 to require a shaded and detached sidewalk along 7th Avenue with a
corresponding sidewalk easement; and Stipulation No. 12 to require all
improvements in the right-of-way be constructed with all required elements and to
ADA standards.

16. The Public Transit Department asked that the existing bus stop be retained
towards the southern boundary of the site. That is shown on the site plan attached
as an exhibit.

OTHER
17. The site has not been identified as being archaeologically sensitive. However, in
the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, all ground
disturbing activities must cease within 33-feet of the discovery and the City of
Phoenix Archaeology Office must be notified immediately and allowed time to
properly assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 13.

18. Staff has not received a completed form for the Waiver of Claims for Diminution in
Value of Property under Proposition 207 (A.R.S. 12-1131 et seq.), as required by
the rezoning application process. Therefore, a stipulation has been added to
require the form be completed and submitted prior to preliminary site plan
approval. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 14.

19. Development and use of the site are subject to all applicable codes and
ordinances. Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements. Other
formal actions such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and abandonments
may be required.

Findings

1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map
designation and the transect map within the Uptown Transit Oriented
Development Policy Plan.

2. The proposal as stipulated, will create a strong pedestrian environment along
7th Avenue with shaded and detached sidewalks to convey residents safely

Page 366
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

and comfortably to the 7th Avenue/Camelback Road light rail station.

3. The proposal will create additional housing options in line with the Housing
Phoenix Plan’s goal of preserving or creating 50,000 housing units by 2030.

Stipulations

1. The developer shall provide a minimum 10,000 square feet of publicly
accessible open space in a forecourt configuration, as described below and as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department. The
publicly accessible open space shall be:

a. Adjacent and accessible to the public sidewalk on 7th Avenue

b. Provided in areas of not less than 500 square feet and 20 feet in width;

c. Shaded to a minimum of 50 percent by vegetative shade;

d. Maintained in perpetuity without fences or barriers;

e. Eligible to qualify as a forecourt frontage type;

f. Improved to contain, at minimum, a drinking fountain for people and
pets, art, and seating.

2. All ground floor dwelling units adjacent to 7th Avenue shall utilize the stoop
and doorwell, forecourt, or porch frontage types, as approved or modified by
the Planning and Development Department.

3. Between the public sidewalk and the building fronts, there shall be a 6-foot-
wide landscape area planted with minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees placed
20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development Department to comply with frontage requirements.

4. The development shall incorporate masonry elements into the primary exterior
building materials and shall be reflective of the architectural style in the area,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. The developer shall install traffic calming devices along the driveways of the
property so that vehicle drivers exercise caution prior to crossing the sidewalk
when exiting the property, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

Page 367
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

6. The developer shall incorporate bicycle infrastructure, as described below and
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

a. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

b. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 required
spaces near entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements
of Section 1307.H of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

c. One bicycle repair station shall be provided and maintained by the
developer in an area of high visibility near the secure bicycle parking
areas.

7. A minimum 35 percent of the uncovered parking lot area shall be shaded by
minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this
development. The TIS shall include evaluation of 7th Avenue peak hour
restrictions and resulting site traffic routing on the surrounding street network
and proposed mitigation to Colter Street. The developer shall be responsible
for all costs for mitigation measure determined by the Study and contribute
funds for the Colter Street Project. No preliminary approval of plans shall be
granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the City.

9. The southern driveway onto 7th Avenue, as depicted on the site plan date
stamped October 31, 2022, shall be restricted to right-in/right-out only and
access shall be coordinated with the Public Transit Department, as approved
by Planning and Development.

10. The developer shall construct a minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk separated from
the curb by a minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area along the east side of 7th
Avenue and planted with minimum three-inch caliper shade trees placed 20
feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved by the Planned and
Development Department.

11. The developer shall dedicate a sidewalk easement to accommodate a
minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk and minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area
located between the back of curb and sidewalk, as approved by the Planning

Page 368
Staff Report: Z-50-22-4
December 16, 2022

and Development Department.

12. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping, and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for
the Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.

Writer
Sarah Stockham
December 16, 2022

Team Leader
Racelle Escolar

Exhibits
Zoning sketch map
Aerial sketch map
Conceptual Site Plan date stamped October 31, 2022
Conceptual Landscape Plan date stamped October 31, 2022
Conceptual Building Elevations date stamped October 31, 2022 (4 pages)

Page 369
R-5 C-2
P-1

7TH AVE
R-4

C-2 *
Z-91-88 WU Code
T5:5 UT *
Z-39-19

Transit
Overlay
District (TOD-1) C-2 HP *
Z-60-18

CAMELBACK RD
C-2
C-2 C-3
NORTHERN AVE

Miles GLENDALE AVE

0.035 0.0175 0 0.035
ALHAMBRA VILLAGE
BETHANY HOME RD

CAMELBACK RD
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 4
43RD AVE 7ST AVE
7TH AVE
19TH AVE
35TH AVE
27TH AVE
I-17
Z-50-22

APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
FROM:
C-2 TOD-1 ( 4.79 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. 6/30/2022
DATE:

Z-50-22 RE VISION DATES:

GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
4.79 Acres QS 19-27 H-8 TO: WU Code T5:5 UT ( 4.79 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
C-2 TOD-1 69 83
WU Code T5:5 UT No Maximum N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus Page 370
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL G IS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2022\Z-50-22.mxd
R-5 C-2
P-1

7TH AVE
R-4

C-2 *
Z-91-88 WU Code
T5:5 UT *
Z-39-19

Transit
Overlay
District (TOD-1) C-2 HP *
Z-60-18

CAMELBACK RD
C-2
C-2 C-3
NORTHERN AVE

Miles GLENDALE AVE

0.035 0.0175 0 0.035
ALHAMBRA VILLAGE
BETHANY HOME RD

CAMELBACK RD
CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 4
43RD AVE 7ST AVE
7TH AVE
19TH AVE
35TH AVE
27TH AVE
I-17
Z-50-22

APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
FROM:
C-2 TOD-1 ( 4.79 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO. 6/30/2022
DATE:

Z-50-22 RE VISION DATES:

GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
4.79 Acres QS 19-27 H-8 TO: WU Code T5:5 UT ( 4.79 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
C-2 TOD-1 69 83
WU Code T5:5 UT No Maximum N/A

* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus Page 371
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL G IS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2022\Z-50-22.mxd
1.20
EXISTING 30' ACCESS EASEMENT
8'-0"
PER SURVEY INFO
1.12 N89°59'54"E 396.15'(C) 1.12
1.05
NORTH NORTH
1.14 1.14 1.03
1.10
1.06
1.11
WILDER ARCHITECTS
1.27 16904 CLUB HILL DR
E1 E1 A2 A2 E1 E1 B1 E1 E1 A2 B1 E1 E1 A2 A2 E1 E1 B1 E1 E1 A2 B1

LOADING
B1 37'x30' 37'x30' B1 37'x30' 37'x30'
DALLAS, TX 75248
SITE INFORMATION
18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30'
1.30 37'x30' 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 1,110 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 1,110 SF 37'x30' 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 1,110 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 1,110 SF 214.616.5196
1,110 SF 1,110 SF
WILDERARCH.COM

1.06 E1 STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. E1 ADDRESS: 5015, 5025, 5027, 5037, 5049 Project Owner:
18'x30' E1 A2 E1 18'x30' E1 A2 E1 E1 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 NORTH 7TH AVE,
540 SF B2 18'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 1.17 540 SF B2 18'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30'
A1
1,150 SF 540 SF 720 SF 540 SF
G G G G G G G G G G G 1,150 SF 540 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF PHOENIX, AZ 85013
E1 E1 698 SF
18'x30' 18'x30'
540 SF 540 SF CURRENT ZONING: C-2
1.06 1.06 REQUESTED ZONING: WU T5:5
A2 A2 E1
24'x30' 1.13 24'x30' 18'x30'
MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.

PORCH FRONTAGE TYPE, PER CH. 13 WU CODE
720 SF 720 SF 540 SF SITE SIZE:
AMENITY NET: 188,803 SF (4.33 AC) 2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
1.12 A2 SUITE 150
A2 A2 24'x30' GROSS: 207,994 SF (4.77 AC)
24'x30' 24'x30' 720 SF
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

372'-9" (78% of SITE FRONTAGE)
720 SF 720 SF
A2 LOT COVERAGE: BLDG FOOTPRINT: 55,000 SF (26.4%)
E1 E1 A2
299'-9"
24'x30' 1.23 Issues and Revisions:

S00°11'13"E 472.00'(C)
18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30'
720 SF ALLOWABLE BUILDING HT: 56'

(EXTERIOR ENTRY SERVES AS SECONDARY ENTRY)
540 SF 540 SF 720 SF
PROPOSED BUILDING HT: 54'-9"
No. Date Issue
APPROX 35% OF REQUIRED PARKING TO BE A3 A2
B B3 SHADED BY SHADE TREES (MIN. 3" CALIPER) 1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
27'x30' BUILDING AREA

26' W. TWO-WAY DRIVE
24'x30' 1.16
1,125 SF 1.16 810 SF 720 SF
40'x30'
1,200 SF
GROSS: 222,000 SF 2 07 March 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
1.26 NET: 177,500 SF 3 17 June 22 Zoning Pre-App update
1.13
4 02 Sept 22 Draft stipulations

N00°11'13"W 358.17'(C)
1.25 B1 B3
37'x30'
249 UNITS TOTAL
40'x30'
1,110 SF 1,200 SF STUDIO 97
1.27 1BR 115
18 15 1.12
B3 2BR 37
B 40'x30'
A3 A2
1,200 SF
20 18 18 18 11 41 PARKING REQUIRED:

N 7th AVE
1,125 SF

80' R.O.W.
27'x30' 24'x30'
810 SF 720 SF 1 per STUDIO 97
1.5 per 1BR 172.5
E1 A2 E1 A2 1.5 per 2BR 55.5
18'x30'
24'x30' 1.24 18'x30'
24'x30' 1.15
540 SF
720 SF
1.15
540 SF
720 SF SUBTOTAL REQ'D 325 SPACES
25% REDUCTION - 81 SPACES
A2 A2 TOTAL 244 SPACES REQUIRED
24'x30' 24'x30'
A2
720 SF
1.17 720 SF 24'x30'
720 SF
PARKING PROVIDED:
A2 1.14 A2 E1 SURFACE 244
1.29 1.13
24'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' ACCESSIBLE 6

7th and CAMELBACK
720 SF 720 SF 540 SF
1.06 1.12 TUCK-UNDER GARAGES 22
1.23 E1 TOTAL 272 SPACES PROVIDED

MAGNOLIA
STOREFRONT FRONTAGE TYPE
18'x30'
540 SF
B2 A1
E1 A2 E1 G G G G G G G G G G G E1 A2 E1 E1 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2

PHOENIX, ARIZONA
AMENITY 698 SF
18'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' E1 1,150 SF 18'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30'
540 SF 720 SF 540 SF 18'x30' 540 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF 720 SF

73'-0"
1.30 LEASING STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. 540 SF
1.06

PER CH. 13 WU CODE
1.26 B1
E1 E1 A2 A2 E1 E1 B1 E1 E1 A2 B1 4 37'x30' E1 E1 A2 A2 E1 E1 B1 E1 E1 A2 B1
18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 37'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 37'x30' 1,110 SF 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 24'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 37'x30' 18'x30' 18'x30' 24'x30' 37'x30'
1.27 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 1,110 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 1,110 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 720 SF 540 SF 540 SF 1,110 SF 540 SF 540 SF 720 SF 1,110 SF

1.10 1.06
1.14
1.11 30
1.21 1.12
1.12 1.12 1.12
26' W. TWO-WAY DRIVE
1.12 1.12 1.12
1.28
1.22
1.03
1.27
1.01 S89°59'54"W 189.15'
S89°59'54"W 93.00' 1.23
8'-0" 1.04 1.03
S89°59'54"W 114.00' 1.02
PER SURVEY INFO
1.03 Project Owner:
40'-0" Contact: Magnolia Property Company
R.O.W.

09 LEVELS 2 thru 4
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150

12 GROUND LEVEL / SITE PLAN
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
SCALE: 1" = 40' SCALE: 1" = 40' 16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
KEYNOTES 214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com
1.01 SET "P.K." NAIL / WASHER R.L.S. #28236 W MISSOURI AVE
1.02 SET REBAR / CAP R.L.S. #28236
1.03 FOUND REBAR / CAP R.L.S. #31020 Drawing Name:
EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT
1.04 FOUND REBAR / CAP R.L.S. #31020
1.05 FOUND REBAR / CAP R.L.S. #42137 SITE PLAN
1.06 ACCESSIBLE PATH TO ENTRY / PUBLIC WAY
1 5 Sheet Number:
1.10 FRONTYARD SETBACK (WU T5:5): COMPLIES WITH DRAFT

A001
4 2 6 8
STIPULATIONS REF: SECTION
1.11 PARKING SETBACK: 30' 3 7
1.12 LANDSCAPE ISLAND: 8'x17'
1.13 LANDSCAPE ISLAND: 5'x35'
1.14 LANDSCAPE ISLAND (75 SF+)

N 7th AVE
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC
1.15 POOL DECK - TURF and PAVING
N 7th AVE
1.16 AMENITY DECK - TURF and CONC PAVING
1.17 6' SPRINKLER EASEMENT
W COLTER ST
1.20 30' W. P-1255-1 ENTRY DRIVEWAY
SITE
1.21 24' W. P-1255-1 ENTRY DRIVEWAY - RIGHT-IN,
RIGHT-OUT ONLY
1.22 EXISTING BUS STOP RELOCATED TO SOUTH

N 11th AVE N 7th AVE N 5th AVE N 3rd AVE
END OF PROPERTY
1.23 TRASH BIN ENCLOSURES COMPLYING WITH
C.O.P. STANDARD
1.24 EXISTING CELL TOWER ANTENNA TO REMAIN 13 9

1.25 "RECESS" AT FIRST 2 LEVELS AT MIDPOINT OF 16 14 12 10

BUILDING LENGTH 15 11
1.26 BUILDING ENTRY ON 7TH AVE. SITE
1.27 PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE OPEN SPACE:
APPROX 4,000 SF AT SOUTH CORNER
APPROX 2,000 SF AT MID POINT
APPROX 2,000 SF AT NORTH CORNER CAMELBACK RD

1.28 TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICE AT VEHICULAR EXIT

05 PHOTO KEY PLAN 04 CONTEXT PLAN 02 VICINITY PLAN
1.29 AMENITY AREAS WILL INCLUDE SECURE RESIDENT BICYCLE
PARKING AND BICYCLE REPAIR STATION. LOCATION
AND CONFIGURATION TBD.
1.30 GUEST BICYCLE PARKING COMPLYING WITH SECTION
1307.H OF ZONING ORDINANCE
SCALE: 1"=100' NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE

Page 372
WILDER ARCHITECTS
16904 CLUB HILL DR
DALLAS, TX 75248
214.616.5196
WILDERARCH.COM

Project Owner:

MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.
2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
SUITE 150
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

Issues and Revisions:

No. Date Issue
1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
4 02 Sept 22 Draft Stipulations

7th and CAMELBACK
MAGNOLIA PHOENIX, ARIZONA

Project Owner:
Contact: Magnolia Property Company
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com

Drawing Name:

LANDSCAPE PLAN
Sheet Number:

A002
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC

Page 373
WILDER ARCHITECTS
16904 CLUB HILL DR
DALLAS, TX 75248
214.616.5196
WILDERARCH.COM

Project Owner:

MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.
2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
SUITE 150
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

Issues and Revisions:

No. Date Issue
1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
3 17 June 22 Zoning Pre-App update
4 02 Sept 22 Draft Stipulations

7th and CAMELBACK
MAGNOLIA PHOENIX, ARIZONA

Project Owner:
Contact: Magnolia Property Company
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com

Drawing Name:

BUILDING ELEVATION
Sheet Number:

FRONT ELEVATION (WEST) A005
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC

Page 374
WILDER ARCHITECTS
16904 CLUB HILL DR
DALLAS, TX 75248
214.616.5196
WILDERARCH.COM

Project Owner:

MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.
2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
SUITE 150
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

Issues and Revisions:

No. Date Issue
1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
3 17 June 22 Zoning Pre-App update
4 02 Sept 22 Draft Stipulations

7th and CAMELBACK
MAGNOLIA PHOENIX, ARIZONA

Project Owner:
Contact: Magnolia Property Company
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com

Drawing Name:

BUILDING ELEVATION
Sheet Number:

SOUTH ELEVATION A005.1
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC

Page 375
WILDER ARCHITECTS
16904 CLUB HILL DR
DALLAS, TX 75248
214.616.5196
WILDERARCH.COM

Project Owner:

MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.
2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
SUITE 150
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

Issues and Revisions:

No. Date Issue
1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
3 17 June 22 Zoning Pre-App update
4 02 Sept 22 Draft Stipulations

7th and CAMELBACK
MAGNOLIA PHOENIX, ARIZONA

Project Owner:
Contact: Magnolia Property Company
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com

Drawing Name:

BUILDING ELEVATION
Sheet Number:

NORTH ELEVATION A005.2
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC

Page 376
WILDER ARCHITECTS
16904 CLUB HILL DR
DALLAS, TX 75248
214.616.5196
WILDERARCH.COM

Project Owner:

MAGNOLIA PROPERTY CO.
2435 SOUTHLAKE BLVD.
SUITE 150
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092

Issues and Revisions:

No. Date Issue
1 28 Feb 22 Phoenix Zoning Pre-App
3 17 June 22 Zoning Pre-App update
4 02 Sept 22 Draft Stipulations

7th and CAMELBACK
MAGNOLIA PHOENIX, ARIZONA

Project Owner:
Contact: Magnolia Property Company
2435 Southlake Blvd, S. 150
Southlake, TX 76092
817.769.2580
randy@mpcres.com

Architect: Wilder Architects
16904 Club Hill Dr.
Dallas, TX 75248
214.616.5196
wilder@wilderarch.com

Drawing Name:

BUILDING ELEVATION
Sheet Number:

EAST ELEVATION A005.3
© 2022 WILDER ARCHITECTS, LLC

Page 377
Attachment C

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

Date of VPC Meeting December 20, 2022
Request From C-2 TOD-1
Request To WU Code T5:5 UT
Proposed Use Multifamily residential
Location Approximately 180 feet north of the northeast corner of
7th Avenue and Camelback Road
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with an
additional stipulation
VPC Vote 12-4

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Committee Members Jak Keyser and Jamaar Williams joined during this item, bringing
quorum to 16 members.

Three members of the public registered to speak on this item.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Sarah Stockham, staff, reviewed the surrounding land uses, zoning designations, and
the Uptown TOD Policy Plan transect map. Ms. Stockham displayed the proposed site
plan, elevations and concluded with staff findings and recommended stipulations.

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Brian Greathouse, representing the applicant with Burch & Cracchiolo, PA, displayed
an aerial image of the site, reviewed the surrounding land uses, and displayed the
proposed elevations and site plan highlighting the location of the open space along 7th
Avenue. Mr. Greathouse showed a trip generation comparison of the current zoning and
proposed zoning revealing a reduction in AM and PM trips, a route comparison showing
that it is a shorter route to turn left onto 7th Avenue rather than a right to travel along
Colter Street to go south on 7th Avenue, or west or east on Camelback Road, and
concluded by showing a gap analysis detailing the number of left turns onto 7th Avenue
possible during AM and PM peak hours.

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

Page 378
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Committee Member Jim DeGraffenreid asked what is the targeted renter
demographic, what the price ranges will be for the units, if residents using light rail was
incorporated into the traffic trip generation calculation, and if any water conservation or
heat mitigation measures are going to be incorporated into the site design. Mr.
Greathouse replied that they are targeting young professionals and empty nesters, the
price range will be $1,400 for a studio, $1,700 for a one-bedroom unit, and $2,400 for a
two-bedroom unit, the traffic study did not reduce the number of trips due to residents
using light rail, but that now that working from home is more popular they expect the
actual trips generated to be 20% less than the projected trips, and they will use a white
TPO roof for energy efficiency and low-flow plumbing fixtures.

Committee Member Tracey Adams asked what is a forecourt, what was the response
of the nearby historic district to the traffic study, and how far is the building from the
back of curb. Mr. Greathouse replied that the building will be recessed in the center to
allow for a seating area which is the forecourt, Medlock Place Historic District provided
a letter of support for the project, and they also want the Colter Street improvements in
the Colter Street Improvement Project completed, and the building is 22 feet from the
back of curb. Committee Member Adams commented that while it is great to have City
stipulations and policy for shade trees, in actuality there is not enough space to grow
them, an Italian Cypress tree can grow to be 20 feet wide, and maintenance is an issue
as well as some property owners cannot keep up with pruning. Committee Member
Adams concluded that she wants to see this project succeed, but when you have a
beautiful building and landscaping that is not up to par, it can have an impact on the
entire site.

Committee Member Keith Ender asked how the parking spaces along the northern
border of the site will impact the traffic flow along the shared driveway to the north, and
if the applicant has spoken to the neighboring property owner to the east who shares
the driveway. Mr. Greathouse replied that they have not spoken with the neighboring
developer, and their calculations show that the driveway is wide enough to
accommodate the parked cars.

Committee Member Maurita Harris asked if the historic neighborhood commented on
turning left during certain times of day, adding that during the mornings and evenings
the reverse lane on 7th Avenue is not a turn lane. Mr. Greathouse replied that they
were surprised with the number of gaps available to turn left in the traffic study, and they
have drone footage showing the gaps available to make left turns throughout the day.
Committee Member Harris asked if the land has already been acquired and if these
units will be for low-income renters. Mr. Greathouse replied that the site is under
contract but has not closed, and that the units will be market rate.

Committee Member Charlie Jones shared a concern with the parking spaces along
the north side of the development, and that they will stop the traffic flow in the shared
driveway when they are backing out. Mr. Greathouse replied that if there was a car

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 379
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

driving in the shared driveway it would yield to the car backing out, and they don’t
anticipate cars driving quickly down the driveway. Committee Member Jones replied
that there will be a lot of traffic using that driveway as it is shared with the development
to the east and asked if the users of this site can access the site to the east which has
access onto Camelback Road. Mr. Greathouse replied that the neighboring site will be
gated so residents of the subject site will not be able to drive through to reach
Camelback Road, and they only used their proposed project in their trip generation
calculations, but they would be happy to look into it more.

Vice Chair Drew Bryck asked if they could stripe a dedicated left turn lane within the
shared driveway, because one car waiting to turn left onto 7th Avenue will back up the
rest of the cars in the driveway who want to turn right and asked who is responsible for
the driveway. Mr. Greathouse replied that the driveway is 30-feet-wide, which is wider
than a typical driveway, but they are expecting it to be one lane in, one lane out without
striping, and that both property owners have rights to the shared driveway. Vice Chair
Bryck asked for clarification on the funds provided in an escrow account and asked if
they anticipate traffic will spill onto Oregon Avenue or Georgia Avenue due to the
improvements proposed on Colter Street. Mr. Greathouse replied that they have agreed
to deposit funds into an escrow account for the Colter Street Improvement Project,
which is still in the design phase, and that is hard to gauge human behavior, but they do
not anticipate many people turning right onto those streets.

Committee Member Alexander Malkoon asked if the purchase of the site if contingent
on the zoning approval, if the units will be built with the potential for condo conversions,
why the property to the east appears to have no building setback on Camelback Road,
when is it required for developers to underground utility lines and what was the amount
provided for traffic improvements by the property to the east to the Medlock Place
association. Mr. Greathouse replied that the sale of the site is contingent the zoning
approval and they are not planning on building the units to condo standards to allow for
a conversion in the future. Ms. Stockham, staff, replied that the Walkable Urban Code
requires a maximum setback, not a minimum, so a 0-foot setback on Camelback Road
would be within Zoning Ordinance standards, it is a common requirement through the
development review process to underground utility lines, and that she is unfamiliar with
the details of the private agreement between the developer of the property to the east
and the nearby historic neighborhood.

Committee Member Charlie Jones asked how many parking spaces will be provided
and what was the unit mix. Mr. Greathouse replied they are providing 272 parking
spaces, which is in the middle of what the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance requires, and the
amount allowed with a 25% reduction due to the proximity of the light rail station, and
they are providing 97 studios, 115 one-bedrooms and 37 two-bedrooms.

Committee Member Christian Solorio shared that unlike the City of Tempe, the City
of Phoenix does not have the infrastructure in place for a fund for voluntary donations
by market-rate developers towards building affordable housing, but the AZ Housing
Fund is an option and encourages all market-rate developers to consider a donation.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 380
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

PUBLIC COMMENT
Ken Waters shared that his TOD journey began in October when there was a PHO
proposal for a PUD-zoned site near Central and Camelback, where the developer
wanted to reduce the amount of retail on the ground floor from 14,000 square feet to
2,000 square feet. Mr. Waters added that the City is missing mixed-use opportunities in
projects along the light rail line, that the ground floor should be sacred ground for retail
for properties along the light rail line and asked each committee member do their own
walk through or inventory of sites near the light rail to see how many incorporate
ground-floor retail and how many are 100% residential.

Ellen Bilbrey, with the Medlock Place Historic District Association, shared her support
for the project, that they worked with both the hotel and multifamily residential
development to the east who did contribute funds for traffic mitigation into an escrow
account, and that she liked that the project was only four stories and the way it
integrates tree and shade, that the shopping center across the street has enough retail
and ultimately thanked the applicant for their early collaboration on the project.

Rick Mountjoy, with the Medlock Place Historic District Association, thanked the
developer for reaching out early in the process, and shared that traffic is a concern now
that this site and the site to the east will add a combined 535 dwelling units to the
neighborhood, but they are working with the City on traffic mitigation measures.

APPLICANT RESPONSE
Mr. Greathouse thanked the speakers for the support and shared that there is retail on
the corner of 7th Avenue and Camelback Road.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED:

MOTION
Committee Member Alexander Malkoon motioned to recommend approval of Z-50-
22-4 per the staff recommendation.

Committee Member Charlie Jones asked to make a friendly amendment that a
stipulation be added to relocate parking on the north so that it will not interfere with
traffic flow on the shared driveway.

Vice Chair Drew Bryck asked to make a friendly amendment that the driveway include
a dedicated left-turn lane.

Committee Member Alexander Malkoon accepted and amended his motion to include
an additional stipulation: The developer shall work with the Street Transportation and
Planning and Development Departments regarding the proposed parking along the
north side of the site so that it does not interfere with traffic flow along the shared
driveway and to potentially stripe the driveway to include a left-turn lane.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 381
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

Committee Member Alexander Malkoon motioned to recommend approval of Z-50-
22-4 per the staff recommendation with an additional stipulation. Committee Member
Charlie Jones seconded the motion.

DISCUSSION
Committee Member Tracey Adams shared a concern with the landscaping along the
streetscape, sharing that often time there is not adequate space for trees to grow or
they grow too close to the building, and apartment management companies excessively
prune or remove the trees.

Committee Member Jak Keyser shared that while he understands the request to have
retail at this location, this could also be a location to have professional offices on the
ground floor, as this site does not immediately face the light rail line.

Committee Member Crystal Carrillo shared that she does not approve of the request,
stating a need for affordable, not market rate, housing in the Village.

VOTE
12-4; motion to recommend approval of Z-50-22-4 per the staff recommendation with an
additional stipulation passes with Committee Members Adams, Ender, Fitzgerald,
Harris, Jones, Keyser, Krietor, LeBlanc, Malkoon, Solorio, Bryck and Shore in favor with
Committee Members Carrillo, DeGraffenreid, Sanchez and Williams opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

None.

VPC Recommended Stipulations:

1. The developer shall provide a minimum 10,000 square feet of publicly
accessible open space in a forecourt configuration, as described below and as
approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department. The
publicly accessible open space shall be:

a. Adjacent and accessible to the public sidewalk on 7th Avenue

b. Provided in areas of not less than 500 square feet and 20 feet in width;

c. Shaded to a minimum of 50 percent by vegetative shade;

d. Maintained in perpetuity without fences or barriers;

e. Eligible to qualify as a forecourt frontage type;

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 382
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

f. Improved to contain, at minimum, a drinking fountain for people and
pets, art, and seating.

2. All ground floor dwelling units adjacent to 7th Avenue shall utilize the stoop
and doorwell, forecourt, or porch frontage types, as approved or modified by
the Planning and Development Department.

3. Between the public sidewalk and the building fronts, there shall be a 6-foot-
wide landscape area planted with minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees placed
20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development Department to comply with frontage requirements.

4. The development shall incorporate masonry elements into the primary exterior
building materials and shall be reflective of the architectural style in the area,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. The developer shall install traffic calming devices along the driveways of the
property so that vehicle drivers exercise caution prior to crossing the sidewalk
when exiting the property, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The developer shall incorporate bicycle infrastructure, as described below and
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

a. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

b. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at
a minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 required
spaces near entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements
of Section 1307.H of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

c. One bicycle repair station shall be provided and maintained by the
developer in an area of high visibility near the secure bicycle parking
areas.

7. A minimum 35 percent of the uncovered parking lot area shall be shaded by
minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this
development. The TIS shall include evaluation of 7th Avenue peak hour
restrictions and resulting site traffic routing on the surrounding street network
and proposed mitigation to Colter Street. The developer shall be responsible
for all costs for mitigation measure determined by the Study and contribute
funds for the Colter Street Project. No preliminary approval of plans shall be

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 383
Alhambra Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Z-50-22-4

granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the City.

9. The southern driveway onto 7th Avenue, as depicted on the site plan date
stamped October 31, 2022, shall be restricted to right-in/right-out only and
access shall be coordinated with the Public Transit Department, as approved
by Planning and Development.

10. The developer shall construct a minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk separated from
the curb by a minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area along the east side of 7th
Avenue and planted with minimum three-inch caliper shade trees placed 20
feet on center or in equivalent groupings, as approved by the Planned and
Development Department.

11. The developer shall dedicate a sidewalk easement to accommodate a
minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk and minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area
located between the back of curb and sidewalk, as approved by the Planning
and Development Department.

12. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the
development with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights,
median islands, landscaping, and other incidentals, as per plans approved by
the Planning and Development Department. All improvements shall comply
with all ADA accessibility standards.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-
foot radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for
the Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a
Proposition 207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the
Maricopa County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in
the rezoning application file for record.

15. THE DEVELOPER SHALL WORK WITH THE STREET TRANSPORTATION
AND PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTS REGARDING THE
PROPOSED PARKING ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE SO THAT
IT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH TRAFFIC FLOW ALONG THE SHARED
DRIVEWAY AND TO POTENTIALLY STRIPE THE DRIVEWAY TO
INCLUDE A LEFT-TURN LANE.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 384
ATTACHMENT D

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
January 5, 2023

ITEM NO: 11
DISTRICT NO.: 4
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-50-22-4
Location: Approximately 180 feet north of the northeast corner of 7th Avenue and
Camelback Road
From: C-2 TOD-1
To: WU Code T5:5 UT
Acreage: 4.79
Proposal: Multifamily residential
Applicant: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA
Owner: Larkspur Lane Investment Properties, LLC
Representative: Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo, PA

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Alhambra 12/20/2022 Approval, per the staff recommendation with an additional stipulation.
Vote: 12-4.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the Alhambra Village Planning
Committee recommendation.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Boyd made a MOTION to approve Z-50-22-4, per the Alhambra
Village Planning Committee recommendation.

Maker: Boyd
Second: Gaynor
Vote: 8-0
Absent: Mangum
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map
designation and the transect map within the Uptown Transit Oriented Development
Policy Plan.

2. The proposal as stipulated, will create a strong pedestrian environment along 7th
Avenue with shaded and detached sidewalks to convey residents safely and
comfortably to the 7th Avenue/Camelback Road light rail station.

3. The proposal will create additional housing options in line with the Housing Phoenix
Plan’s goal of preserving or creating 50,000 housing units by 2030.

Page 385
Stipulations:

1. The developer shall provide a minimum 10,000 square feet of publicly accessible open
space in a forecourt configuration, as described below and as approved or modified by
the Planning and Development Department. The publicly accessible open space shall
be:

a. Adjacent and accessible to the public sidewalk on 7th Avenue

b. Provided in areas of not less than 500 square feet and 20 feet in width;

c. Shaded to a minimum of 50 percent by vegetative shade;

d. Maintained in perpetuity without fences or barriers;

e. Eligible to qualify as a forecourt frontage type;

f. Improved to contain, at minimum, a drinking fountain for people and pets, art,
and seating.

2. All ground floor dwelling units adjacent to 7th Avenue shall utilize the stoop and door
well, forecourt, or porch frontage types, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department.

3. Between the public sidewalk and the building fronts, there shall be a 6-foot-wide
landscape area planted with minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees placed 20 feet on
center or in equivalent groupings, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development Department to comply with frontage requirements.

4. The development shall incorporate masonry elements into the primary exterior building
materials and shall be reflective of the architectural style in the area, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

5. The developer shall install traffic calming devices along the driveways of the property
so that vehicle drivers exercise caution prior to crossing the sidewalk when exiting the
property, as approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

6. The developer shall incorporate bicycle infrastructure, as described below and as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

a. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H of the
Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

b. Guest bicycle parking for multifamily residential use shall be provided at a
minimum of 0.05 spaces per unit with a maximum of 50 required spaces near
entrances of buildings and installed per the requirements of Section 1307.H of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

c. One bicycle repair station shall be provided and maintained by the developer in
an area of high visibility near the secure bicycle parking areas.

7. A minimum 35 percent of the uncovered parking lot area shall be shaded by minimum
3-inch caliper shade trees, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

Page 386
8. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to the City for this development.
The TIS shall include evaluation of 7th Avenue peak hour restrictions and resulting site
traffic routing on the surrounding street network and proposed mitigation to Colter
Street. The developer shall be responsible for all costs for mitigation measure
determined by the Study and contribute funds for the Colter Street Project. No
preliminary approval of plans shall be granted until the study is reviewed and approved
by the City.

9. The southern driveway onto 7th Avenue, as depicted on the site plan date stamped
October 31, 2022, shall be restricted to right-in/right-out only and access shall be
coordinated with the Public Transit Department, as approved by Planning and
Development.

10. The developer shall construct a minimum 6-foot-wide sidewalk separated from the curb
by a minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area along the east side of 7th Avenue and
planted with minimum three-inch caliper shade trees placed 20 feet on center or in
equivalent groupings, as approved by the Planned and Development Department.

11. The developer shall dedicate a sidewalk easement to accommodate a minimum 6-foot-
wide sidewalk and minimum 10-foot-wide landscape area located between the back of
curb and sidewalk, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

12. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping,
and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

13. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

14. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning application
file for record.

15. THE DEVELOPER SHALL WORK WITH THE STREET TRANSPORTATION AND
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED
PARKING ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE SO THAT IT DOES NOT
INTERFERE WITH TRAFFIC FLOW ALONG THE SHARED DRIVEWAY AND TO
POTENTIALLY STRIPE THE DRIVEWAY TO INCLUDE A LEFT-TURN LANE.

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 387
ATTACHMENT E

CITY OF PHOENIX
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

FORM TO REQUEST PC to CC
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE CC HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:

APPLICATION NO/ Z-50-22-4 (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION Approximately 180 opposition x applicant
feet north of the
northeast corner of
7th Avenue and
Camelback Road

APPEALED FROM: PC 126 West Pierson Street
1/5/2023 Phoenix, AZ 85013

PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC Ken Waters
HEARING 2/1/2023 602-373-1902
Kennywaters602@gmail.com

CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

NOT Walkable Urban Mixed-Use as should be! Etc.

RECEIVED BY: Chase Hales RECEIVED ON: 1/9/2023

Alan Stephenson Greg Harmon
Joshua Bednarek Paul M. Li
Tricia Gomes Village Planner
Racelle Escolar GIS
Stephanie Vasquez Applicant
Diana Hernandez Adam Stranieri (for PHO Appeals)
David Urbinato
Vikki Cipolla-Murillo

Page 388
Page 389
CITY OF PHOENIX
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

FORM TO REQUEST PC to CC
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE CC HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:

APPLICATION NO/ Z-50-22-4 (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION Approximately 180 opposition x applicant
feet north of the
northeast corner of
7th Avenue and
Camelback Road

APPEALED FROM: PC 1-5-2023
7135 E. Camelback Road, Suite 360
Phoenix, AZ 85251

PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC 2-1-2023
HEARING Jon Garshick
602-778-2800
jgarshick@allresco.com

CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

Safety concerns related to current site plan which required vehicular maneuvering
within an active driveway easement.

RECEIVED BY: Brad Wylam RECEIVED ON: 1/12/2023

Alan Stephenson Greg Harmon
Joshua Bednarek Paul M. Li
Tricia Gomes Village Planner
Racelle Escolar GIS
Stephanie Vasquez Applicant
Diana Hernandez Adam Stranieri (for PHO Appeals)
David Urbinato
Vikki Cipolla-Murillo

Page 390
Page 391
ATTACHMENT F

From: Brian Greathouse
To: Ellen Bilbrey; Sarah Stockham
Cc: Randy Primrose; taylor@mpcres.com; Jamie Blakeman; Ricki Horowitz
Subject: RE: Magnolia Camelback Apartment Project & Medlock Place
Date: Monday, December 19, 2022 11:46:52 AM

Ellen,

Thank you. We appreciate Medlock’s support email below!

Sarah,

Please see below email from Ellen Bilbre and Rick Mountjoy on behalf of the Medlock Place Historic
District Association.

Brian Greathouse
(602) 234-9903

[bcattorneys.com]

From: Ellen Bilbrey
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2022 3:39 PM
To: Brian Greathouse
Subject: Magnolia Camelback Apartment Project & Medlock Place

Hi Brian I will also send this to Drew Bryk to support Magnolia. Ellen Ellen Bilbrey 602-432-7942 Begin forwarded message: From: Rick Mountjoy Date: December 12, 2022 at 1:53:39 PM MST T

Allow sender [mail-
cloudstation-us-east-
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. 2.prod.hydra.sophos.com] |
Block sender [mail-
cloudstation-us-east-
2.prod.hydra.sophos.com]

sophospsmartbannerend

Hi Brian

I will also send this to Drew Bryk to support Magnolia.

Ellen

Ellen Bilbrey

Page 392
602-432-7942

Begin forwarded message:

From: Rick Mountjoy
Date: December 12, 2022 at 1:53:39 PM MST
To: Council District 4
Cc: blockwatch , Michael Petersen-Incorvaia

, Maria G Lopez-Corona
, Kini Knudson , Christopher
Kowalsky
Subject: Magnolia Camelback Apartment Project & Medlock Place

Dear Vice Mayor Pastor,

Thanks again for meeting with us on November 1st regarding traffic control and safety
in Medlock Place, and for your directive to implement a trial traffic control feature on
Colter Street (the “simulation”).

As you are aware, the Magnolia Property Company is proposing a 250-unit, four-story
apartment project very near our neighborhood (7th Avenue & Camelback). This is in
addition to Alliance Residential’s adjacent 285-unit project called “Broadstone Uptown”
now under construction. These two projects combined add 535 dwelling units to our
neighborhood, far exceeding all the dwellings in the Medlock Place Historic District.
The additional traffic load from these projects will cause traffic on Colter Street to
exceed 1000 vehicles per day; over the limit for a local street.

We had several meetings with Magnolia regarding traffic impact and mitigation, and
Magnolia had agreed to implement a traffic suppression feature at Third Avenue and
Colter Street. Subsequently, the Streets Department (Chris Kowalski) informed
Magnolia that traffic suppression would be designed and installed solely by the Streets
Department as part of the “Colter Street Project” and/or the “Third Avenue Project”.

We are thus forced to rely entirely on the City to finance and implement cut-thru traffic
suppression from the Magnolia and Alliance projects. The preliminary designs shown
on-line for the Colter Street Project are not sufficient to mitigate the cut-thru traffic.
We must have a stronger solution; we expect the “trial” feature on Colter to help
determine what this solution will be.

Magnolia has asked us to support their zoning change petition at the Village Planning
Committee hearing on the 20th. Since the City has assumed leadership and
responsibility for effective cut-thru traffic control, on this basis we will support
Magnolia’s proposed zoning change subject to the City’s draft stipulations (Z-50-22-4)
provided to us on November 17th by Magnolia’s attorney (Brian Greathouse).

Sincerely,

Ellen Bilbrey, President; Medlock Place Historic District Association

Rick Mountjoy, Chairman; Medlock Place Traffic Committee

Page 393
ATTACHMENT G

From: Kenny W
To: Sarah Stockham
Subject: Please forward to AVPC members asap re #3 tonight
Date: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 3:10:18 PM

https://northcentralnews.net/2022/features/fighting-for-the-future-of-central-avenue/
[northcentralnews.net]

Sarah,

Please forward -asap - this above link to the December cover story of the North Central News,
that is applicable to agenda item #3 tonight, on to the entire AVPC committee. It is not
applicable for just “Central Ave” but a fight for the Camelback Rd Walkable Urban TOD
future as well.

MIXED-USE TOD Vision with their 100% NON Walkable Urban destination-less dead end
100% residential products that simply covets “It’s next to Light Rail!” We’re building a TOD
out with no places to go, no vibrancy, no services, with fewer and fewer retail offerings - just
Nothingville AZ, USA. This Magnolia project actually tears down and destroys existing TOD
retail.

Members: Please consider mercifully rejecting this project, for a better Version 2.0 tomorrow.
Please insist that the TOD ground floor floorplates are unique, sacred, and reserved for
commercial/retail only on our Light Rail TOD system. The price of TOD entry for developers
is vibrancy and delivered VISION. Not more and more of the same non contributing soulless
product not fit for ANY Main Street USA.

Thanks,
Ken Waters

Page 394
From: Michael Trend
To: PDD Long Range Planning
Subject: RE: Z-50-22-4 (7TH Ave and Camelback, NE Corner)
Date: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 1:59:33 PM
Attachments: Outlook-y3jt35io.png

Hi

As a resident and business owner in North Central Phoenix I wanted to share my comments
with the committee in regards to the following topic:

1. Z-50-22-4: Presentation, discussion, and possible recommendation regarding a
request to rezone 4.79 acres located approximately 180 feet north of the
northeast corner of 7th Avenue and Camelback Road from C-2 TOD-1
(Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One) to WU T5:5 UT (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5, Transit Uptown
Character Area) to allow multifamily residential.

I believe that all Multi-family Residential along the light rail in TOD should have retail that is
accessible by foot traffic. As the city becomes denser there needs to be space set aside for
restaurants, coffee shops and retail, that enhances these parts of the city and makes them
more livable and walkable.

Thank for considering my comments.

Best,
Michael

Michael Trend
Real Estate Advisor
602.708.8013
michael@michaeltrend.com

HomeSmart
5225 North Central Avenue, Suite 104 Phoenix, AZ 85012

See my past sales, read reviews or add a new review on Zillow:
https://www.zillow.com/profile/MichaelTrend/ [zillow.com]

Page 395
From: Linda Vincent
To: Sarah Stockham
Subject: Last Meeting
Date: Sunday, January 8, 2023 4:21:20 PM

I was upset by a remark by the representative of the aspiring developer of an additional apartment complex at 7th
Avenue and Camelback. He stated that we who voted in opposition had not bothered to attend the Alhambra Village
Meeting. I am you recall there was a glitch because you did not recognize the phone number for Janice Paul and she
was not given an opportunity to speak. I can only say it was our intention to speak and share the concerns we
expressed at the meeting this past week.

Also he spoke about attending the neighborhood meeting to present the plans for the development. It is my
understanding there were six people in attendance representing over 200 residents. One might wonder why there
appeared to be no interest or concern. In something of obvious impact isn’t it possible there was really no
information that was shared so the majority of residents were not informed.

I am not sure this is necessarily within your area but it has caused a sense of being deliberately left out to avoid any
resistance.

Thank you for responding to my and other’s attempts to communicate with you to express our genuine concerns.

Sent from my iPad

Page 396

Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.

View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text

Public Hearing and Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-40-22-2
(Scottsdale Town Square Thunderbird Phase PUD) - Approximately 800 Feet
North of the Northwest Corner of Scottsdale Road and Thunderbird Road
(Ordinance G-7076)

Request to hold a public hearing and amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section
601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning Application Z-40-22-
2 and rezone the site from C-2 (Intermediate Commercial), C-2 SP (Intermediate
Commercial, Special Permit), and PSC (Planned Shopping Center) to PUD (Planned
Unit Development) to allow multifamily residential and commercial uses.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-2 (1.06 acres), C-2 SP (0.06-acres), and PSC (7.42 acres)
Proposed Zoning: PUD
Acreage: 8.54 acres
Proposal: PUD to allow multifamily residential and commercial uses

Owner: Scottsdale Towne Square, LLC
Applicant: George Pasquel III, Withey Morris, PLC
Representative: George Pasquel III, Withey Morris, PLC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Info: The Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee heard this case on Aug. 1,
2022, for information only.
VPC Action: The Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee heard this case on Dec.
5, 2022, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, with a
modification and additional stipulations, by a vote of 13-3.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on Jan. 5, 2023, and
recommended approval, per the staff memo dated Jan. 5, 2023, with a modification, by
a vote of 8-0.
The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed for a public hearing by a
community member on Jan. 12, 2023.

Page 397

Location
Approximately 800 feet north of the northwest corner of Scottsdale Road and
Thunderbird Road
Council District: 2
Parcel Address: 13802, 14026, 14036, and 14046 N. Scottsdale Road

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

Page 398
ATTACHMENT A

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

ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 601 OF THE CITY OF
PHOENIX ZONING ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE ZONING
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PARCEL DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-40-22-2) FROM C-2 (INTERMEDIATE
COMMERCIAL), C-2 SP (INTERMEDIATE COMMERCIAL,
SPECIAL PERMIT), AND PSC (PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER)
TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT).

____________

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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of an 8.54-acre property located approximately

800 feet north of the northwest corner of Scottsdale Road and Thunderbird Road in a

portion of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range 4 East, as described more specifically

in Exhibit “A,” is hereby changed from 1.06 acres of “C-2” (Intermediate Commercial),

0.06-acres of “C-2 SP” (Intermediate Commercial, Special Permit), and 7.42 acres of

“PSC” (Planned Shopping Center) to “PUD” (Planned Unit Development).

SECTION 2. The Planning and Development Director is instructed to

modify the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix to reflect this use district classification

change as shown in Exhibit “B.”

Page 399
SECTION 3. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district applied for by the applicant, this rezoning is subject to the following stipulations,

violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Scottsdale Towne Square PUD
reflecting the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the
Planning and Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval
of this request. The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the
Development Narrative date stamped November 18, 2022, as modified by the
following stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add
the following: Hearing draft submittal: November 18, 2022; City Council
adopted: [Add adoption date].

b. Pages 14-15, Sidewalk Standards, Internal Walkways: Remove the single
asterisk next to the 5’ minimum width internal walkway standard. Add a
triple asterisk next to the sidewalk standard for internal walkways. Add a
new footnote for a triple asterisk that 5’ minimum width internal walkways
shall be clear of all obstacles.

c. Page 15, General Landscape Requirements: Remove bullet point (b.) for
landscape irrigation, which is repeated in bullet point (d.), and re-letter
accordingly.

d. Pages 16-17, Landscape Standards Table:

(1) Streetscape: Revise titles of streetscape standards to “Streetscape
– Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to
Scottsdale Road, Including Detached Sidewalk Landscape Strip”,
“Landscape Setback Adjacent to 71st Street Where Pocket Park
Option Is Not Utilized”, and “Landscape Setback Adjacent to 71st
Street - Pocket Park Option”.

(2) Add language “at maturity” after each live vegetative ground
coverage standard.

Page 400
(3) Add a new row for a landscape standard for the bus stop pad on
southbound Scottsdale Road, below the “Adjacent to Buildings”
row, as follows: “Bus Stop Pad Landscaping – a) Minimum 3-inch
caliper shade trees to provide minimum shade per Section D.6. at
maturity; b) Minimum 75% live vegetative ground coverage at
maturity”

e. Page 20, Shade: Add a shade standard for the bus stop pad: “A minimum
of 50% of the bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road shall be
shaded at tree maturity”

f. Page 24, iv. Design for Cost-Effectiveness: Modify the language to a
development/developer requirement that is not confused as a directive to
the Street Transportation Department.

g. Page 14, Development Standards, Development Standards Table, Noise
Reduction: Add language that states, “The average noise level, measured
at the west property line, shall not exceed 55 DB (one LDN) when
measured on a “weighted” sound level meter and according to the
procedures of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

h. Page 15, Development Standards, Landscape Standards Table, General
Landscaping Requirements: Add a provision to require low-water-use tree
species with a dense foliage along the west perimeter of the site to provide
an adequate visual buffer for adjacent residences.

i. Page 16, Development Standards, Landscape Standards Table: Modify
the language for landscaping along Scottsdale Road, 71st Street, and the
north property line to require minimum 3-inch caliper trees planted 20 feet
on center on in equivalent groupings.

j. Page 18, Development Standards, Fences / Walls: Add Language to
require a 6-foot-high full view fence be constructed along 71st Avenue at
or behind the building setback line.

k. Page 20, Development Standards, Amenities: Add the following language
after the Commercial Amenities section:

4) Art: A minimum of two art installations shall be installed either along
Scottsdale Road or in the open space area between the two restaurant
buildings. The art shall be a minimum of five feet in length in any one
directions (height, width or depth).

l. Page 25, Development Standards, Signs: Add language to require signs
along the west side of the property be non-lighted signs.

Page 401
m. Tab H, Scottsdale Towne Square Architectural Design Guidelines, Section
1.0, Page 2, Form and Scale, Building Massing (PDF Page 57): Add
language to restrict upper-level balconies where there is no visual buffer
blocking a line of sight from a balcony looking west into adjacent single-
family yards. Balconies may either be recessed or Juliette balconies where
there is no line of sight into the yards. Protruding balconies may be
allowed either where there is a visual buffer blocking the line of sight from
the balcony looking west into single-family yards or wherever there are no
lines of sight looking west into adjacent single-family yards.

n. Tab H, Scottsdale Towne Square Architectural Design Guidelines, Section
1.4, Page 8, Glass (PDF Page 63): Add language to require glass on all
windows be a minimum of 85% non-reflective glass.

2. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study/Statement to the City for this
development. The developer shall be responsible for cost and construction of all
mitigation identified through the analysis. No preliminary approval of plans shall
be granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the Street Transportation
Department.

3. The developer shall submit a circulation plan addressing pedestrian and bicyclist
connectivity and safety within the development, to nearby pedestrian and bicyclist
infrastructure, and include proximity to activity centers, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

4. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping, and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.

5. The developer shall build a bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road. The
pad shall be designed according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a
depth of 10 feet.

6. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence and
operational characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) to future owners
or tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney.

Page 402
7. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a No Hazard Determination from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the permanent
structure a separate Form 7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA and a “No
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

8. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials.

9. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition
207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record.

10. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the developer shall apply for the on-street
parking zones program in order to install no parking signs along 71st Street
adjacent to the site.

SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or

portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the

decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity

of the remaining portions hereof.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 1st day of February,

2023.

________________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk

Page 403
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Julie M. Kriegh, City Attorney

By:
_________________________
_________________________

REVIEWED BY:

_________________________
Jeffrey Barton, City Manager

Exhibits:
A – Legal Description (1 Page)
B – Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)

Page 404
EXHIBIT A

A portion of Tract “A”, of Raskin Estates No. 1, according to the plat of record in the
office of the County Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, recorded in Book 86 of
Maps, Page 36 and a portion of the south half of Hearn Road, as abandoned by
Resolution No. 19618 in Document No. 2001-373063, records of Maricopa County,
Arizona, lying within the southeast quarter of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range 4
East, of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, more
particularly described as follows:

Commencing at the southeast corner of Section 10, a City of Scottsdale Brass Cap in
Handhole, from which the east quarter corner of said Section 10, a City of Scottsdale
Brass Cap in handhole, bears North 00°57'30" West, a distance of 2,642.53 feet;

Thence along the east line of the southeast quarter of said Section 10, North 00°57'30"
West, a distance of 818.52 feet;

Thence leaving said east line, South 89°02'30" West, a distance of 65.00 feet, to the
Point of Beginning;

Thence South 89°02'30" West, a distance of 204.94 feet;

Thence South 00°56'35" East, a distance of 156.67 feet;

Thence South 89°16'50" West, a distance of 364.81 feet, to the easterly right-of-way
line of 71st Street;

Thence along said easterly right-of-way line, North 00°50'20" West, a distance of 330.78
feet;

Thence North 89°18'30" East, a distance of 8.00 feet;

Thence North 00°50'20" West, a distance of 277.00 feet;

Thence North 00°17'40" West, a distance of 53.00 feet, to the centerline of abandoned
portion of Hearn Road;

Thence along said centerline, North 89°18'15" East, a distance of 559.92 feet, to the
westerly right-of-way line of Scottsdale Road;

Thence leaving said centerline, along said westerly right-of-way line, South 00°57'30"
East, a distance of 503.02 feet; to the Point of Beginning.

Containing 341,138 Square Feet or 7.83 Acres more or less.

Page 405
Page 406
$77$&+0(17%

Staff Report Z-40-22-2
Scottsdale Towne Square Thunderbird Phase PUD
December 2, 2022

Paradise Valley Village Planning December 5, 2022
Committee Meeting Date:
Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 5, 2023
Request From: PSC (Planned Shopping Center District)
(7.42 acres), C-2 (Intermediate Commercial)
(1.06 acres), C-2 SP (Intermediate
Commercial, Special Permit) (0.06 acres)

Request To: PUD (Planned Unit Development) (8.54
acres)
Proposed Use: Planned Unit Development to allow
multifamily residential and commercial uses.
Location: Approximately 800 feet north of the
northwest corner of Scottsdale Road and
Thunderbird Road
Owner: Scottsdale Towne Square, LLC
Applicant/Representative: George Pasquel III, Withey Morris, PLC
Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations

General Plan Conformity
General Plan Land Use Map Designation Commercial
Scottsdale Major
65-foot west half street
Road Arterial
Street Map Classification
Local Width varies from 25-foot to 33-
71st Street
Street foot east half street

CONNECT PEOPLE AND PLACES CORE VALUE; OPPORTUNITY SITES; LAND
USE PRINCIPLE: Promote and encourage compatible development and
redevelopment with a mix of housing types in neighborhoods close to employment
centers, commercial areas, and where transit or transportation alternatives exist.

Page 407
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

General Plan Conformity

The proposal will be a mixed-use development that will add to the mix of housing types in
the area while providing additional commercial services and employment opportunities
along Scottsdale Road, an established commercial corridor, and near Kierland, which is a
node of commercial activity.

CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS CORE
VALUE; CERTAINTY AND CHARACTER; DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Enhance the
compatibility of residential infill projects by carefully designing the edges of the
development to be sensitive to adjacent existing housing. Create landscape
buffers and other amenities to link new and existing development.

The PUD proposes a stepdown approach with varied heights, limiting height close to the
nearby single-family residential neighborhood. The PUD also proposes a series of pocket
parks along the west frontage to enhance the interface between the proposed
development and the adjacent neighborhood.

BUILD THE SUSTAINABLE DESERT CITY CORE VALUE; TREES AND SHADE;
DESIGN PRINCIPILE: Integrate trees and shade into the design of new
development and redevelopment projects throughout Phoenix.

The PUD proposes standards that integrate trees and shade in the design, including
enhanced landscaping around the perimeter of the site, shaded detached sidewalks, and
the integration of a shaded public plaza on site.

Applicable Plans, Overlays, and Initiatives
Tree and Shade Master Plan – See Background Item No. 10.
Complete Streets Guiding Principles – See Background Item No. 11.
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan – See Background Item No. 12.
Housing Phoenix Plan – See Background Item No. 13.
Zero Waste PHX – See Background Item No. 14.

Page 408
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning
Land Use Zoning
On Site Commercial retail PSC, C-2, and C-2 SP

North Commercial retail C-2 PCD

South Commercial retail PSC
East (across Vacant and commercial City of Scottsdale: Industrial Park (I-
Scottsdale Road) office 1)
West (across 71st
Single-family residential R1-14
Street)

Background/Issues/Analysis

SUBJECT SITE
1. This request is to rezone an 8.54-acre site located approximately 800 feet north of
the northwest corner of Scottsdale Road and Thunderbird Road. The request is to
rezone from PSC (Planned Shopping Center District), C-2 (Intermediate
Commercial), and C-2 SP (Intermediate Commercial, Special Permit) to PUD
(Planned Unit Development) to allow multifamily residential and commercial uses.

The subject site is the northern portion of the existing Scottsdale Towne Square
shopping center. To facilitate the existing development, the site was rezoned to
PSC in 1985, through Rezoning Case No. Z-212-85. In 2017, a portion of the site
was rezoned to C-2 and C-2 SP, through Rezoning Case Nos. Z-14-17 and Z-SP-
2-17, to facilitate a massage establishment within a portion of the existing
shopping center.

The subject site is within a commercial corridor along Scottsdale Road with old
auto-oriented shopping centers, extending south from the Kierland Commons
area, which is a hub of mixed-use activity and employment. The area presents an
opportunity for revitalizing the corridor with more mixed-use activity in close
proximity to Kierland Commons. As stated in the Paradise Valley Village Character
Plan, “due to the 2009 economic recession, this Village has been left slightly
overbuilt with commercial space. There is an opportunity to re-evaluate the land
use distribution and consider alternative uses to activate empty retail spaces.”

Page 409
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION
2. The General Plan Land Use Map
designation for the subject site is
Commercial. The proposal is
consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Map designation.

The General Plan Land Use
Map designations north and
south of the site is Commercial.
West of the site is an area
designated as Residential 3.5 to
5 dwelling units per acre. East of
the site is in the City of
Scottsdale jurisdiction.

General Plan Land Use Map, Source: City of Phoenix
Planning and Development Department

SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES
3. The subject site and surrounding
area along Scottsdale Road are
generally commercial with
existing shopping centers
located on the subject site and
directly to the north and south
within C-2, C-2 SP, and PSC
zoning districts. West of the
subject site is a single-family
neighborhood in an R1-14
zoning district. Across
Scottsdale Road to the east is
vacant land and commercial Zoning Aerial Map, Source: City of Phoenix Planning and
offices in the City of Scottsdale. Development Department

PROPOSAL
4. The proposal was developed utilizing the PUD zoning district. The Planned Unit
Development (PUD) is intended to create a built environment that is superior to
that produced by conventional zoning districts and design guidelines. Using a
collaborative and comprehensive approach, an applicant authors and proposes
standards and guidelines that are tailored to the context of a site on a case by
case basis. Where the PUD Development Narrative is silent on a requirement, the
applicable Zoning Ordinance provisions will be applied.

Page 410
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

5. The PUD proposes standards that support the vision of a mixed-use development,
including a vertical mixed-use building with ground floor retail and residential
above, two stand-alone commercial buildings, and a public plaza.

Conceptual Site Plan, Source: Nelsen Partners, Inc.

6. Land Use
The PUD proposes a mixed-use development to include a range of commercial
retail and multifamily housing. The proposed development narrative lists all uses
permitted by the C-2 zoning district and multifamily residential uses, as governed
by the PUD standards. The development narrative also proposes restricting
certain uses that are inconsistent with the PUD's vision of mixed-use pedestrian-
oriented development such as auto title loan establishments, gas stations, and
automobile service stations.

Page 411
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

7. Development Standards
The PUD proposes development standards, consistent with the vision of a
pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development. It proposes a maximum height of 68
feet to facilitate the multifamily component on the portion of the site closer to
Scottsdale Road. Height steps down closer to the west property line with a
maximum of 30 feet within 90 feet of the west property line. Landscape setbacks
are proposed on all sides of the site, except for the south side, which abuts the
remainder of the same shopping center that is not part of this PUD. The PUD
proposes amenity standards including a minimum of six indoor residential
amenities, a minimum of six outdoor amenities, and a minimum of three amenities
for commercial uses.

Staff recommends updates to the PUD Narrative for clarity and to address
technical corrections. Stipulation 1.b. is related to a footnote in the Development
Standards Table, indicating that the five-foot wide sidewalk “shall be clear of
obstacles except for tree grates and public amenities”. A five-foot wide sidewalk
would not be wide enough to have tree grates or public amenities obstructing it.
The stipulation requests the applicant to add a new footnote that the minimum five-
foot wide sidewalk width shall be clear of all obstacles.

Below are additional development standards from the PUD Narrative:

Maximum Residential Density: 36.5 dwelling units per gross acre
Minimum Lot Width/Depth No Minimum
Minimum Building Setbacks
North (Interior property line) 10 feet
South(Interior property line) 0 feet
East (Scottsdale Road) 12 feet
West (71st Street) 25 feet
Minimum Landscape Setbacks
North (Interior property line) 10 feet
South(Interior property line) 0 feet
East (Scottsdale Road) 10 feet
West (71st Street) 25 feet
Maximum Building Height 68 feet maximum
30 feet maximum within 90 feet of west
property line
56 feet maximum within 200 feet of west
property line
Maximum Lot Coverage 65 percent

Page 412
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

Open Space Minimum 20 percent of site area
Minimum 5,000 square feet as public plaza
Minimum 5 percent of site area dedicated
to residential amenity space
Retail Parking 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Residential Parking 1.3 spaces per efficiency
1.5 spaces per one- or two-bedroom unit
2.0 spaces per three or more-bedroom unit
1.0 spaces per <600-square-foot unit
Bicycle Parking Per Section 1307.H (WU Code)

8. Landscape Standards
The PUD proposes landscape standards for streetscape landscape areas,
perimeter setbacks, adjacent to buildings, parking areas, common and retention
areas, and is stipulated to add landscape standards for the bus stop pad. The
PUD also proposes a minimum 75 percent shade requirement for public sidewalks
and internal walkways, a minimum 50 percent shade requirement for internal open
space areas and is stipulated to add a minimum 50 percent shade requirement for
the bus stop pad. The proposed shade and landscape planting standards are an
enhancement compared to the Zoning Ordinance standards.

Staff recommends the following updates to the PUD Narrative for clarity and to
address technical corrections:

Stipulation 1.c. is related to a bullet point in the Landscape Standards Table which
is repetitive. The stipulation requests that the applicant delete bullet point (b.)
which has the same language that is repeated in bullet point (d.), and to re-letter
accordingly.

Stipulation 1.d.(1) is related to streetscape standards in the Landscape Standards
Table. The stipulation requests that the applicant change the titles of the rows for
streetscape standards for clarity so that there is 1) a clear standard for the
streetscape along Scottsdale Road, and not just the detached landscape strip
alone, and 2) a clear standard for the streetscape along the entirety of 71st Street.

Stipulation 1.d.(2) is related to the live vegetative ground coverage standards
within the Landscape Standards Table for clarity on how live vegetative ground
coverage is measured. The stipulation requests the words “at maturity” be added
after the word “coverage” in each location where there is a live vegetative ground
coverage standard.

Stipulation 1.d.(3) requests a landscape standard be added in the Landscape
Standards Table for the bus stop pad the applicant is stipulated to install along
Scottsdale Road. The stipulation requests the applicant to add a row for bus stop

Page 413
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

pad landscaping in order to achieve minimum bus stop pad shading using similar
landscape standards as the streetscape.

9. Design Guidelines and Standards
The PUD proposes design standards that promote a pedestrian-oriented design
with quality architecture. Pedestrian walkways will be provided to connect all
points of interest on site and will have contrasting materials when crossing drive
aisles to promote safety. The public plaza will contain landscaping and seating for
the public. Architectural guidelines include varied façade elements between
ground floor retail spaces and upper floor residential, provisions for quantities of
façade materials to minimize monotonous buildings, ground floor transparency,
and articulation to break up larger building masses. Additionally, pocket parks
along the western property line will include landscaping, benches, and local art
sculptures.

Staff recommends the following updates to the PUD Narrative for clarity and to
address technical corrections:

Stipulation 1.e. is related to the shade standards in Section D.6. The stipulation
requests the applicant to add a tree shade standard for the bus stop pad that the
applicant is stipulated to install along Scottsdale Road.

Stipulation 1.f. is related to Design for Cost-Effectiveness in Section E.3. The
Street Transportation Department requested that the language be changed so it is
not confused as a directive for the Street Transportation Department.

Page 414
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

Conceptual Renderings, Source: Nelsen Partners, Inc.

Conceptual Renderings, Source: Nelsen Partners, Inc.

Page 415
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

AREA PLANS, OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AND INITIATIVES
10. Tree and Shade Master Plan
The Tree and Shade Master Plan encourages treating the urban forest as
infrastructure to ensure the trees are an integral part of the City’s planning and
development process. Sidewalks on the street frontages should be detached from
the curbs to allow trees to be planted on both sides of the sidewalk to provide
thermal comfort for pedestrians and to reduce the urban heat island effect. The
PUD includes standards for detached sidewalks along Scottsdale Road, enhanced
shade along sidewalks, a shaded public plaza on site, and parking lot landscaping.

11. Complete Streets Guiding Principles
In 2014, the City of Phoenix City Council adopted the Complete Streets Guiding
Principles. The principles are intended to promote improvements that provide an
accessible, safe, connected transportation system to include all modes, such as
bicycles, pedestrians, transit, and vehicles. To promote safety and connectivity for
all users, the PUD proposes standards for bicycle parking, shaded pedestrian
connections to the street, and detached shaded sidewalks along Scottsdale Road.

12. Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan
The City of Phoenix adopted the Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan in 2014 to
guide the development of its bikeway system and supportive infrastructure. The
Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan supports options for both short- and long-
term bicycle parking as a means of promoting bicyclist traffic to a variety of
destinations. The proposal incorporates requirements for bicycle parking to
encourage multi-modal transportation.

13. Housing Phoenix Plan
In June 2020, the Phoenix City Council approved the Housing Phoenix Plan. This
Plan contains policy initiatives for the development and preservation of housing
with a vision of creating a stronger and more vibrant Phoenix through increased
housing options for residents at all income levels and family sizes. Phoenix’s rapid
population growth and housing underproduction has led to a need for over
163,000 new housing units. Current shortages of housing supply relative to
demand are a primary reason why housing costs are increasing. The proposed
development supports the Plan’s goal of preserving or creating 50,000 housing
units by 2030 by repurposing an existing underutilized auto-oriented shopping
center into new multifamily residential housing above retail spaces, contributing to
the mix of housing types in the area and adding to the housing supply for Phoenix.

14. Zero Waste PHX
The City of Phoenix is committed to its waste diversion efforts and has set a goal
to become a zero waste city, as part of the city’s overall 2050 Environmental
Sustainability Goals. One of the ways Phoenix can achieve this is to improve and
Section 716 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance expand its recycling and other

Page 416
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

waste diversion programs. The development will provide recycling services for
residents.

COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
15. At the time the staff report was written, staff has received one letter of support, a
petition of support with 10 signatures, and seven letters of opposition to this case.
Concerns include height, privacy, oversaturation of multifamily residential in the
area, security, parking, and increased traffic.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
16. The Street Transportation Department commented that all streets within and
adjacent to the development, shall be constructed with all required elements,
including meeting ADA requirements. Furthermore, no preliminary approval of
plans shall be granted until a Traffic Impact Study is reviewed and approved by the
City, and the developer shall be responsible for all mitigation identified through the
analysis. These are addressed in Stipulation Nos. 2 and 3.

17. The Public Transit Department commented that the developer shall build a bus
stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road, according to City of Phoenix standards.
This is addressed in Stipulation No. 4.

18. The City of Scottsdale expressed concern with the location of this project as it
relates to the airports flight paths and the 55 Day Night Average Sound Level
(DNL) noise contours of Scottsdale Airport. The City of Scottsdale comments and
proposed stipulations were provided to the City of Phoenix Aviation Department for
review.

19. The City of Phoenix Aviation Department has noted that the site is within the
Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) traffic pattern airspace, therefore, the
developer shall provide notice to prospective purchasers of the existence and
operation characteristics of the Scottsdale Airport and shall provide documentation
that Form 7460-1 from has been filed with the FAA. The requirements are
addressed in Stipulation Nos. 5 and 6.

20. The Phoenix Fire Department has noted that they do not anticipate any problems
with this case and that the site and/or buildings shall comply with the Phoenix Fire
Code.

21. The Office of Heat Response and Mitigation commented that the development
should provide detached sidewalks with 75 percent shade along Scottsdale Road.
This requirement is incorporated into the PUD narrative.

22. The Water Services Department commented that the property has existing water
and sewer mains that can potentially serve the development. In addition, the

Page 417
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

Water Services Department commented that capacity is a dynamic condition that
can change over time due to a variety of factors.

OTHER
23. The site has not been identified as being archaeologically sensitive. However, in
the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, all ground
disturbing activities must cease within 33-feet of the discovery and the City of
Phoenix Archaeology Office must be notified immediately and allowed time to
properly assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 7.

24. Staff has not received a completed form for the Waiver of Claims for Diminution in
Value of Property under Proposition 207 (A.R.S. 12-1131 et seq.), as required by
the rezoning application process. Therefore, a stipulation has been added to
require the form be completed and submitted prior to preliminary site plan
approval. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 8.

25. Development and use of the site is subject to all applicable codes and ordinances.
Zoning approval does not negate other ordinance requirements. Other formal
actions such as, but not limited to, zoning adjustments and abandonments, may
be required.

Findings

1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map
designation and compatible with the existing land use pattern in the surrounding
area.

2. The proposed development will provide new mixed-use development with housing,
retail, and employment opportunities along an established commercial corridor,
near the Kierland commercial area.

3. The proposed PUD sets forth design and development standards that will enhance
connectivity in the immediate vicinity by providing shaded detached sidewalks,
pedestrian-oriented design, and an enhanced interface with the adjacent
neighborhood.

Stipulations

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Scottsdale Towne Square PUD reflecting
the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and
Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request.
The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development
Narrative date stamped November 18, 2022, as modified by the following
stipulations:

Page 418
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add the
following: Hearing draft submittal: November 18, 2022; City Council adopted:
[Add adoption date].

b. Pages 14-15, Sidewalk Standards, Internal Walkways: Remove the single
asterisk next to the 5’ minimum width internal walkway standard. Add a triple
asterisk next to the sidewalk standard for internal walkways. Add a new
footnote for a triple asterisk that 5’ minimum width internal walkways shall be
clear of all obstacles.

c. Page 15, General Landscape Requirements: Remove bullet point (b.) for
landscape irrigation, which is repeated in bullet point (d.), and re-letter
accordingly.

d. Pages 16-17, Landscape Standards Table:

(1) Streetscape: Revise titles of streetscape standards to “Streetscape –
Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to Scottsdale
Road, Including Detached Sidewalk Landscape Strip” and “Streetscape
– Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to 71st Street
Where Pocket Park Option Is Not Utilized”.

(2) Add language “at maturity” after each live vegetative ground coverage
standard.

(3) Add a new row for a landscape standard for the bus stop pad on
southbound Scottsdale Road, below the “Adjacent to Buildings” row, as
follows: “Bus Stop Pad Landscaping – a) Minimum 3-inch caliper shade
trees to provide minimum shade per Section D.6. at maturity; b)
Minimum 75% live vegetative ground coverage at maturity”

e. Page 20, Shade: Add a shade standard for the bus stop pad: “A minimum of
50% of the bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road shall be shaded at
tree maturity”

f. Page 24, iv. Design for Cost-Effectiveness: Modify the language to a
development/developer requirement that is not confused as a directive to the
Street Transportation Department.

Page 419
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

2. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study/Statement to the City for this
development. The developer shall be responsible for cost and construction of all
mitigation identified through the analysis. No preliminary approval of plans shall be
granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the Street Transportation
Department.

3. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping,
and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

4. The developer shall build a bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road. The pad
shall be designed according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a depth of
10 feet.

5. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence and
operational characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be according
to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved
by the City Attorney.

6. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan approval
that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the development
received a No Hazard Determination from the FAA. If temporary equipment used
during construction exceeds the height of the permanent structure a separate Form
7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA and a “No Hazard Determination” obtained
prior to the construction start date.

7. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials.

8. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning application
file for record.

Page 420
Staff Report: Z-40-22-2
December 2, 2022

Writer
Anthony Grande
Adrian Zambrano
December 2, 2022

Team Leader
Racelle Escolar

Exhibits
Sketch Map
Aerial Map
Conceptual Site Plan date stamped November 28, 2022
Community Correspondence (11 pages)
Scottsdale Towne Square PUD Development Narrative date stamped November 18,

Page 421
C-2 PCD *
R-3A Z-48-A-91
PCD*
Z-48-91

SCOTTSDALE RD
C-2 PCD*
Z-48-91
R1-10 *
CROCUS DR PCD

70TH PL
Z-48-91

C-2 SP *
Z-SP-2-17
HEARN RD C-2 *
Z-14-17

REDFIELD RD PSC*
Z-212-85

SHEENA DR

69TH ST R1-14
71ST ST
70TH ST
FRIESS DR

PSC
LUDLOW DR

Phoenix City Limits
THUNDERBIRD RD
C-1 *
Z-80-81 C-1
RE-24 C-2*
Z-12-95

I
DEER VALLEY DR

SR 101 Z-40-22
UNION HILLS DR
Miles

A W P EA K PKWY (SR 51)
BELL RD
0.075 0.0375 0 0.075 GREENWAY RD

PARADISE VALLEY THUNDERBIRD RD

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 2 CACTUS RD

SCOTTSDALE RD
SHEA BLVD
QU

16TH ST 56TH ST 64TH ST
24TH ST S

TATUM BLVD
32ND ST
40TH ST

APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
George Pasquel III
FROM:
PSC ( 7.42 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO.
Z-40-22
DATE:
6/3/2022
REVISION DATES:
C-2 ( 1.06 a.c.)
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
8/30/2022 11/15/2022 C-2 SP ( 0.06 a.c.)
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
8.54 Acres QS 33-44 L-12 TO: PUD ( 8.54 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
PSC, C-2, C-2 SP N/A, 15, 1 N/A, 18, 1
PUD 311 N/A
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus Page 422
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2022\Z-40-22.mxd
C-2 PCD *
R-3A Z-48-A-91
PCD*
Z-48-91

SCOTTSDALE RD
C-2 PCD*
Z-48-91
R1-10 *
CROCUS DR PCD

70TH PL
Z-48-91

C-2 SP *
Z-SP-2-17
HEARN RD C-2 *
Z-14-17

REDFIELD RD PSC*
Z-212-85

SHEENA DR

69TH ST R1-14
71ST ST
70TH ST
FRIESS DR

PSC
LUDLOW DR

Phoenix City Limits
THUNDERBIRD RD
C-1 *
Z-80-81 C-1
RE-24 C-2*
Z-12-95 mapservices@phoenix.gov

I
DEER VALLEY DR

SR 101 Z-40-22
UNION HILLS DR
Miles

A W P EA K PKWY (SR 51)
BELL RD
0.075 0.0375 0 0.075 GREENWAY RD

PARADISE VALLEY THUNDERBIRD RD

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT: 2 CACTUS RD

SCOTTSDALE RD
SHEA BLVD
QU

16TH ST 56TH ST 64TH ST
24TH ST S

TATUM BLVD
32ND ST
40TH ST

APPLICANT'S NAME: REQUESTED CHANGE:
George Pasquel III
FROM:
PSC ( 7.42 a.c.)
APPLICATION NO.
Z-40-22
DATE:
6/3/2022
REVISION DATES:
C-2 ( 1.06 a.c.)
GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
8/30/2022 11/15/2022 C-2 SP ( 0.06 a.c.)
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO & ZONING MAP
QUARTER SEC. NO.
8.54 Acres QS 33-44 L-12 TO: PUD ( 8.54 a.c.)
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D. OPTION
PSC, C-2, C-2 SP N/A, 15, 1 N/A, 18, 1
PUD 311 N/A
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus Page 423
Document Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2022\Z-40-22.mxd
PROJECT TEAM

DEVELOPER: WOODBURY CORPORATION
2733 E PARLEYS WAY, SUITE 300
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84109
801.485.7770
Contact: Joshua Woodbury
Email: josh_woodbury@woodburycorp.com

ARCHITECT: NELSEN PARTNERS, INC.
15210 N SCOTTSDALE RD, SUITE 300
SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85254
480.949.6800
Contact: Jeff Brand
Email: jbrand@nelsenpartners.com

PROJECT INFORMATION

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY ADDRESS: 14036 N SCOTTSDALE ROAD
PHOENIX, AZ 85254
EXISTING ACCESS
RESTRICTION TO PARCEL NUMBERS: 215-57-184N
REMAIN
SECURITY LOADING CURRENT ZONING: PSC
LOADING AREA 85'-0"
GATE 559.92' AREA S 89° 18' 36" W
PROPOSED ZONING: PUD

35'-11 1/2"
GROSS SITE AREA: 8.67
8.54 ACRES
9.02 ACRES
(392,998 SF)

NET LOT AREA: 7.83 ACRES
(341,068 SF)

S 00° 57' 30" E

SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE
DENSITY DU // 9.02
311 DU 8.54 AC=RES
8.67AC or 36.5
=34.47
36.5 DU/AC
DU/AC DU/AC max.

EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT: 20 FT

N 00° 50' 14" W
PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: 68 FT
DOWN

RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 311 UNITS

RETAIL: 15,000 SF

LOBBY RESTAURANT: 15,000 SF

EXISTING RETAIL: 12,750 SF

SCOTTSDALE ROAD
RETAIL
DECEL

14036 N SCOTTSDALE RD
LANE PARKING CALCULATIONS

PARKING REQUIRED:

RESIDENTIAL: 405 SPACES (311 UNITS @ 1.3 / D.U.)
UP
RESTAURANT: 75 SPACES (5 :1000 SF)
RETAIL: 139 SPACES (5:1000 SF)
TOTAL: 619 SPACES

277.00'

71ST STREET
PARKING PROVIDED:

PHOENIX, AZ
SURFACE PARKING 217 SPACES

SECURITY STRUCTURED
PROPERTY
GATE LEVEL 1 85 SPACES
LINE
VALET DROP-OFF LEVEL 2 95 SPACES
LEVEL 3 95 SPACES
LEVEL 4 95 SPACES
LEVEL 5 55 SPACES
TOTAL: 425 SPACES

450.27'
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED 642 SPACES

REST. REST.
RESIDENTIAL
VICINITY MAP N.T.S

330.75'
12'-0"
38'-3"
58'-1"
E HEARN RD.

N 71ST ST
205.00' S 89° 02' 30" W
E REDFIELD RD

N SCOTTSDALE RD.
E SHEENA RD. Date
08/31/2022
EXISTING PROJECT
RETAIL
E FRIESS DR.
SITE

156.69' E LUDLOW RD.

KIVA: 99-37600
SDEV: 0101647
364.83' PAPP: 2109608
QS:
PROPERTY LINE

CITY OF PHOENIX Drawings and written material appearing
herein constitute original and unpublished

NOV 28, 2022 work of the architect and may not be
duplicated, used, or disclosed without
written consent of the architect.

© 2022 NELSEN PARTNERS, INC.

Planning & Development Project No.
SITE PLAN - LEVEL 1 Department
01 0 25' 50' 100'
SCALE: 1"=50'
A110
REF:

NORTH
SITE PLAN

Page 424
Enrique A Bojorquez-Gaxiola

To: PDD Long Range Planning
Subject: RE: Rezoning case# Z-40-22-2

From:EliPutney
Sent:Monday,August1,202210:17AM
To:PDDLongRangePlanning
Subject:Rezoningcase#ZͲ40Ͳ22Ͳ2

CommentfortheplanningcommitteereZͲ40Ͳ22Ͳ2

IliveonRedfieldRd,adjacenttotheproposedproject.

Isubmittothecommitteeconcernoftheproposedapartmentshavingalineofsightintothebackyards,pools,or
privateareasofthehomeslocatedinRaskinEstates.Iftheywillhavesuchalineofsight,Iwouldopposesuch
development.

Thankyou
EliPutney

Page 425
Enrique A Bojorquez-Gaxiola

Subject: RE: Rezoning case# Z-40-22-2

From:SholomZagelbaum
Sent:Monday,August1,20222:51PM
To:PDDLongRangePlanning
Subject:Rezoningcase#ZͲ40Ͳ22Ͳ2

CommentfortheplanningcommitteereZͲ40Ͳ22Ͳ2

WeliveonRedfieldRd,adjacenttotheproposedproject.

Wesubmittothecommitteeconcernoftheproposedapartmentshavingalineofsightintothebackyards,pools,or
privateareasofthehomeslocatedinRaskinEstates.Iftheywillhavesuchalineofsight,wewouldopposesuch
development.

Thankyou

SholomandPeninaZagelbaum

Page 426
From: Wade and Joann Giles
To: Anthony M Grande
Subject: Proposed Development of Scottsdale Town Square
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 8:13:19 AM

Dear Sir:

We live in a single family home 1 block west of the proposed development on Hearn Road
and have been here for 27 years. We love the area, the neighborhood, and the many amenities
that go with living in a single family home neighborhood. Right now, the proposed area to be
torn down to build multiple housing units, is busy and provides many amenities to the
neighborhood.

I am greatly concerned about the proposed development in Scottsdale Town Square. I fear it
will change our safe, quiet neighborhood into a jam packed, loud and busy, busy area. Not
only will there be well over 300 people, but the cars which will be coming and going from this
area is way too many for our streets to handle. We already have difficulty accessing
Thunderbird Road at rush hour. What will happen with 300 plus people moving into this
area? Will there be a traffic study done to see what the density of cars is at rush hour now?
Imagine the impact of 300 more coming and going.

Further to the point of traffic, what about access to Scottsdale Road going North? There are
only 2 streets to access Scottsdale Road going North from the development - Thunderbird or
Acoma. From the proposed development, to go North you have to access Thunderbird to
Scottsdale Road. Extremely difficult as that means left on Thunderbird across traffic and
then left at the lights on Scottsdale Road. OR, cars will have to proceed through the entire
neighboring shopping center to get to Acoma Road. What will be done to address this issue,
as I know that Scottsdale Road is in Scottsdale district not Phoenix? I can see this being a huge
problem!

We live on Hearn which is the street the neighborhood school is on. I am concerned about the
increase of traffic coming and going as more people pick up and drop off children in the
neighborhood school from the multi family housing units.

The population density in our area in the last 27 years has more than quadrupled. The number
of multi family units which have been built and continue to be built is staggering in number!
Have a look at The Quarter and Kierland with the gigantic high rises that have been and are
continuing to be built. Just south of Thunderbird on Scottsdale Road there is a multi-family
unit under construction now - I am guessing 300 plus units. Where will it end? How many is
too much?

Please take into consideration the proliferation of population in this area and the impact it will
have, as you consider the rezoning proposal.

Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Sincerely,

Wade and Joann Giles

6943 E Hearn Rd.

Page 427
From: Christina Noyes
To: Anthony M Grande
Subject: Scottsdale - Towne Square Rezoning
Date: Monday, October 17, 2022 11:05:46 AM

Hello,

I would like to provide written comments on this proposal. I am a resident at 70th place, five
houses north and west of this development.

I am strongly opposed to the height of the apartments that are closet to 71th Street and also,
to the 68 feet along Scottsdale which is still too tall for this area. It is not urban, it is suburban.

The houses need more of a buffer. The apartment owners will be able to look down into the
yards of the homes along 70th street. Trees are not tall enough to prevent this direct view
from this height.

The 20 foot current height and current setbacks were relied upon by the homeowners who
are just next door, as were the character of use as commercial. The setbacks work well to
maintain the expectation of privacy a homeowner has in their backyard based on the zoning
when bought.

I am also concerned that this will set a precedent for the development just north on setbacks
and heights.

At the local meeting, I asked for a drone photo or line of sight study from the proposed height
of the apartments at each level. None has been provided to date.

This area is being characterized as old and downtrodden, with views from the backside of the
commercial buildings. As a resident, we are frequently in this area, using the stores. A facelift
is fine. A complete re-characterization, is not.

Christina Noyes
Brian Flaherty
14238 N. 70th Place
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
cnbemail@gmail.com

Page 428
From: Amy Satterfield2
To: Adrian G Zambrano
Subject: Scottsdale Towne Square Case #Z-40-22-2
Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 9:35:56 AM

Below please find a copy of the Kierland Community Alliance's letter sent to Jason Morris on
November 20, 2022, regarding PUD Case number Z-40-22-2, Scottsdale Towne Square. This
letter outlines the KCA’s concerns regarding this development. Please let me know if you
have any questions.

Amy Satterfield
Vice Chair
Kierland Community Alliance

Jason,

Our Board has reviewed the Scottsdale Towne Square application, revisiting our conversations
with you, George and Jeff on Oct. 4., along with comments shared in the community Zoom
call and input received from neighbors directly affected by this development.

While we believe we are getting closer to a project the Kierland Community Alliance can
support, and although we appreciate your efforts on bringing this in line with other
developments in the area, particularly those that are directly adjacent to single-family homes,
our primary concern remains the maximum height of the development currently drafted at 68’.
As Wayne stated in a letter/email dated July 23, 2021, we firmly believe the maximum height
for a project adjacent to single family homes should not exceed 56’. This is in line with The
Manor development precedent south of Thunderbird, as well as the tiered height restrictions
adopted with the Kierland Sky development off Kierland Blvd.

Ancillary to this we would also like to see specific language added to the proposal to further
clarify some of the features you have already agreed to verbally.

Below is a brief overview of what the KCA would need to see, in order to support your
proposal with the city and the neighborhood.

Reduction in height to a maximum roof line of 56’ (The height on your comparative
zoning table say 78’ max height.)
3” caliber trees with 20’ center on all perimeter trees. The current plan indicates
mesquite and palo verde trees along the 71st Street frontage. As these trees to do not
have dense foliage, they will not provide adequate visual buffer for adjacent residences.
We would request more dense trees like Chinese Elm, Southern Live Oak, Indian
Laurel, Ficus, etc.
No pedestrian access along 71st Street
In exchange for balconies at the 2-story level, no balconies on the 4th story as at these
heights, view lines in the residential yards are not able to be obstructed by the tree line.
85% non reflective glass on all windows
Solid fence along 71st Street
No lighted signage on the West side of the property.

As mentioned in a previous email, we would also like clarification/documentation on the

Page 429
following items:

Will there be a deceleration lane southbound on Scottsdale Road approaching the turn
off to the West before Thunderbird?
What are the parking ratios relative to city requirements?
Where will the dog park be located?
Have you completed a traffic study? If yes, please provide to us.
Are the drone photographs completed? If yes, please provide to us.
In the email dated, July 23, 2021, Wayne asked for further clarification regarding your
intentions on the southern portion of the property. This is not made clear in the PUD
application.
We would appreciate some language in the proposal confirming that this will not be
redeveloped and built any higher than the existing retail. Would the developer be open
to creating a deed restriction on that portion of the property to assure nothing will be
developed above the existing height on that section of the property?

We thank you for the willingness of your team and the Woodburys to conduct open and
productive conversations with representatives from the Kierland Community Alliance Board.

We recognize and appreciate the accommodations you have already made in those
conversations.
These include:

wrapping the parking garage and moving it away from the single-family homes
tiering the development height up toward Scottsdale Rd.
upgrading the landscaping along 71st St.
removing balconies on the 2nd and 3rd story west facing units
not having rooftop amenities.

While this is not impactful on your development and will be handled by the neighborhood, as
an adjacent property owner, we would appreciate written support for the following:

No parking signs along the eastern side of 71st Street.
Closure of street rather than gated access at Hearn Rd. and 71st Street.

Jason, in speaking with Jeff recently, he asked if we would clarify our support of the project as
is currently submitted. With the concerns regarding the proposed height being paramount, we
are not able to support the project in its current form. We do, however feel if this and the other
issues can be resolved, we could provide support for this project moving forward.

Please feel free to reach out if you have and questions. We look forward to hearing from you.

On behalf of the Kierland Community Alliance Board, thank you.

Amy Satterfield
Vice Chair
Kierland Community Alliance

Page 430
From: Adrian G Zambrano
To: Adrian G Zambrano
Subject: 2022-11-30 - Opposition - Christina Noyes
Date: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 3:38:57 PM

From: Christina Noyes
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 2:16 PM
To: PDD Long Range Planning
Subject: Scottsdale Town Square - 12/5 vote

Hello,

I am a neighbor only a few houses away from this development. I am strongly concerned
about the view lines from the apartments into the yards of the neighboring single family
homes along 71st street, even with the proposed setback and changes.

I have suggested a drone view from the height and set-back for each apartment level, so that
the homes could further evaluate the impact of the levels and proposed set backs. I have not
received one and the proposal does not include one. The site views in the application do not
fully show the apartments facing the homes.

The desert trees proposed are high enough or dense enough to block the view.

Christina Noyes
Brian Flaherty
cnbemail@gmail.com
14238 N. 70th Place
Scottsdale, AZ 85254

Page 431
Nayeli Sanchez Luna

Subject: FW: rezoning at townsquare, Scottsdale Rd and Hearn

From:ChristineBlunt
Sent:Friday,December2,20229:55AM
To:PDDLongRangePlanning
Subject:rezoningattownsquare,ScottsdaleRdandHearn

PleasedoNOTrezonethis.Therearemanymanyapartmentcomplexesbeingbuiltintheaea.WedoNOTneed
anotherone.Iamaresidentofthearea.IdoNOTwantthis.Thiswilloverloadanalreadymaxedoutsewersystem,
etc.

ChristineBlunt

Page 432
Page 433
Page 434
Page 435
Attachment C

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-40-22-2
INFORMATION ONLY

Date of VPC Meeting August 1, 2022
Request From C-2, C-2 SP, and PSC
Request To PUD
Location Approximately 800 feet north of the northwest corner of
Scottsdale Road and Thunderbird Road

VPC DISCUSSION:

Four members of the public registered to speak on this item.

Jason Morris, representing the applicant with Withey Morris PLC, introduced himself
and provided an overview of Woodbury Corporation who has owned this property for
five years and intends to hold it. Mr. Morris discussed the location of the property,
surrounding developments, and existing tenants in the property. Mr. Morris stated that
the site was developed originally for a grocery store, but the area has changed
considerably since. Mr. Morris showed photos depicting site conditions and discussed
the proposed site plan. Mr. Morris stated that this proposal would remove 25,000 square
feet of retail space to right size it and redevelop a mix of uses. Mr. Morris met with
neighbors in the area, including the Kierland Community Alliance, and will review the
feedback provided recently on the project.
Jeff Brand, with Nelsen Partners, introduced himself and provided an overview of the
changes proposed for a portion of the existing shopping center. The northern portion of
the center is intended to be redeveloped with buildings located closer to Scottsdale
Road. Mr. Brand stated that open space is proposed along 71st Street, in addition to a
gated pedestrian connection. Mr. Brand discussed various conceptual renderings and
compared the street cross-sections to that of the Manor Scottsdale project. Mr. Brand
stated that this proposed development would not have windows facing the adjacent
single-family neighborhood much like the Manor Scottsdale project. Mr. Brand
discussed proposed open space improvements and renderings of these along 71st
Street. Mr. Brand added that a local artist was engaged to create these art pieces.

Questions from the Committee:

Jennifer Hall asked if the maximum building height proposed was 78 feet and if the
Scottsdale Municipal Airport was contacted. Ms. Brand responded that the PUD
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 436
Narrative as written now would allow for a maximum height of 78 feet and that the
project had received approval from the FAA on the building location.

Alex Popovic asked if the current proposal is to have four stories of residential units
over two stories of non-residential space. Mr. Brand responded that the proposal is for
five stories of residential over one story of non-residential space. Mr. Popovic asked if
250 residential units are proposed and if these are rental or ownership type. Mr. Brand
responded that the 250 units proposed would be for rent. Mr. Popovic asked for
clarification on the proposed building height and if there could be increased building
setbacks provided along the west. Mr. Morris responded that his team is evaluating the
proposed height and have located buildings closer to Scottsdale Road.

Marc Soronson asked if the southern portion of the shopping center is also owned by
the same company and what will happen to this property in the future. Mr. Morris
responded that the property to the south is also under the same ownership and will be
consistent with this proposed development when it redevelops in the future. Mr.
Soronson asked for clarification on the pocket park and stated that there might be
concerns with others accessing this space along the neighborhood. Mr. Morrison
stated that this topic is a point of discussion with the neighborhood. Mr. Soronson
asked for clarification about the maintenance of the pocket park and added that the
emphasis of the site should be Scottsdale Road.

Robert Goodhue asked if the parking garage is proposed to be screened along the
western property line. Mr. Brand responded that the parking will be screened but will be
open at the top of the garage. Mr. Brand added that the distance of the building,
proposed over height wall, and vegetation will help mitigate any noise. Mr. Goodhue
stated that he wants to ensure that noise will be mitigated. Mr. Morris stated that he
anticipates any noise to be lower than what exists on site today due to the back-of-
house uses there.

Regina Schmidt asked for clarification on the size of the pocket park and if trees will be
planted in the parking areas. Mr. Morris stated that the park is more of a linear park and
trees will be provided on parking within the retail portion of the site, but not along the
parking garage. Mr. Morris added that covered parking might be considered here.

Chair Robert Gubser asked for clarification on the central pedestrian connection
proposed. Mr. Brand responded that this is an enhanced pedestrian pathway that will
create a transition with the southern portion of the site. Mr. Morris added that this
pathway is intended to also allow existing residents along 71st Avenue a more direct
connection to the retail uses proposed on this site. Chair Gubser asked how residents
would get access along this pathway if this will be gated. Mr. Morris stated that there is
an existing agreement that allows those residents to have access through this gate.

Public Comment:

Amy Satterfield, Vice Chair of the Kierland Community Alliance (KCA), stated that KCA
has met with the applicants. The building height is of primary concern at 78 feet, while
other projects in the area do not exceed 70 feet. Ms. Satterfield stated that the privacy
of residents along the west is also of concern in addition to open parking garages due to
emanating noise from vehicle alarms and other noises. Ms. Satterfield stated that that

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 437
Scottsdale Manor project is 50 feet in height with no balconies facing single-family uses
and a wrapped parking garage. Ms. Satterfield added that site access and increased
traffic are of concern and ensuring that vehicular parking along 71st Street is not an
issue like in the past. Ms. Satterfield stated that the gate code along the proposed
pathway is changed quarterly and provided to all residents who live along the west. Ms.
Satterfield concluded by stating that the discussions with the applicants are
encouraging.

Lani Harrison, resident of the area, lives along 71st Street near Impact Church which
has loud music and whose patrons often park along 71st Street on Sundays. Ms.
Harrison stated that she wants to like this project but has various concerns. Ms.
Harrison stated that the line of sight into the residents’ yards is important to protect, in
addition to the access code for the pedestrian gate. Ms. Harrison has concerns with
vehicular parking and unrestricted pedestrian access along 71st Street. Ms. Harrison
stated that density is of concern and encourages a reduction in the number of dwelling
units.

Alison Howard asked if the linear park along 71s Street was going to be a dog park
and if there is a limit on the density for the project.

Mervin Giles, resident of the area, stated that the density of 350 dwelling units is an
issue for him, causing increased traffic in the area, adding that 700 people would be
living there. Mr. Giles stated that gate access is often used by others who are not
authorized to use it.

Applicant Response to Public Comment:

Mr. Morris thanked everyone for the feedback provided and stated that a neighborhood
meeting would be held in September. Mr. Morris stated that this case could return to the
Village Planning Committee on October 3rd for recommendation.

Discussion:
None.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 438
Attachment D

Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Z-40-22-2
Scottsdale Town Square PUD

Date of VPC Meeting December 5, 2022
Request From C-2 (1.06 acres), C-2 SP (0.06 acres), and PSC (7.42
acres)
Request To PUD
Proposed Use Planned Unit Development to allow multifamily
residential and commercial uses
Location Approximately 800 feet north of the northwest corner of
Scottsdale Road and Thunderbird Road
VPC Recommendation Approval, per staff the recommendation, with a
modification and additional stipulations
VPC Vote 13-3

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

Committee member Alan Sparks joined the meeting during this item, bringing the
quorum to 18 members. Committee members Toby Gerst and Louisa Ward left the
meeting during this item, bringing the quorum to 16 members.

Staff Presentation:

Mr. Zambrano provided an overview of rezoning case Z-40-22-2, describing the
location, request, surrounding land uses, existing and surrounding zoning, and General
Plan Land Use Map designation. Mr. Zambrano provided background on adopted policy
plans that the project would support. Mr. Zambrano then described the proposal,
discussing the proposed site plan and elevations. Mr. Zambrano noted letters of
opposition and support received and summarized the concerns in the letters of
opposition. Mr. Zambrano concluded by sharing the staff findings, recommendation of
approval and the recommended stipulations, noting requested revisions of the PUD
narrative.

Applicant Presentation:

Jason Morris, representing the applicant with Withey Morris PLC, introduced himself,
George Pasquel with Withey Morris PLC, Jeff Brand with Nelson Partners, and Joshua
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 439
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Woodbury with Woodbury Corporation. Mr. Morris provided an overview of the proposal,
noting the trend of many retail stores closing over the past decade. Mr. Morris stated
that the property owner, the Woodbury family, is a long-term property owner and is
intending to remain the property owner after improving the property. Mr. Morris noted
that shopping center property owners have had to search for alternative uses to occupy
their suites as retail needs declined, including charter schools and churches. Mr. Morris
stated that the anchor tenant space located on the portion of the site where proposed
redeveloped is located is occupied by Impact Church, noting that the church does not
serve as an anchor to the shopping center when they are not busy. Mr. Morris added
that the church can also be very busy during services, so much that almost the entire
parking lot is taken up for church parking, which can be problematic for other retail
tenants in the shopping center. Mr. Morris stated that the intent of the proposal is to
provide a better mix of uses that compliment and support the other retailers in the
shopping center. Mr. Morris noted that 71st Street separates the property from adjacent
single-family residences to the west and compared that to previously approved rezoning
cases where single-family residences were directly abutting the subject property. Mr.
Morris added that views will not be impacted as the existing conditions shown on the
street view image from 71st Street already block views of any surrounding mountains.
Mr. Morris stated that the proposal was redesigned since the last VPC meeting to
address neighbor concerns with the parking garage abutting the neighborhood, noting
design elements that were kept, including the landscape buffer along 71st Street and
two buildings for restaurant space with a common patio and open space area for
existing restaurant tenants to relocate to. Mr. Morris stated the pool area was relocated
to the west with enhanced landscaping surrounding it. Mr. Morris added that the building
along the west is tiered to be at a lower height when closer to the west. Mr. Morris
stated that the parking garage has been wrapped and enclosed by the building
containing residential units, the amenity area is in a courtyard at ground-level
surrounded by walls and landscaping, and height and density were reduced to an
overall height of a 4-story parking garage and overall, five stories with a 4-story
residential building above 1-story of retail. Mr. Morris stated that the all the small retail
uses are being kept as part of this development so that it is a true mixed-use
development rather than uses located adjacent to each other. Mr. Morris stated that the
development would create a retail environment underneath the residential units that are
the right space, right size and right location, but in order to do that they need a total
height of at least 66 feet, which is less than what was originally proposed. Mr. Morris
added that the maximum height is only required for the residential building furthest east
against Scottsdale Road, and that all other buildings are at a lower height. Mr. Morris
stated that the tallest residential building has been oriented to limit balconies facing
west. Mr. Morris proceeded to discuss Manor Scottsdale PUD; a rezoning request
previously approved by the Paradise Valley VPC. Mr. Morris noted that this was also a
request for five stories with a maximum height of 56 feet and no ground-level retail. Mr.
Morris argued that there being no retail and solely residential is the reason why this
project was able to be brought down to this height. Mr. Morris provided a comparison
between Manor Scottdale PUD and the proposed Scottsdale Town Square PUD, noting
that the taller portions of the building are located further away from the nearest single-
family residence than Manor Scottsdale PUD is. Mr. Morris added that the proposed
density is less than Manor Scottsdale PUD. Mr. Morris shared a diagram showing that
the proposed trees along the west property line would block views from taller portions of

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 440
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

the building into single-family residence yards and noted that privacy is protected much
more than Manor Scottsdale PUD. Mr. Morris concluded by discussing the renderings of
the proposed landscaping along the west property line, noting that there is not much of
an existing landscape buffer, and the proposal would be a big enhancement to provide
a dense landscape buffer.

Questions from the Committee:

Larisa Balderrama asked how long the church’s lease was. Mr. Morris responded that
the existing lease will not be broken and that the church will be given time to find
another location. Mr. Morris stated that the construction will not be able to take place
until building permits are issued, likely in at least 12 months. Mr. Morris stated he was
unaware of the length of the lease but noted the church use was always intended to be
an interim use until redevelopment of the site was able to occur. Ms. Balderrama stated
she understood that the lease was for another five years per a source she believes to
be truthful, but she has not verified that information. Ms. Balderrama stated that if that
information is correct, she would like to know that before being able to vote on this item
so she is assured the church will not be evicted. Mr. Morris responded that he was just
told that there is a right to redevelop under the lease within 24 months. Ms. Balderrama
asked if the church was aware they would need to move in 24 months. Mr. Morris
responded affirmatively and clarified that it is 24 months from where they are at today
but was unsure how long it has been. Mr. Morris added that the church has been an
excellent tenant but that there have been some concerns from the neighborhood
regarding overflow parking into the neighborhood. Ms. Balderrama asked if the
applicant has met with the church and if they have received any input from the church
on the plan for redevelopment. Mr. Morris responded affirmatively.

Alex Popovic asked if there was a rezoning related to the existing PSC zoning. Mr.
Morris responded that PSC permits up to 56 feet of height as well but that it does not
permit residential uses and does not enforce the type of quality product proposed. Mr.
Morris added that the conventional zoning districts are typically only for commercial or
residential uses, but to have vertical mixed-use requires a PUD in this area. Mr.
Popovic asked if there will be any balconies for the units on the upper stories facing
west that could potentially look into residential yards to the west. Mr. Morris responded
that there will be windows and balconies on those units; however, the parking garage is
directly adjacent to them, and those units will be looking down to the top of the parking
garage rather than into residential yards further away. Mr. Morris added that balconies
were restricted on units closer to the west property line, but that the units further east do
not have a viewshed into the neighborhood and are rather looking down into the project
site itself. Mr. Popovic asked how many units were removed since the informational
only meeting. Mr. Morris responded that approximately 42 units and one story in height
were removed. Mr. Popovic clarified that the building was moved further east. Mr.
Morris responded affirmatively. Mr. Popovic asked if there were any further
discussions with the community regarding pedestrian and vehicular access to 71st
Street. Mr. Morris responded that art features and pocket parks were originally
proposed along the 71st Street frontage. Mr. Morris stated that the neighborhood was
concerned the pocket parks would become a nuisance with unwanted people using and
taking advantage of the pocket parks. Mr. Morris stated that the residents requested

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 441
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

pedestrian access be removed to 71st Street, adding that the intent of the pedestrian
access was to be an accessible gate for residents of the neighborhood to the west that
would connect to the open space area between the restaurant buildings so that
residents of the neighborhood can easily access the restaurant and retail spaces by
walking. Mr. Morris stated the pedestrian access was removed per resident request. Mr.
Morris added that the residents requested the art pieces along 71st Street be removed,
and the money reallocated for additional landscaping along 71st Street. Mr. Morris
stated they agreed to do that as well.

Mr. Goodhue asked if the top floor of the garage will be open. Mr. Morris stated that
the top floor of the garage would have covered parking and may have some
opportunities for solar panel canopies. Mr. Morris added that the top level will be walled
to ensure noise remains interior. Mr. Goodhue stated that his biggest concern has been
noise transmitted from the property, so if this goes for approval, he has additional
stipulations to add.

Cynthia DiMassa asked which floors have balconies facing west. Mr. Morris
responded that it would be the top two floors, so the fourth story on the side of the
garage. Ms. DiMassa asked how far the fourth story is from the adjacent residential
properties. Mr. Morris responded it is 160 feet at its closest, and then the next story has
a step back which is 319 feet away. Ms. DiMassa clarified that the fifth story is 319 feet
away. Mr. Morris confirmed, adding that they are both 4-story residential, but one is
above ground-level retail. Ms. DiMassa stated that she lives on the fifth story of the
building she lives in at Optima Kierland Apartments, and she can see straight down into
the properties behind her, even though the building is set back a good distance from
71st Street. Mr. Morris responded that the fourth story and fifth story are likely a bit
lower than the Optima building, and that the Optima building does not have higher
stories stepped back, whereas this proposed building has the higher stories tiered to be
stepped back from 71st Street. Mr. Morris added that because of the step back the
viewshed would be looking more at this site itself rather than the neighbors. Ms.
DiMassa clarified that the fourth story will be looking at the third story roof. Mr. Morris
confirmed. Ms. DiMassa asked what was on top of the garage. Mr. Morris responded
that it would be the top level of the parking garage. Ms. DiMassa asked if there would
be cars parked there. Mr. Morris confirmed and added that they would be under
canopies. Ms. DiMassa asked what can be done to limit noise from the pool area since
it is right up against 71st Street. Mr. Morris responded that one of the requests from the
neighborhood is that there are no rooftop amenities, so they have agreed to that. Mr.
Morris stated that the pool area is enclosed on all four sides and there is a solid wall to
the west.

Diane Petersen asked how many units were proposed. Mr. Morris responded 311
units. Ms. Petersen stated she was concerned with height and traffic. Ms. Petersen
stated that she has a concern with the gate going into the community, citing concerns
with apartment traffic going through the adjacent neighborhood due to difficulty being
able to turn to go north on Scottsdale Road when wanting to head west. Ms. Petersen
stated that she would like the gate to be closed and walled off. Mr. Morris responded
that buildings in the Kierland area are 120 feet tall or more and the request is for 66
feet. Mr. Morris added that the most recent project that came to the VPC on Bell Road

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 442
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

and Scottsdale Road was at 141 feet. Mr. Morris added that Manor Scottsdale PUD was
at 56 feet tall directly abutting adjacent neighbors’ yards. Mr. Morris added that only a
portion of this project is 66 feet tall. Mr. Morris stated that change in use from retail to
residential will be a decrease in traffic by 400 trips per day. Mr. Morris agreed that the
access from Hearn Road is unnecessary, stating that this project already has
northbound and southbound access to Scottsdale Road, as well as eastbound and
westbound access to Thunderbird Road. Mr. Morris stated that there would be zero trips
from this project along 71st Place or within any of the adjacent residential areas. Mr.
Morris stated if the neighbors in the area wanted to remove the access gate from Hearn
Road and close off that access entirely, that they would support the neighborhood on
that request and that they sent a letter to the Kierland Community Alliance (KCA) stating
so. Ms. Petersen stated there is a lot of history of people using Hearn Road. Ms.
Petersen asked if the ground-level retail will be for the existing retail in the shopping
center. Mr. Morris responded that the intent is to phase the project so that the existing
tenants can remain and can be moved into the new retail spaces. Ms. Petersen asked
if the ground-level retail spaces could be relocated nearby the restaurants so that the
building height could be reduced. Mr. Morris responded that existing shopping center
has retail spaces that are for larger stores and modern retail spaces are typically
narrower and not as deep. Mr. Morris stated that more retail space is being created
rather than just the number of existing retail tenants. Mr. Morris stated that moving the
retail to another place would be difficult and it would take away from what they are trying
to create, which is vertical mixed-use rather than uses adjacent or near residences. Mr.
Morris stated he misspoke regarding the balconies on the fifth story facing west and that
they would be facing internally, looking at the building on the other side.

Marc Soronson stated that he would like to amend the Traffic Impact Study stipulation
to also include a mobility study to address pedestrian and bicyclist mobility to the activity
centers to the north and east. Mr. Soronson asked what the property owner’s plan is for
the south half of the existing shopping center. Mr. Morris responded that one of the
selling points of living in this area is having pedestrian and bike access to the
commercial to the north and south. Mr. Soronson stated he would like it to be part of
the stipulation. Mr. Soronson stated that there are many underground parking spaces
along Scottsdale Road but there are no ways to get between developments. Mr.
Soronson stated that there are activity centers in this area that are extremely walkable
and bikeable and that connectivity could be easily implemented between developments.
Mr. Soronson believes that developers have a responsibility to recognize that and
implement it into their plan. Mr. Morris agreed, stating that there will be detached
sidewalks with landscaping to make it a more pleasant condition. Mr. Morris stated that
the City of Phoenix and City of Scottsdale will focus more on people and bikes over cars
when there are more people and bikes in the area. Mr. Morris stated that this project will
bring more people to the area and that is being seen throughout this area. Mr. Morris
stated the south half of the shopping center adjacent to Thunderbird Road will be
refurbished to have a façade that matches the look and design of the north half. Mr.
Morris added that there will be no additional height or change of use requested on the
south side. Mr. Soronson stated that given the density in the area, he would like to see
a minimum of 6-foot-wide sidewalks.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 443
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Ms. Schmidt asked if the top level of the parking garage would include spaces for
residents. Mr. Morris responded that there will be shared parking at the ground level
and reserved parking for residents above the ground level. Mr. Morris added that retail
parking will be closer to the retail stores at the ground level. Ms. Schmidt proposed that
noise from the top level of the parking garage could be reduced by only having the
parking garage open during business hours. Mr. Morris stated that the retail parking
spaces are kept at ground-level because they are much more likely to be coming into
and out of the site frequently versus a resident that would make fewer trips.

Public Comment:

Amy Satterfield, Vice Chair of the Kierland Community Alliance (KCA), introduced
herself and the KCA as a neighborhood organization opposed to the project. Ms.
Satterfield stated that they have had discussions with the development team since
August and have continued those discussions to mitigate the impact on the residential
community. Ms. Satterfield stated at that meeting they requested mitigating the impact
by doing the following: 1) wrapping the parking garage and moving it away from the
adjacent single-family homes; 2) tiering the building up towards Scottsdale Road; 3)
upgrading the landscaping along 71st Street and removing the pocket parks; 4)
removing balconies on the second and third stories facing west; and 5) removing
rooftop amenities. Ms. Satterfield stated those mitigations have all been agreed to. Ms.
Satterfield stated that since then there have been subsequent discussions regarding
some additional concerns. Ms. Satterfield stated that they received an email from the
applicant agreeing to their proposed stipulations, and asked that the following
stipulations be added to this case:

1) The west perimeter shall be planted with minimum 3-inch caliper trees
planted 20 feet on center.
2) Trees species with denser foliage to create a visual buffer shall be used along
the west perimeter.
3) The fence along 71st Street shall be a solid wall and there shall be no
openings that allow pedestrian access to 71st Street.
4) Windows shall use 85% non-reflective glass.
5) There shall be no lighted signage along the west side of the property
6) No parking signs shall be installed along the east side of 71st Street.
7) Access from Hearn Road shall be permanently removed.
8) The maximum building height shall be 56 feet.
9) There shall be no balconies on the fourth story.

Ms. Satterfield stated that they also requested the developer take photos by a drone to
illustrate if there would be a visual buffer from trees for the balconies at the second story
versus the fourth story, but the developer stated that the permits need to be filed and
received in order to do so. Ms. Satterfield stated the KCA would also like some
assurance that the south side of the shopping center would not develop higher than the
existing buildings. Ms. Satterfield stated that the KCA is in favor of development that
has the least amount of impact to existing homeowners. Ms. Satterfield stated that the
Village Planning Committee is closest to the neighbors, and as the case moves along in

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 444
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

the process it becomes more distant from those who are most impacted. Ms. Satterfield
stated they rely on the Committee to be the voice of the neighborhood.

Mervin Giles introduced himself as a neighbor of 28 years opposed to the project. Mr.
Giles stated that he would like to see a traffic study done that includes the residential
units that have been added along Scottsdale Road between Bell Road and Cactus
Road within the last two years. Mr. Giles stated that the traffic studies he has looked at
presented by the developer do not compare at all to the traffic he sees on the street. Mr.
Giles stated he does not understand how the traffic generated would be less if the
existing retail tenants are remaining on the site in addition to the proposed residences.
Mr. Giles stated he has a concern with the height because the mountains can be seen
from about a block away. Mr. Giles requested a drone view at the proposed height.

Anthony Scerbo introduced himself and his friend Nick Cardinale, the Immediate Past
Chief Operating Officer of the Barrett-Jackson Collector Car Auction, in support of the
case. Mr. Scerbo read a letter of support from Mr. Cardinale on his behalf, since he was
unable to attend the meeting, which was sent to staff to be attached to the staff report.

Lani Harrison introduced herself as a neighbor on 71st Street and Redfield Road in
support of the project. Ms. Harrison stated that the situation with Impact Church is not a
good situation for the residents of the neighborhood. Ms. Harrison stated that the
church’s music goes on four days a week and that her windows shake. Ms. Harrison
stated that the church had sent the neighbors a letter that they would begin to use 71st
Street for additional parking and provided gift cards. Ms. Harrison added that she does
not hear much noise from the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company building, stating that
she would have thought a car repair facility would be noisier, but it is actually the church
that has been much noisier and has been a nuisance. Ms. Harrison supported the
updated look and added that the neighborhood currently looks into the back of an
industrial-looking shopping center and that she would love a view of something more
updated and prettier. Ms. Harrison stated she would support removing pedestrian
access along 71st Street and removing the gate access from Hearn Road to
permanently close it off, since neighbors have their children riding bikes along 71st
Street.

Applicant Response:

Mr. Morris agreed with comments made by Ms. Satterfield. Mr. Morris stated she had
worked diligently with the architectural team to come to a compromise with the final
product, but what could not be compromised any further was the height. Mr. Morris
stated that the majority of the site is at 56 feet in height until further east beyond 165
feet from the nearest residence. Mr. Morris added that they truly believe in the viability
of the retail uses and a true mixed-use project and having that additional 10 feet over
300 feet away allows them to create an interesting streetscape rather than an apartment
building alone. Mr. Morris stated that the current property owner was the previous retail
property owner and will remain the property owner after this site is redeveloped. Mr.
Morris stated that the goal of the project was to create a long-lasting project of high
quality. Mr. Morris stated they are able to accommodate the majority of the concerns
heard. Mr. Morris stated that the choice would be to either have 55-foot-tall multifamily

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 445
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

residential with no retail or restaurant uses, or to have this project that they believe is
exceptional and has a height of 68 feet for less than 15% of the project.

Chair Gubser asked if the applicant agrees to the additional stipulations proposed by
Ms. Satterfield. Mr. Morris stated that they had responded to her letter in agreeance
and that he does not believe there is anything that she raised that they would not be
comfortable with, other than the height.

MOTION:

Mr. Popovic motioned to recommend approval of Z-40-22-2 per the staff
recommendation. Alan Sparks seconded the motion.

Discussion:

Jennifer Hall commended the development team for working with the KCA to work
through their concerns. Ms. Hall stated she supports the ground-level retail and the
other changes made to the project. Ms. Hall stated that before this is brought to a vote,
she would recommend that the Committee members entertain a friendly amendment to
ensure they include all the stipulations that Ms. Satterfield proposed.

Ms. DeMoss asked if the same developer would develop the south portion of the
shopping center.

Mr. Popovic stated he believed one of the proposed stipulations from the KCA was to
not allow this same type of development on the south side of the shopping center.

Ms. DeMoss asked if it was possible to move the ground-level retail underneath the
building down to the south. Mr. Morris responded that there is no intention to redevelop
the southern portion of the shopping center. Mr. Morris added that the only way the
same type of development on the southern portion could occur is if it went through the
same type of public hearing process, since it is not entitled for that type of development.
Mr. Morris reiterated that it is not the intent of the developer at this point in time to
redevelop the southern portion of the shopping center. Mr. Morris stated that the plan is
to upgrade the façade of the shopping center to be compatible with the new
development. Mr. Morris stated that moving the retail would take away the uniqueness
of having retail at ground-level below residential units. Mr. Morris added that they have
not taken anything away from the neighborhood and that the reduction in height from 78
feet to 68 feet has already taken away from the project.

Ms. DeMoss stated she was unclear how the applicant is stating that mountain views
would not be affected when Ms. Satterfield stated that it would. Ms. Satterfield
responded that regarding the southern portion of the shopping center, the KCA was
asking for some assurance written into the PUD that the southern portion of the
shopping center would not be developed higher than 56 feet. Ms. Satterfield added that
Mr. Giles had stated that mountains can be seen further out. Ms. Satterfield clarified that
she did not make that comment and clarified that her comment was related to views into

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 446
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

the neighborhood. Ms. Satterfield stated that views looking down would look at the top
of the parking structure, but views looking out would look into the residences’ yards.

Chair Gubser asked if Ms. Satterfield was referring to the southern portion of the
shopping center to not be developed. Ms. Satterfield confirmed.

Ms. Petersen asked Ms. Satterfield to restate what she had said regarding the KCA
establishing a precedent of 56 feet in height. Ms. Satterfield responded that within the
KCA boundary between Thunderbird Road to the south, Paradise Lane to the north,
64th Street to the west, and Scottsdale Road to the east, this is the first development
that is this close in proximity to single-family homes. Ms. Satterfield stated that they had
worked with the development team for the Kierland Sky PUD, who had agreed to
reduce the height of the building that is closest to the neighborhood to a maximum of 56
feet within 560 feet of a single-family residence.

Toby Gerst appreciated the proposed revitalization of the area and the idea of mixed-
use at ground level. Ms. Gerst added that she has some considerations regarding the
kind of traffic that this development would bring to the neighborhood. Ms. Gerst agreed
that the proposed stipulations should be added, in addition to limiting height to 56 feet
within 560 feet of a single-family residence.

Mr. Goodhue stated that while everyone is focused on the 56-foot height limitation, it
should also be considered that this project has tiered the buildings away from the
property line so that the higher stories have more of a step back. Mr. Goodhue added
that there is a big difference between a non-tiered building that is 56 feet tall adjacent to
the property line versus the tiered proposal. Mr. Goodhue stated that a 56-foot-tall
building that is 10 feet away from the property line would be much more visually
impactful than a tiered structure.

Mr. Soronson agreed and stated he did not have any issues with the proposed height.
Mr. Soronson wanted to ensure the amended motion includes a mobility plan to be
included as part of the traffic impact study. Chair Gubser asked what Mr. Soronson
envisions to be included in the mobility plan. Mr. Soronson responded that it should
include consideration of pedestrian and bicycle circulation both inside and outside of the
property and not just bicycle parking alone. Mr. Soronson added that there is a lot of
employment at the airpark across the street and he would like to see less traffic from
cars going into the airpark.

Chair Gubser stated that when talking about mobility in terms of pedestrian
accessibility, the neighbors have indicated that they do not want pedestrian connectivity
to 71st Street and that they also want Hearn Road closed off.

Mr. Soronson stated that there is a dilemma all over the City of Phoenix where
pedestrians in developments have to walk a quarter mile around walls to get to a transit
stop rather than 20 feet.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 447
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Ms. Petersen reiterated that Ms. Satterfield said this development is the closest to the
single-family residences at this height compared to other developments at least 560 feet
from the nearest single-family residence at 56 feet in height.

Abe Bowman asked for clarification on the KCA distance of 56 feet in height from the
nearest single-family residence. Mr. Bowman stated that he thought the Manor
Scottsdale PUD was closer than what was previously stated by Ms. Petersen. Ms.
Petersen stated that Ms. Satterfield was referring to other projects that the KCA has
dealt with. Ms. Petersen added that the Kierland Sky PUD was reduced to 56 feet in
height with a minimum distance of 560 feet from the nearest single-family residence.

Mr. Sparks stated that he agreed with Mr. Goodhue’s comments and clarified that Mr.
Goodhue was making a point that a building 56 feet tall that is located a short distance
away is less favorable than a tiered structure as presented. Mr. Sparks stated he
believes the applicant has done a great job at making significant changes to address
concerns from the KCA and neighbors. Mr. Sparks stated he believes the developer has
gone out of their way to accommodate as much as they possibly could.

Mr. Wise added that the building is located several hundred feet away and that there
will be a large number of trees along the west side of the property. Mr. Wise stated that
the trees will grow to block more of the view than the building can see at the distance it
is proposed.

Ms. DiMassa asked if the balconies on the fourth story could be removed as the KCA
requested.

Chair Gubser stated he would ask for Mr. Morris to come back on. Chair Gubser stated
it was his understanding that the balconies were facing north and south and not west.

Mr. Morris stated that Chair Gubser was correct about the fourth and fifth floor
balconies. Mr. Morris stated that they would be willing to abide by a stipulation that there
be no balconies on the fourth floor if they have a sightline into the neighborhood. Mr.
Morris stated that there are many different ways to design a balcony so that it does not
protrude outside of the building, such as a recessed balcony or Juliette balcony. Mr.
Morris stated they do not have a desire to create a viewshed into the neighborhood,
which is why they went to great lengths to create a landscape plan that has mature
trees at planting along 71st Street that will only get larger. Mr. Morris stated they will do
whatever is necessary to protect the privacy of the adjacent single-family residences.

Ms. DiMassa stated that a stipulation limiting the balconies would definitely help, and
that if it were a recessed balcony, that there would be no noise from parties on the
balconies. Ms. DiMassa requested there be a stipulation added restricting balconies
wherever there is a line of sight into the community.

Ms. Sepic stated that she believes public art is very important in redevelopment and
that she is in support of the proposed height. Ms. Sepic wanted to ensure that if there is
no public art on 71st Street, that there at least be public art installations either on
Scottsdale Road or in the open space area between the two restaurant buildings. Ms.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 448
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Sepic recommended that balconies still be provided but that they should be recessed
balconies so that community members can have an outdoor space to still enjoy
Arizona’s moderate weather.

Chair Gubser asked Mr. Popovic if he would like to amend his motion to include the
recommended stipulations.

Mr. Popovic stated he would agree to add the stipulations recommended by the KCA
except for the height. Mr. Popovic added that he is okay with restricting balconies to
recessed or Juliette balconies. Mr. Popovic added that he would be amenable to any
other recommended stipulations he may be missing.

Chair Gubser added that there was a proposed stipulation for public art along
Scottsdale Road, a mobility plan, and a recommendation from Mr. Goodhue regarding
noise.

Mr. Goodhue stated he has a standard stipulation that the City uses for noise
mitigation, that states “Noise generated on the site shall not exceed 50 decibels at the
west property line and shall be verified by testing approved by the Planning and
Development prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy”. Mr. Goodhue stated
that this stipulation was the same stipulation used for another project and that it worked
perfectly.

Chair Gubser asked if testing noise before occupancy would provide accurate results.
Mr. Goodhue responded that it would, adding that he is more worried about the parking
garage. Mr. Goodhue stated that the noise testing includes simulated car alarms going
off as well as other high noises generated from a parking garage. Mr. Goodhue stated
that his biggest concern is noise from the upper level of the parking garage since it is
not enclosed. Mr. Goodhue stated that testing noise is possible with noise engineers
going out into the field with equipment and running tests.

Chair Gubser added that there was a recommendation for a reduction in the height.

Mr. Popovic stated that he is supportive of the proposed height and is not supportive of
reducing the height. Mr. Popovic added that he is okay with the recommended
stipulations, except that the height should remain as the applicant has proposed.

Ms. Hall asked if KCA’s stipulations should be read into the record. Chair Gubser
concurred. Ms. Hall stated she can read them from Ms. Satterfield’s letter. Ms. Hall
stated that the only one she would not read is the one about reducing the height since
she agrees that the proposed height is fine. Ms. Hall stated that the letter included the
following recommendations:

1. Enhanced landscaping on the west side of the property
2. Three-inch caliper trees planted 20 feet on center on all of the perimeter
3. Provide an adequate visual buffer for adjacent residences by providing
denser trees like Chinese Elm, Southern Indian Laurel, etc.
4. No pedestrian access along 71st Street

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 449
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

5. No parking signs along 71st Street
6. In exchange for the balconies on the second story, no balconies with line of
sight on the fourth story on the west
7. Eighty-five percent non-reflective glass on all windows
8. Solid fence along 71st Street
9. No lighted signage on the west side of the property

Ms. Hall stated she would like to add that the solid wall be a 6-foot-tall decorative
subdivision wall.

Mr. Popovic concurred with the recommended stipulations.

Mr. Sparks echoed Ms. Sepic’s comments regarding public art. Mr. Sparks
recommended the stipulation regarding balconies be simplified to state that there can
be balconies where there are no sightlines into the neighborhood and allow the
architects to design it. Mr. Sparks concurred with Mr. Popovic’s modification to the
motion.

Mr. Zambrano stated that some clarification would be needed on the language of the
stipulations and if the Committee would like it to be incorporated into the PUD narrative
or to be a separate stipulation.

Chair Gubser responded that he would defer to staff on where it would be better to be
incorporated into the narrative or to be a separate stipulation. Mr. Zambrano responded
that the noise stipulation could be a separate stipulation. Mr. Zambrano stated that the
balcony stipulation could be an amendment to the PUD narrative.

Mr. Popovic stated that if the language of the balcony stipulation included no sightlines,
it may cause confusion of what may be allowed and may be more restrictive than
intended.

Ms. Gerst stated that restricting the height to 56 feet may address the sightline issue
from balconies.

Mr. Popovic asked what the difference would be if balconies would be provided either
way.

Ms. Gerst stated that she believed the KCA requested no balconies on the fourth story
and above. Ms. Gerst asked if Mr. Popovic was referring to only one story. Mr. Popovic
asked if the Committee would be okay with allowing balconies on the fourth story if the
height was reduced to 56 feet. Ms. Gerst clarified that if the height was lowered, it
would eliminate the sightline problem with balconies.

Chair Gubser asked if the stipulation for no sightlines to the west residences would be
only for balconies or if it would also include west-facing windows. Ms. Petersen stated
that windows are fine.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 450
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Anita Mortensen recommended adding a solid wall or some type of cover on the
rooftop of the parking garage to block the view from the balconies rather than reducing
the height to 56 feet.

Ms. Hall clarified that they are not talking about the fourth story balconies to the east of
the parking garage but rather the fourth story located on the other side of the parking
garage. Ms. Hall recommended the stipulation say that there be no walk-out balconies
on the west side of the fourth story rather than line of sight.

Ms. Mortensen concurred.

Ms. DiMassa concurred.

Mr. Popovic concurred.

Ms. DeMoss asked what the Committee’s opinion was on Ms. Satterfield’s comment
regarding precedent set by approving a height more than 56 feet.

Chair Gubser stated that the amended motion excludes height reduction and at this
point the Committee is working through the stipulations that the majority of the
Committee is comfortable with.

Ms. Gerst stated that there could be multiple motions made if a previous one fails and
at that point a stipulation reducing the height could be considered. Ms. Gerst suggested
taking a poll to see how many Committee members agree with reducing the height to 56
feet. Chair Gubser responded that the Committee needs to work through the other
stipulations first. Chair Gubser asked Mr. Zambrano if the motion and additional
stipulations are acceptable.

Mr. Zambrano responded that there is still some clarification needed on the language
of the additional stipulations and if they were to be included as an amendment to the
PUD narrative or as a separate stipulation. Mr. Zambrano asked for clarification on what
is being measured with the noise stipulation. Mr. Goodhue responded that he is
referring to noise being generated by the site that is transmitted across the property line.
Mr. Goodhue stated he would prefer noise not exceeding 50 decibels at the property
line over 45 decibels. Mr. Goodhue stated that the way he read the stipulation pertains
more to the intent of the stipulation than the standard stipulation for indoor noise that
Mr. Zambrano was using. Mr. Zambrano stated he was unsure if it would be an
enforceable stipulation to constantly measure the noise level at the property line after
occupancy. Mr. Goodhue responded that it is enforceable and has been done before
with a previous case by testing simulated noises.

Ms. Gerst stated she was not able to get sound on her computer initially, so she used
her husband’s computer which he now needs. Ms. Gerst requested Ms. DeMoss vote
for her in proxy while she switched computers. Ms. Gerst stated she is in favor of all the
stipulations that were discussed but is opposed to anything above 56 feet in height. Ms.
Gerst stated she will vote in favor if the height is reduced to 56 feet and will vote in
opposition if the height remains the same.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 451
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Chair Gubser agreed.

Staff verified after the meeting that a proxy vote is not recognized as an official vote.
Mr. Zambrano went through the recommended stipulations from the KCA and stated
some could be amendments to the PUD narrative. Chair Gubser stated that Mr.
Zambrano could follow up with the Committee as he does not believe they have ever
gone through recommending stipulations that amend pages of the PUD narrative
before.

Mr. Zambrano read the recommended stipulations from the KCA to verify which ones
were to be included.

Ms. Schmidt stated that the stipulation for planting trees with denser foliage should also
be low-water-use species.

Ms. Hall asked for confirmation that trees are not being replaced but rather the
landscaping is being enhanced. Chair Gubser responded affirmatively.

Mr. Zambrano asked if the Committee would like to add the stipulation for a solid fence
along 71st Street.

Ms. Sepic concurred.

Chair Gubser stated that Ms. Hall had mentioned the wall should be a 6-foot-tall
decorative subdivision wall. Chair Gubser asked if the stipulation for no pedestrian
access along 71st Street is included. Mr. Zambrano responded that for the previous
case that the Committee recommended no pedestrian access to a street, the stipulation
was removed at Planning Commission due to conflicts with several City policies and
design guidelines that promote and require pedestrian and accessibility enhancements
to new development. Chair Gubser responded that it is best to keep the stipulation and
if it needs to be struck out later on that it could be done so at that point.

Ms. Hall asked if the stipulation regarding a mobility plan was added. Mr. Zambrano
confirmed and asked if it was a modification to Stipulation No. 2 regarding the Traffic
Impact Study.

Mr. Soronson concurred.

Ms. Sepic listed the recommended stipulations to ensure she had them all correct,
including:

1) Public art installations shall be installed either along Scottsdale Road or in the
open space area between the two restaurant buildings.
2) Minimum 3-inch caliper trees planted 20 feet on center shall be planted along the
perimeter of the site.
3) Low-water-use trees with dense foliage shall be used along the west perimeter.
4) A 6-foot-high solid decorative fence shall be constructed along 71st Street.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 452
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

5) There shall be no pedestrian access along 71st Street.
6) Minimum 85% non-reflective glass shall be used on all windows.
7) No parking signs shall be installed along 71st Street adjacent to the site.
8) There shall be no lighted signage on the west side of the property.
9) Noise generated on the site shall not exceed 50 decibels at the west property line
and shall be verified by testing, prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

Ms. Sepic overlooked capturing the following items that were discussed and agreed
upon as being stipulations:

• Modification of Stipulation No. 2 to include a mobility study for pedestrian and
bicyclist connectivity.
• No balconies shall have a line of sight to the adjacent single-family yards.
Recessed or Juliette balconies may be allowed if there is no line of sight into the
yards. Protruding balconies may be allowed if there is a visual buffer blocking
view into the yards, or if there is no line of sight into the yards.

Ms. Sepic asked if the closure of Hearn Road was also a stipulation.

Ms. Hall responded that the KCA will support it, but they cannot really do anything
about it.

Ms. Petersen believed it was important to add it as a stipulation.

Chair Gubser asked Mr. Popovic if he would like to add that into his motion. Mr.
Popovic responded that he is fine with that but would like to defer to the attorney and
Mr. Morris once the stipulations are clarified. Mr. Popovic added that the Committee
could add a lot of stipulations but ultimately some may be stricken.

Chair Gubser asked Mr. Morris to respond to the recommended stipulations.

Mr. Morris stated that the applicant is in support of the majority of the recommended
stipulations. Mr. Morris added that he believes the language of the balcony stipulation
captures what they intended, which was to have no balconies on the west side unless
they can show that there are no views into the neighborhood.

Mr. Wise stated that the exhibit the applicant shared shows a sightline from a person
standing on the edge of the residential area looking up at the building with the trees
planted along 71st Street entirely bocking the view. Mr. Wise stated for that reason, it
does not really make a difference whether there is a reduction in 10 feet in height since
no one would see it.

MOTION:

Mr. Popovic amended the motion to recommend approval of Z-40-22-2, per the staff
recommendation, with a modification to Stipulation No. 2 and additional stipulations as
discussed. Mr. Sparks seconded the motion.
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 453
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

VOTE:

13-3; motion to recommend approval of Z-40-22-2, per the staff recommendation with a
modification to Stipulation No. 2 and additional stipulations as discussed, passes with
Committee members Bowman, DiMassa, Goodhue, Hall, Maggiore, Mortensen,
Popovic, Schmidt, Sepic, Soronson, Sparks, Wise and Gubser in favor and Committee
members Balderrama, DeMoss, and Petersen opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION & STIPULATIONS:

VPC recommended stipulations:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Scottsdale Towne Square PUD reflecting
the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and
Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request.
The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development
Narrative date stamped November 18, 2022, as modified by the following
stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add the
following: Hearing draft submittal: November 18, 2022; City Council adopted:
[Add adoption date].

b. Pages 14-15, Sidewalk Standards, Internal Walkways: Remove the single
asterisk next to the 5’ minimum width internal walkway standard. Add a triple
asterisk next to the sidewalk standard for internal walkways. Add a new
footnote for a triple asterisk that 5’ minimum width internal walkways shall be
clear of all obstacles.

c. Page 15, General Landscape Requirements: Remove bullet point (b.) for
landscape irrigation, which is repeated in bullet point (d.), and re-letter
accordingly.

d. Pages 16-17, Landscape Standards Table:

(1) Streetscape: Revise titles of streetscape standards to “Streetscape –
Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to Scottsdale
Road, Including Detached Sidewalk Landscape Strip” and “Streetscape
– Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to 71st Street
Where Pocket Park Option Is Not Utilized”.

(2) Add language “at maturity” after each live vegetative ground coverage
standard.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 454
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

(3) Add a new row for a landscape standard for the bus stop pad on
southbound Scottsdale Road, below the “Adjacent to Buildings” row, as
follows: “Bus Stop Pad Landscaping – a) Minimum 3-inch caliper shade
trees to provide minimum shade per Section D.6. at maturity; b)
Minimum 75% live vegetative ground coverage at maturity”

e. Page 20, Shade: Add a shade standard for the bus stop pad: “A minimum of
50% of the bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road shall be shaded at
tree maturity”

f. Page 24, iv. Design for Cost-Effectiveness: Modify the language to a
development/developer requirement that is not confused as a directive to the
Street Transportation Department.

G. PAGE 14, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
TABLE, NOISE REDUCTION: ADD LANGUAGE THAT STATES, “NOISE
GENERATED ON THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DECIBELS AT THE
WEST PROPERTY LINE AND SHALL BE VERIFIED BY TESTING, PRIOR
TO ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, AS APPROVED
BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.”

H. PAGE 15, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
TABLE, GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: ADD A PROVISION
TO REQUIRE LOW-WATER-USE TREE SPECIES WITH A DENSE
FOLIAGE ALONG THE WEST PERIMETER OF THE SITE TO PROVIDE AN
ADEQUATE VISUAL BUFFER FOR ADJACENT RESIDENCES.

I. PAGE 16, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
TABLE: MODIFY THE LANGUAGE FOR LANDSCAPING ALONG
SCOTTSDALE ROAD, 71ST STREET, AND THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE
TO REQUIRE MINIMUM 3-INCH CALIPER TREES PLANTED 20 FEET ON
CENTER.

J. PAGE 18, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, FENCES / WALLS: ADD
LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE A 6-FOOT-HIGH SOLID DECORATIVE FENCE
BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG 71ST STREET.

K. PAGE 20, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AMENITIES: ADD THE
FOLLOWING LANGUAGE AFTER THE COMMERCIAL AMENITIES
SECTION:

4) PUBLIC ART: A PUBLIC ART INSTALLATION SHALL BE INSTALLED
EITHER ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD OR IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA
BETWEEN THE TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS.

L. PAGE 25, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SIGNS: ADD LANGUAGE TO
REQUIRE SIGNS ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BE NON-
LIGHTED SIGNS.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 455
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

M. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.0, PAGE 2, FORM AND SCALE, BUILDING
MASSING (PDF PAGE 57): ADD LANGUAGE TO RESTRICT UPPER-
LEVEL BALCONIES WHERE THERE IS NO VISUAL BUFFER BLOCKING
A LINE OF SIGHT FROM A BALCONY LOOKING WEST INTO ADJACENT
SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS. BALCONIES MAY EITHER BE RECESSED OR
JULIETTTE BALCONIES WHERE THERE IS NO LINE OF SIGHT INTO THE
YARDS. PROTRUDING BALCONIES MAY BE ALLOWED EITHER WHERE
THERE IS A VISUAL BUFFER BLOCKING THE LINE OF SIGHT FROM
THE BALCONY LOOKING WEST INTO SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS OR
WHEREVER THERE ARE NO LINES OF SIGHT LOOKING WEST INTO
ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS.

N. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.4, PAGE 8, GLASS (PDF PAGE 63): ADD
LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE GLASS ON ALL WINDOWS BE A MINIMUM OF
85% NON-REFLECTIVE GLASS.

2. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study/Statement AND A MOBILITY
STUDY FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYLIST CONNECTIVITY to the City for this
development. The developer shall be responsible for cost and construction of all
mitigation identified through the analysis. No preliminary approval of plans shall be
granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the Street Transportation
Department.

3. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping,
and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development
Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

4. The developer shall build a bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road. The pad
shall be designed according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a depth of
10 feet.

5. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence and
operational characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be according
to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved
by the City Attorney.

6. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan approval
that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the development
received a No Hazard Determination from the FAA. If temporary equipment used
during construction exceeds the height of the permanent structure a separate Form
7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA and a “No Hazard Determination” obtained
prior to the construction start date.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 456
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

7. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials.

8. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning application
file for record.

9. THERE SHALL BE NO PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ALONG 71ST STREET.

10. NO PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG 71ST STREET ADJACENT
TO THE SITE.

11. THE EXISTING GATE FROM HEARN ROAD SHALL BE REMOVED AND
ACCESS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY CLOSED OFF.

Staff recommends that the language for Stipulation No. 1.G. be modified to standard
language used for noise mitigation stipulations.

Staff recommends that Stipulation Nos. 1.I. and 1.J. be modified for clarity.

Staff recommends that Stipulation No. 1.K. be modified to reference artwork in general
and not refer to “public art”. Public art is required to go through a separate process
through the City’s Public Art Program. Staff also recommends including more specific
requirements for the required artwork, such as minimum dimension requirements, a
minimum number of artwork pieces to provide, and a list of types of artwork to select
from that would meet the requirement.

Staff recommends the deletion of the additional language regarding a mobility study for
Stipulation No. 2. A single development cannot provide such a study for an entire area.
Additionally, a typical mobility study would have included a Long Range Planning
combined effort between the Planning and Development Department and Street
Transportation Department, which has not occurred in this area. Staff recommends an
alternative stipulation separate from the Traffic Impact Study stipulation that addresses
the intent of the recommended stipulation.

Staff recommends the deletion of Stipulation No. 9 regarding removal of pedestrian
access to 71st Street. This stipulation conflicts with several City policies and design
guidelines that promote and require pedestrian and accessibility enhancements to new
development.

Staff recommends that Stipulation No. 10 be modified to require that the developer
apply for an on-street parking zone to prohibit on-street parking along 71st Street
adjacent to the subject site.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 457
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
December 5, 2022

Staff recommends the deletion of Stipulation No. 11 regarding removal of the existing
gate on Hearn Road and permanent closure of Hearn Road to 71st Street. This
stipulation conflicts with stipulations attached to the abandonment of Hearn Road
regarding general conformance to the abandonment exhibit, maintaining vehicular
access, and access control gates exclusively accessible by single-family residents.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Page 458
ATTACHMENT E

To: City of Phoenix Planning Commission Date: January 5, 2023

From: Racelle Escolar, AICP
Principal Planner

Subject: ITEM NO. 10 (Z-40-22-2) – APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET NORTH OF THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SCOTTSDALE ROAD AND THUNDERBIRD ROAD

The purpose of this is memo is to recommend modifications to the stipulations added by
the Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee (VPC), modify a stipulation recommended
by staff regarding landscape setback planting standards, and to relay additional
correspondence received since the Staff Report.

Rezoning Case No. Z-40-22-2 is a request to rezone 8.54 acres from C-2 (Intermediate
Commercial) (1.06 acres), C-2 SP (Intermediate Commercial, Special Permit) (0.06
acres), and PSC (Planned Shopping Center) (7.42 acres) to PUD (Planned Unit
Development) to allow multifamily residential and commercial uses.

The Paradise Valley VPC heard this request on December 5, 2022, and recommended
approval, per the staff recommendation with a modification and additional stipulations,
by a 13-3 vote. The VPC recommended a modification of Stipulation No. 2 to include a
mobility study and added 11 new stipulations, in addition to the staff recommended
stipulations included in the Staff Report.

Staff recommends the following:

 Modification of Stipulation 1.d. to clarify the landscape setback along 71st Street.
 Modification of Stipulation No. 1.G. to match standard language used in the Zoning
Ordinance for noise level standards.
 Modifications of Stipulation Nos. 1.I. and 1.J. for clarity.
 Modification of Stipulation No. 1.K. to reference artwork in general and not refer to
“public art”. Public art is required to go through a separate process through the
City’s Public Art Program. Staff also recommends including more specific
requirements for the required artwork.
 Deletion of the additional language regarding a mobility study for Stipulation No. 2,
per the Street Transportation Department, as a single development cannot provide
such a study for an entire area.
 Addition of Stipulation No. 3 to address the intent of the VPC recommended
stipulation regarding a mobility study and renumbering accordingly.
 Deletion of Stipulation No. 9 regarding removal of pedestrian access from 71st
Street. This stipulation conflicts with several City policies and design guidelines that

Page 459
Z-40-22-2 Planning Commission Backup Memo
January 5, 2023

promote and require pedestrian and accessibility enhancements to new
development.
 Modification of Stipulation No. 10 to require that the developer apply for an on-
street parking zone to prohibit on-street parking along 71st Street adjacent to the
subject site.
 Deletion of Stipulation No. 11 due to conflicts with stipulations associated with the
abandonment of Hearn Road.

Staff recommends approval, subject to the stipulations below:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Scottsdale Towne Square PUD
reflecting the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the
Planning and Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of
this request. The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the
Development Narrative date stamped November 18, 2022, as modified by the
following stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add the
following: Hearing draft submittal: November 18, 2022; City Council
adopted: [Add adoption date].

b. Pages 14-15, Sidewalk Standards, Internal Walkways: Remove the single
asterisk next to the 5’ minimum width internal walkway standard. Add a
triple asterisk next to the sidewalk standard for internal walkways. Add a
new footnote for a triple asterisk that 5’ minimum width internal walkways
shall be clear of all obstacles.

c. Page 15, General Landscape Requirements: Remove bullet point (b.) for
landscape irrigation, which is repeated in bullet point (d.), and re-letter
accordingly.

d. Pages 16-17, Landscape Standards Table:

(1) Streetscape: Revise titles of streetscape standards to “Streetscape
– Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to
Scottsdale Road, Including Detached Sidewalk Landscape Strip”,
and “Streetscape – Landscape SETBACK Areas Within Public
Right-of-Way Adjacent to 71st Street Where Pocket Park Option Is
Not Utilized”, AND “LANDSCAPE SETBACK ADJACENT TO
71ST STREET – POCKET PARK OPTION”.

(2) Add language “at maturity” after each live vegetative ground
coverage standard.

Page 460
Z-40-22-2 Planning Commission Backup Memo
January 5, 2023

(3) Add a new row for a landscape standard for the bus stop pad on
southbound Scottsdale Road, below the “Adjacent to Buildings” row,
as follows: “Bus Stop Pad Landscaping – a) Minimum 3-inch caliper
shade trees to provide minimum shade per Section D.6. at maturity;
b) Minimum 75% live vegetative ground coverage at maturity”

e. Page 20, Shade: Add a shade standard for the bus stop pad: “A minimum
of 50% of the bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road shall be
shaded at tree maturity”

f. Page 24, iv. Design for Cost-Effectiveness: Modify the language to a
development/developer requirement that is not confused as a directive to
the Street Transportation Department.

G. PAGE 14, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS TABLE, NOISE REDUCTION: ADD LANGUAGE THAT
STATES, “NOISE GENERATED ON THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEED 50
DECIBELS AT THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND SHALL BE VERIFIED
BY TESTING, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.” “THE AVERAGE NOISE LEVEL,
MEASURED AT THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, SHALL NOT EXCEED 55
DB (ONE LDN) WHEN MEASURED ON AN "A WEIGHTED" SOUND
LEVEL METER AND ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURES OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.”

H. PAGE 15, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
TABLE, GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: ADD A
PROVISION TO REQUIRE LOW-WATER-USE TREE SPECIES WITH A
DENSE FOLIAGE ALONG THE WEST PERIMETER OF THE SITE TO
PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE VISUAL BUFFER FOR ADJACENT
RESIDENCES.

I. PAGE 16, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
TABLE: MODIFY THE LANGUAGE FOR LANDSCAPING ALONG
SCOTTSDALE ROAD, 71ST STREET, AND THE NORTH PROPERTY
LINE TO REQUIRE MINIMUM 3-INCH CALIPER TREES PLANTED 20
FEET ON CENTER OR IN EQUIVALENT GROUPINGS.

J. PAGE 18, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, FENCES / WALLS: ADD
LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE A 6-FOOT-HIGH SOLID DECORATIVE
FENCE BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG 71ST STREET AT OR BEHIND
THE BUILDING SETBACK LINE.

Page 461
Z-40-22-2 Planning Commission Backup Memo
January 5, 2023

K. PAGE 20, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AMENITIES: ADD THE
FOLLOWING LANGUAGE AFTER THE COMMERCIAL AMENITIES
SECTION:

4) PUBLIC ART: A PUBLIC ART INSTALLATION SHALL BE
INSTALLED EITHER ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD OR IN THE OPEN
SPACE AREA BETWEEN THE TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS.

A MINIMUM OF TWO ART INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE INSTALLED
EITHER ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD OR IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA
BETWEEN THE TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS. THE ART SHALL BE
A MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET IN LENGTH IN ANY ONE DIRECTION
(HEIGHT, WIDTH, OR DEPTH).

L. PAGE 25, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SIGNS: ADD LANGUAGE TO
REQUIRE SIGNS ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BE
NON-LIGHTED SIGNS.

M. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.0, PAGE 2, FORM AND SCALE, BUILDING
MASSING (PDF PAGE 57): ADD LANGUAGE TO RESTRICT UPPER-
LEVEL BALCONIES WHERE THERE IS NO VISUAL BUFFER
BLOCKING A LINE OF SIGHT FROM A BALCONY LOOKING WEST
INTO ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS. BALCONIES MAY EITHER
BE RECESSED OR JULIETTTE BALCONIES WHERE THERE IS NO
LINE OF SIGHT INTO THE YARDS. PROTRUDING BALCONIES MAY BE
ALLOWED EITHER WHERE THERE IS A VISUAL BUFFER BLOCKING
THE LINE OF SIGHT FROM THE BALCONY LOOKING WEST INTO
SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS OR WHEREVER THERE ARE NO LINES OF
SIGHT LOOKING WEST INTO ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS.

N. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.4, PAGE 8, GLASS (PDF PAGE 63): ADD
LANGUAGE TO REQUIRE GLASS ON ALL WINDOWS BE A MINIMUM
OF 85% NON-REFLECTIVE GLASS.

2. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study/Statement AND A MOBILITY
STUDY FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYLIST CONNECTIVITY to the City for this
development. The developer shall be responsible for cost and construction of all
mitigation identified through the analysis. No preliminary approval of plans shall
be granted until the study is reviewed and approved by the Street Transportation
Department.

3. THE DEVELOPER SHALL SUBMIT A CIRCULATION PLAN ADDRESSING
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST CONNECTIVITY AND SAFETY WITHIN THE
DEVELOPMENT, TO NEARBY PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO ACTIVITY CENTERS, AS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
Page 462
Z-40-22-2 Planning Commission Backup Memo
January 5, 2023

3. 4. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development
with paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands,
landscaping, and other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and
Development Department. All improvements shall comply with all ADA
accessibility standards.

4. 5. The developer shall build a bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road. The
pad shall be designed according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a
depth of 10 feet.

5. 6. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence and
operational characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) to future owners
or tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney.

6. 7. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan
approval that Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the
development received a No Hazard Determination from the FAA. If temporary
equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the permanent
structure a separate Form 7460-1 shall be submitted to the FAA and a “No
Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

7. 8. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the
developer shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot
radius of the discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the
Archeology Office to properly assess the materials.

8. 9. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition
207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record.

9. THERE SHALL BE NO PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO 71ST STREET.

10. NO PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE
PLAN APPROVAL, THE DEVELOPER SHALL APPLY FOR THE ON-STREET
PARKING ZONES PROGRAM IN ORDER TO INSTALL NO PARKING SIGNS
ALONG 71ST STREET ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

11. THE EXISTING GATE FROM HEARN ROAD SHALL BE REMOVED AND
ACCESS SHALL BE CLOSED OFF.

Enclosure:
Correspondence (3 pages)

Page 463
From: Amy Satterfield2
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 12:33 PM
To: PDD Planning Commission
Subject: Scottsdale Town Center Z-40-22, Agenda Item number 10

Importance: High

To the Phoenix Planning Commission:

On behalf of the Kierland Community Alliance (KCA), we are reaching out to express concern over the maximum height
of the Scottsdale Towne Square Development Z‐40‐22 at Scottsdale and Thunderbird Roads being presented to the
Planning Commission on January 5, 2023.

HISTORY:
In 2020/21, the KCA worked directly with the developers of Kierland Sky Z‐14‐20 (also within the KCA boundaries) to
reach a precedent for maximum height and height step backs near single‐family residential homes. Attached is the City
of Phoenix Recorded Ordinance (Exhibit 1 and attached image) for this development clearly stating that the project is
restricted to a height of no more than “56 ft, and no closer than a minimum of approximately 560 ft away from the
closest existing single‐family residence". This is an important precedent which should be observed to protect single
family residences from encroachments by building overly high multifamily projects adjacent to them.

CURRENT SITUATION:
Scottsdale Towne Square is adjacent on its western border to single‐family homes and the entire width (east to west
borders) of the subject property is 559.9ft (see Exhibit 2 and attached image). As such, this entire parcel is within the
560 ft distance for the 56 ft maximum height restriction precedent established by Kierland Sky.

While the Scottsdale Towne Square development team have made adjustments to their original plan by including height
step backs closest to the single‐family residences, they have refrained from reducing the overall maximum height of the
property in keeping with this precedent.

We do not support the developer using the PUD process to maximize their profit while ignoring the community interests
and ultimately disrupting the privacy of single family home owners who purchased homes based on existing and
published zoning rules years ago and who have faithful been paying their taxes since then. This type of development is
not reasonable or foreseeable for those home owners and as such, this height is not acceptable.

CONSIDERATION:
We are therefore asking for your support in a reduction of maximum height for the Scottsdale Towne Square project
from 68 ft to no more than 56 ft within 560 ft of single‐family residences in keeping with the already established
precedent.

This is a small, but important ask which we recommend the City support to protect this community, and the other
communities who will find the proposed Towne Square height precedent used against them to their detriment by future
developers.

Thank you,

Amy Satterfield

Page 464
Chairperson
Kierland Community Alliance

Exhibit 1: Z‐14‐20 Kierland Sky Recorded Ordinance ‐ See Section 1E image below [drive.google.com]
Exhibit 2: Z‐40‐22 ‐ Towne Square ‐ Applicant Narrative ‐ See TabD for full width of project & distance from SFR
[drive.google.com]

Exhibit 1 Image: Z‐14‐20 Kierland Sky Recorded Ordinance section 1E

Exhibit 2 Image: Z‐40‐22 Scottsdale Towne Square Applicant Narrative Tab D

Page 465

Page 466
ATTACHMENT F

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
January 5, 2023

ITEM NO: 10
DISTRICT NO.: 2
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-40-22-2 (Scottsdale Town Square Thunderbird Phase PUD)
Location: Approximately 800 feet north of the northwest corner of Scottsdale Road
and Thunderbird Road
From: C-2, C-2 SP, and PSC
To: PUD
Acreage: 8.54
Proposal: Planned Unit Development to allow multifamily residential and commercial
uses.
Applicant: George Pasquel III
Owner: Scottsdale Towne Square, LLC
Representative: George Pasquel III

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Paradise Valley 8/1/2022 Information only.
Paradise Valley 12/5/2022 Approval, per the staff recommendation with a modification and
additional stipulations. Vote: 13-3.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the staff memo dated January 5, 2023,
with a modification.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Busching made a MOTION to approve Z-40-22-2, per the staff
memo dated January 5, 2023, with a modification to Stipulation No. 1 to replace “solid
decorative fence” with “full view fence”.

Maker: Busching
Second: Perez
Vote: 8-0
Absent: Mangum
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map
designation and compatible with the existing land use pattern in the surrounding area.

2. The proposed development will provide new mixed-use development with housing,
retail, and employment opportunities along an established commercial corridor, near
the Kierland commercial area.

Page 467
3. The proposed PUD sets forth design and development standards that will enhance
connectivity in the immediate vicinity by providing shaded detached sidewalks,
pedestrian-oriented design, and an enhanced interface with the adjacent
neighborhood.

Stipulations:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Scottsdale Towne Square PUD reflecting the
changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning and
Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request. The
updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the Development Narrative date
stamped November 18, 2022, as modified by the following stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add the
following: Hearing draft submittal: November 18, 2022; City Council adopted: [Add
adoption date].

b. Pages 14-15, Sidewalk Standards, Internal Walkways: Remove the single asterisk
next to the 5’ minimum width internal walkway standard. Add a triple asterisk next to
the sidewalk standard for internal walkways. Add a new footnote for a triple asterisk
that 5’ minimum width internal walkways shall be clear of all obstacles.

c. Page 15, General Landscape Requirements: Remove bullet point (b.) for landscape
irrigation, which is repeated in bullet point (d.), and re-letter accordingly.

d. Pages 16-17, Landscape Standards Table:

(1) Streetscape: Revise titles of streetscape standards to “Streetscape –
Landscape Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to Scottsdale Road,
Including Detached Sidewalk Landscape Strip”, and “Streetscape –
Landscape SETBACK Areas Within Public Right-of-Way Adjacent to 71st
Street Where Pocket Park Option Is Not Utilized”, AND “LANDSCAPE
SETBACK ADJACENT TO 71ST STREET – POCKET PARK OPTION”.

(2) Add language “at maturity” after each live vegetative ground coverage
standard.

(3) Add a new row for a landscape standard for the bus stop pad on southbound
Scottsdale Road, below the “Adjacent to Buildings” row, as follows: “Bus Stop
Pad Landscaping – a) Minimum 3-inch caliper shade trees to provide
minimum shade per Section D.6. at maturity; b) Minimum 75% live vegetative
ground coverage at maturity”

e. Page 20, Shade: Add a shade standard for the bus stop pad: “A minimum of 50% of
the bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road shall be shaded at tree maturity”

f. Page 24, iv. Design for Cost-Effectiveness: Modify the language to a
development/developer requirement that is not confused as a directive to the Street
Transportation Department.

Page 468
G. PAGE 14, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE,
NOISE REDUCTION: ADD LANGUAGE THAT STATES, “NOISE GENERATED ON
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DECIBELS AT THE WEST PROPERTY LINE
AND SHALL BE VERIFIED BY TESTING, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.” “THE AVERAGE NOISE LEVEL, MEASURED
AT THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, SHALL NOT EXCEED 55 DB (ONE LDN)
WHEN MEASURED ON AN "A WEIGHTED" SOUND LEVEL METER AND
ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY.”

H. PAGE 15, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS TABLE,
GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: ADD A PROVISION TO REQUIRE
LOW-WATER-USE TREE SPECIES WITH A DENSE FOLIAGE ALONG THE
WEST PERIMETER OF THE SITE TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE VISUAL
BUFFER FOR ADJACENT RESIDENCES.

I. PAGE 16, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LANDSCAPE STANDARDS TABLE:
MODIFY THE LANGUAGE FOR LANDSCAPING ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD,
71ST STREET, AND THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE TO REQUIRE MINIMUM 3-
INCH CALIPER TREES PLANTED 20 FEET ON CENTER OR IN EQUIVALENT
GROUPINGS.

J. PAGE 18, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, FENCES / WALLS: ADD LANGUAGE
TO REQUIRE A 6-FOOT-HIGH SOLID DECORATIVE FULL VIEW FENCE BE
CONSTRUCTED ALONG 71ST STREET AT OR BEHIND THE BUILDING
SETBACK LINE.

K. PAGE 20, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AMENITIES: ADD THE FOLLOWING
LANGUAGE AFTER THE COMMERCIAL AMENITIES SECTION:

4) PUBLIC ART: A PUBLIC ART INSTALLATION SHALL BE INSTALLED EITHER
ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD OR IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA BETWEEN THE
TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS.

A MINIMUM OF TWO ART INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE INSTALLED EITHER
ALONG SCOTTSDALE ROAD OR IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA BETWEEN THE
TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS. THE ART SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF FIVE
FEET IN LENGTH IN ANY ONE DIRECTION (HEIGHT, WIDTH, OR DEPTH).

L. PAGE 25, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SIGNS: ADD LANGUAGE TO
REQUIRE SIGNS ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BE NON-
LIGHTED SIGNS.

Page 469
M. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.0, PAGE 2, FORM AND SCALE, BUILDING MASSING
(PDF PAGE 57): ADD LANGUAGE TO RESTRICT UPPER-LEVEL BALCONIES
WHERE THERE IS NO VISUAL BUFFER BLOCKING A LINE OF SIGHT FROM A
BALCONY LOOKING WEST INTO ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS.
BALCONIES MAY EITHER BE RECESSED OR JULIETTTE BALCONIES WHERE
THERE IS NO LINE OF SIGHT INTO THE YARDS. PROTRUDING BALCONIES
MAY BE ALLOWED EITHER WHERE THERE IS A VISUAL BUFFER BLOCKING
THE LINE OF SIGHT FROM THE BALCONY LOOKING WEST INTO SINGLE-
FAMILY YARDS OR WHEREVER THERE ARE NO LINES OF SIGHT LOOKING
WEST INTO ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY YARDS.

N. TAB H, SCOTTSDALE TOWNE SQUARE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
GUIDELINES, SECTION 1.4, PAGE 8, GLASS (PDF PAGE 63): ADD LANGUAGE
TO REQUIRE GLASS ON ALL WINDOWS BE A MINIMUM OF 85% NON-
REFLECTIVE GLASS.

2. The applicant shall submit a Traffic Impact Study/Statement AND A MOBILITY STUDY
FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYLIST CONNECTIVITY to the City for this development.
The developer shall be responsible for cost and construction of all mitigation identified
through the analysis. No preliminary approval of plans shall be granted until the study is
reviewed and approved by the Street Transportation Department.

3. THE DEVELOPER SHALL SUBMIT A CIRCULATION PLAN ADDRESSING
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST CONNECTIVITY AND SAFETY WITHIN THE
DEVELOPMENT, TO NEARBY PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST INFRASTRUCTURE,
AND INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO ACTIVITY CENTERS, AS APPROVED BY THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

3. 4. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to the development with
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, streetlights, median islands, landscaping, and
other incidentals, as per plans approved by the Planning and Development Department.
All improvements shall comply with all ADA accessibility standards.

4. 5. The developer shall build a bus stop pad on southbound Scottsdale Road. The pad shall
be designed according to City of Phoenix Standard Detail P1260 with a depth of 10 feet.

5. 6. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence and operational
characteristics of Scottsdale Municipal Airport (SDL) to future owners or tenants of the
property. The form and content of such documents shall be according to the templates
and instructions provided which have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

6. 7. The developer shall provide documentation to the City prior to final site plan approval that
Form 7460-1 has been filed for the development and that the development received a No
Hazard Determination from the FAA. If temporary equipment used during construction
exceeds the height of the permanent structure a separate Form 7460-1 shall be submitted
to the FAA and a “No Hazard Determination” obtained prior to the construction start date.

7. 8. In the event archaeological materials are encountered during construction, the developer
shall immediately cease all ground-disturbing activities within a 33-foot radius of the
discovery, notify the City Archeologist, and allow time for the Archeology Office to properly
assess the materials.

Page 470
8. 9. Prior to preliminary site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County Recorder's
Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning application file for record.

9. THERE SHALL BE NO PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO 71ST STREET.

10. NO PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
APPROVAL, THE DEVELOPER SHALL APPLY FOR THE ON-STREET PARKING
ZONES PROGRAM IN ORDER TO INSTALL NO PARKING SIGNS ALONG 71ST
STREET ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

11. THE EXISTING GATE FROM HEARN ROAD SHALL BE REMOVED AND ACCESS
SHALL BE CLOSED OFF.

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 471
ATTACHMENT G

CITY OF PHOENIX
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

FORM TO REQUEST PC to CC
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE CC HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:

APPLICATION NO/ Z-40-22-2 (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION Approximately 800 opposition x applicant
feet north of the
northwest corner of
Scottsdale Road
and Thunderbird
Road

APPEALED FROM: PC 1/5/2023 6932 E. Hearn Road
Scottsdale, AZ 85254

PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC 2/1/2023 Amy Satterfield, Chair KCA
HEARING 602-478-1912
Satterfield4az@cox.net

CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

The Kierland Community Alliance is opposed to the height of 68 feet.

RECEIVED BY: Chase Hale RECEIVED ON: 1/12/2023

Alan Stephenson Gregory Harmon
Joshua Bednarek Paul M. Li
Tricia Gomes Village Planner
Racelle Escolar GIS
Stephanie Vasquez Applicant
Diana Hernandez Adam Stranieri (for PHO Appeals)
David Urbinato
Vikki Cipolla-Murillo

Page 472
Page 473

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.

View on Agenda Online ↗

Meeting phoenix-pdf-2023-02-01 complete

1. ¶ Summary

Item text

Supporting documents

2. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - WR Marksman Club, Inc.

Item text

Supporting documents

3. ¶ Liquor License - Duelies Bar & Grill

Item text

Supporting documents

4. ¶ Liquor License - Xtaz Imports

Item text

Supporting documents

5. ¶ Liquor License - Pizza Hut #40981

Item text

Supporting documents

6. ¶ Liquor License - Urban Chilli

Item text

Supporting documents

7. ¶ Liquor License - Bassh Inc.

Item text

Supporting documents

8. ¶ Liquor License - Oak on Camelback

Item text

Supporting documents

9. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Knights of Columbus Cathedral Council 12708

Item text

Supporting documents

10. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Kiwanis Club of Ahwatukee Foundation, Inc.

Item text

Supporting documents

11. ¶ Liquor License - Horse & Hyde

Item text

Supporting documents

12. ¶ Liquor License - Tocaya Modern Mexican

Item text

Supporting documents

13. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - ALEES

Item text

Supporting documents

14. ¶ Liquor License - SGL Wine & Spirits

Item text

Supporting documents

15. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Alwun House Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

16. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Alwun House Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

17. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Alwun House Foundation

Item text

Supporting documents

18. ¶ Liquor License - Special Event - Liberty Wildlife, Inc.

Item text

Supporting documents

19. ¶ Liquor License - ATL Wings

Item text

Supporting documents

20. ¶ Liquor License - Topaz Bar & Lounge

Item text

Supporting documents

27. ¶ Proposed Redistricting Schedule

Item text

Supporting documents

28. ¶ Appoint Election Officials and Boards for March 14, 2023 Runoff Election -

Item text

Supporting documents

29. ¶ Dedication of Right-of-Way for Roadway Purposes on City-Owned Property at

Item text

Supporting documents

30. ¶ Decontamination Services - IFB 18-058 - Amendment (Ordinance S-49392)

Item text

Supporting documents

31. ¶ PeopleSoft Application Development Services (Ordinance S-49390)

Item text

Supporting documents

32. ¶ Artists Purchase Agreements for Phoenix Sky Harbor Percent-for-Art Collections

Item text

Supporting documents

33. ¶ Artist Design and Construction Contract for Solano Park Public Art Project