← Back to meetings

Meeting phoenix-pdf-2025-12-03 complete

2025-12-03 · Formal Meeting

Items: 77

Formal Meeting

View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Swearing In of Municipal Court Judges

Request to permit the swearing in of Municipal Court Judges.

Summary
Administer the oath of office for the Honorable Brett Hutchison and Honorable
Christine Mulleneaux each to a four-year term as Judge of the Phoenix Municipal
Court to expire on November 19, 2029.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
On September 25, 2025, the Judicial Selection Advisory Board (JSAB) recommended
approval to the Public Safety and Justice Subcommittee.

On November 5, 2025, the Public Safety and Justice Subcommittee recommended
approval to the City Council by a vote of 4-0.

On November 19, 2025, the City Council approved appointment of Judge Hutchison
and Judge Mulleneaux by a vote of 9-0.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the City Council
Office.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Hopsology Taproom and Wine Bar - District 1

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 360416.

Summary

Applicant
Adam Vath, Agent

License Type
Series 3 - Microbrewery

Location
4925 W. Bell Road, Suite C-9
Zoning Classification: PSCOD
Council District: 1

This request is for a new liquor license for a microbrewery. This location is currently
licensed for liquor sales with a Series 7 - Beer and Wine Bar, liquor license.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 6, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the
State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations



on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Hopsology Taproom and Wine Bar (Series 7)
4925 W. Bell Road, Suite C-9, Glendale
Calls for police service: 13
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I currently hold a Series 7 liquor license maintaining an active liquor license
demonstrates my reliability and commitment to operating within legal and regulatory
frameworks. With 15 years of brewing experience, I have developed the technical
expertise and business acumen necessary to responsibly hold and manage a liquor
license.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Our small-batch brewery will serve as a community gathering space and educational
hub that enriches our local area in several meaningful ways: Community Education &
Engagement: These programs will provide hands-on learning opportunities with our
brewing classes. Charitable Commitment: The expansion of our brewery will allow us
to increase our charitable contributions with our current charity tap. As a small-batch
operation, we will contribute to the local economy while maintaining a personal,
community-focused approach.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Attachment A - Hopsology Taproom and Wine Bar - Data
Attachment B - Hopsology Taproom and Wine Bar - Map



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





Liquor License Data: HOPSOLOGY TAPROOM AND WINE
BAR
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 2 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 1

Liquor Store 9 3 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 3 1

Restaurant 12 21 7



Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 36.91 36.73

Violent Crimes 12.31 5.01 4.56

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 40 13

Total Violations 69 23




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1042142 990 310 26 265

1042251 1988 402 1 142

1042252 1012 346 32 21

1042253 805 272 12 65

6180001 2319 594 14 143

6181001 1908 536 20 61

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: HOPSOLOGY TAPROOM AND WINE BAR
4925 W BELL RD




Date: 11/18/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Serra Gaucha Happy Valley - District 1

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 362976.

Summary

Applicant
Nandino Beronja, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
2460 W. Happy Valley Road, Ste. 1169
Zoning Classification: PUD/PCD
Council District: 1

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit. This business
has plans to open in January 2026.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 14, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations on file with the AZ



Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within the boundaries of
Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the last 12 months for
the address listed.

Serra Gaucha Brazilian Steakhouse (Series 12)
16160 N. 83rd Avenue, Peoria
Calls for police service: N/A - not in Phoenix
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I currently hold a liquor license with our first location, Serra Gaucha Brazilian
Steakhouse for the past 9 years. It has given me invaluable insight on how to promote
and sell alcohol safely, through employee training, upholding company standards and
employee responsibility.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“I believe it will the local area a new concept to a steak-house dining experience, it
being a more 'dinner and show' with the gauchos slicing meats table side."

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Attachment A - Serra Gaucha Happy Valley - Data
Attachment B - Serra Gaucha Happy Valley - Map

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


Liquor License Data: SERRA GAUCHA HAPPY VALLEY
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Wholesaler 4 2 0

Bar 6 4 3

Beer and Wine Bar 7 10 6

Liquor Store 9 8 4

Beer and Wine Store 10 7 6

Hotel 11 3 0

Restaurant 12 41 37


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 58.99 162.63

Violent Crimes 12.31 3.26 7.11
*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 41 2

Total Violations 69 3


Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

6119001 1987 449 11 33

6123012 3501 661 276 286

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: SERRA GAUCHA HAPPY VALLEY
2460 W HAPPY VALLEY RD




Date: 11/21/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Special Event - St. Francis Xavier Roman Catholic Parish
Phoenix - District 4

Request for a Series 15 - Special Event liquor license for the temporary sale of all
liquors.

Summary

Applicant
Mark Vinci

Location
4715 N. Central Avenue
Council District: 4

Function
Dinner

Date(s) - Time(s) / Expected Attendance
February 14, 2026 - 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. / 130 attendees

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

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








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - 2Cango Restaurant - District 4

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 360507.

Summary

Applicant
Theresa Morse, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
4904 N. 19th Avenue
Zoning Classification: C-2 TOD-1
Council District: 4

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 6, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.




Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“The owner has two years experience in the liquor industry and no violations. The
owners will ensure the employees as well as the owners attend Arizona liquor law
training to prevent sales to obviously intoxicated patrons and prevent sales to
underage.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“The owners would like to add their unique restaurant to highlight food from their
country and support the community. Although they have not had their grand opening,
customers have come to the business and want to eat. They are asking if alcoholic
alcoholic beverages will also be served to complement their food. The owners bake
their own bread and other types of international cuisine.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Attachment A - 2Cango Restaurant - Data
Attachment B - 2Cango Restaurant - Map

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





Liquor License Data: 2CANGO RESTAURANT
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Wholesaler 4 1 0

Bar 6 5 3

Liquor Store 9 8 4

Beer and Wine Store 10 10 3

Hotel 11 1 0

Restaurant 12 9 3


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 323.46 315.92

Violent Crimes 12.31 82.74 99.36
*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 41 146

Total Violations 69 313




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1073002 1474 165 71 376

1073003 1581 76 29 244

1074021 1380 95 87 317

1074031 1441 173 36 913

1074032 899 195 110 45

1089021 1389 50 77 422

1089022 2020 344 30 553

1090021 1321 88 119 313

1090022 1779 47 64 421

1090023 806 238 4 241

1090032 2025 61 57 598

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: 2CANGO RESTAURANT
4904 N 19TH AVE




Date: 11/21/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - El Tio Meat Market - District 4

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 362314.

Summary

Applicant
Hamde Shiha, Agent

License Type
Series 10 - Beer and Wine Store

Location
2848 N. 43rd Avenue
Zoning Classification: C-1
Council District: 4

This request is for a new liquor license for a convenience store that does not sell gas.
This location was previously licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with
an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 6, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.






Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I am assured to uphold the laws and regulations about liquor license. I have never
been involved in any criminal activity, no record of getting in trouble with law and
authorities.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“This store will provide a safe and secure place for the neighborhood to buy alcohol.
The location will be convenient for the people in neighborhood who may not have
access to transportation. Adding the long time experience of the working in liqour store
while upholding all the laws and regulations, the store will be a safe, secure and
convenience place for the customers to purchase quality liquor.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Attachment A - El Tio Meat Market - Data
Attachment B - El Tio Meat Market - Map

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





Liquor License Data: EL TIO MEAT MARKET
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 4 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 1

Liquor Store 9 4 2

Beer and Wine Store 10 16 4

Restaurant 12 5 4


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 212.84 231.63

Violent Crimes 12.31 50.05 70.8

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 41 113

Total Violations 69 184




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1100012 2396 440 9 106

1101003 2856 362 7 499

1122011 1934 461 36 148

1122022 1573 317 10 110

1122023 1811 156 35 491

1123013 1965 399 6 60

1123023 1018 92 34 300

1123024 1449 0 134 473

1123025 1604 414 16 226

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: EL TIO MEAT MARKET
2848 N 43RD AVE




Date: 11/14/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Special Event - CASA Academy - District 5

Request for a Series 15 - Special Event liquor license for the temporary sale of all
liquors.

Summary

Applicant
Tacey Cundy

Location
8047 N. 35th Avenue
Council District: 5

Function
Annual School Event

Date(s) - Time(s) / Expected Attendance
February 20, 2026 - 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. / 250 attendees

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

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








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Mountain Mike's Pizza Phx - District 5

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 361148.

Summary

Applicant
Nicholas Cabatingan, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
1775 N. 99th Avenue, Ste. 100
Zoning Classification: PUD
Council District: 5

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was not
previously licensed for liquor sales and does not have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 15, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the
State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes liquor license violations



on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and, for locations within
the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for police service within the
last 12 months for the address listed.

Mountain Mike's Pizza (Series 12)
13736 W. Bell Road, Ste. 4, Surprise
Calls for police service: N/A - not in Phoenix
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“I have an opportuity to give back by providy jobs an community space. Our current
location in Surprise has had no violations and through charity provided over $10,000 in
funds to local 501(c)3 orgs.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“We will provide entrey level employment and skill building opportunities to Pheonix
youth. We also offer a wholsome place for familys to gather and celebrate an
occasion.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application noting the applicant must resolve any
pending City of Phoenix building and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with
the City of Phoenix Code and Ordinances.

Attachments
Attachment A - Mountain Mike's Pizza Phx - Data
Attachment B - Mountain Mike's Pizza Phx - Map

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


Liquor License Data: MOUNTAIN MIKE'S PIZZA PHX
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Beer and Wine Bar 7 1 1

Beer and Wine Store 10 1 1

Hotel 11 1 1

Restaurant 12 1 1


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 26.53 15.18

Violent Crimes 12.31 4.24 2.54

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 40 7

Total Violations 68 11




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

0820171 1887 192 18 229

0820172 0 0 0 0

0820173 3988 321 14 398

0820241 1305 279 32 111

0820242 3240 398 110 469

0820271 2208 260 99 274

0830002 2263 325 59 979

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: MOUNTAIN MIKE'S PIZZA PHX
1775 N 99TH AVE




Date: 10/22/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Fuzz Bot Brewing - District 6

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 364297.

Summary

Applicant
Jeffrey Miller, Agent

License Type
Series 7 - Beer and Wine Bar

Location
5030 E. Ray Road, Ste. J-5
Zoning Classification: C-2 PCD
Council District: 6

This request is for an ownership transfer of a liquor license for a beer and wine bar.
This location was previously licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with
an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 13, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.






Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
No protest or support letters were received within the 20-day public comment period.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Fuzz Bot brewery operates with a strong commitment to quality, compliance, and
community responsibility. They have established clear operational procedures that
ensure all aspects of production, service, and sales meet or exceed local and state
alcohol regulations. Their management team hold the necessary experience and
certifications related to alcohol service and safety, including staff training in responsible
beverage service and age verification practices.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Fuzz Bot Brewing is dedicated to enhancing the local economy, culture, and
community experience. They are more than a place to enjoy high-quality craft beer -
they are a gathering space that supports local agriculture, artisans, and events.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this application.

Attachments
Attachment A - Fuzz Bot Brewing - Data
Attachment B - Fuzz Bot Brewing - Map

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





Liquor License Data: FUZZ BOT BREWING
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Bar 6 4 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 8 4

Liquor Store 9 10 3

Beer and Wine Store 10 8 4

Hotel 11 2 1

Restaurant 12 39 20


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 74.52 187.26

Violent Crimes 12.31 7.69 15.39
*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 41 3

Total Violations 69 6




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1167171 2051 41 73 259

1167172 1387 296 20 76

1167181 1460 206 40 150

1167182 1174 257 50 188

1167192 1416 0 74 89

1167193 2092 331 14 70

8100001 3359 762 65 340

8104002 1072 257 54 286

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: FUZZ BOT BREWING
5030 E RAY RD




Date: 11/21/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Dilla Libre Tres Phoenix - District 7

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 364108.

Summary

Applicant
Andrea Lewkowitz, Agent

License Type
Series 12 - Restaurant

Location
521 W. McDowell Road
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 7

This request is for a new liquor license for a restaurant. This location was previously
licensed for liquor sales and may currently operate with an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 9, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.

Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
The ownership of this business has an interest in other active liquor license(s) in the
State of Arizona. This information is listed below and includes information about any



liquor license violations on file with the AZ Department of Liquor Licenses and Control
and, for locations within the boundaries of Phoenix, the number of aggregate calls for
police service within the last 12 months for the address listed.

Dilla Libre Uno Phoenix (Series 12)
1339 E. Northern Avenue, Phoenix
Calls for police service: 1
Liquor license violations: None

Dilla Libre Dos Scottsdale (Series 12)
8018 E. Thomas Road, Ste. 1, Phoenix
Calls for police service: None
Liquor license violations: None

Public Opinion
Two valid letters protesting the issuance of this license were received and are on file in
the Office of the City Clerk. The letters are from local residents who would like the
applicant to comply with stipulations outlined in a good faith agreement submitted with
the protest letters.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Applicant is committed to upholding the highest standards for business and
maintaining compliance with applicable laws. Managers and staff will be trained in the
techniques of legal and responsible alcohol sales and service.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“Opening it's third location in Arizona, Dilla Libre Tres Phoenix serves award-winning,
high-quality, authentic Mexican cuisine. Applicant would like to continue the tradition of
offering delicious, innovative dishes and would like to offer guests 21 and over the
opportunity to order alcoholic beverages with the meals served.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff gave careful consideration to the protest letters received, however after reviewing
the application in its entirety, staff recommends approval of this application as
submitted pursuant to Title 4 of Arizona Revised Statutes.



Attachments
Attachment A - Dilla Libre Tres Phoenix - Data
Attachment B - Dilla Libre Tres Phoenix - Map

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





Liquor License Data: DILLA LIBRE TRES PHOENIX
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Microbrewery 3 4 1

Wholesaler 4 2 0

Government 5 5 1

Bar 6 19 1

Beer and Wine Bar 7 6 2

Liquor Store 9 2 0

Beer and Wine Store 10 11 3

Restaurant 12 60 10

Club 14 2 0


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 189.72 151.8

Violent Crimes 12.31 38.05 20.48

*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 40 42

Total Violations 68 54




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1118002 846 361 100 89

1118004 1423 507 117 200

1119002 642 264 45 17

1129001 1399 521 53 62

1129002 671 102 83 94

1130001 2898 331 199 515

1130002 1364 179 221 139

1131001 1929 146 155 743

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: DILLA LIBRE TRES PHOENIX
521 W MCDOWELL RD




Date: 10/17/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Liquor License - Hatcher Beer and Smoke Shop LLC - District 3

Request for a liquor license. Arizona State License Application 361690.

Summary

Applicant
Rebhi Awawdah, Agent

License Type
Series 10 - Beer and Wine Store

Location
9501 N. 7th Street
Zoning Classification: C-2
Council District: 3

This request is for a new liquor license for a tobacco shop. This location was
previously licensed for liquor sales with a Series 6 - Bar liquor license and does not
have an interim permit.

The 60-day limit for processing this application is December 6, 2025.

Pursuant to A.R.S. 4-203, a spirituous liquor license shall be issued only after
satisfactory showing of the capability, qualifications and reliability of the applicant and
that the public convenience and the best interest of the community will be substantially
served by the issuance. If an application is filed for the issuance of a license for a
location, that on the date the application is filed has a valid license of the same series
issued at that location, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the public
convenience and best interest of the community at that location was established at the
time the location was previously licensed. The presumption shall not apply once the
licensed location has not been in use for more than 180 days.






Other Active Liquor License Interest in Arizona
This applicant does not hold an interest in any other active liquor license in the State of
Arizona.

Public Opinion
One letter protesting the issuance of this license has been received and is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk. The letter is from the PHX Luv Neighborhood Association.
They are concerned about the existing number of beer and wine store and liquor store
licenses in the area, and feel that adding this new license does not meet the need and
convenience of the neighborhood. They believe that adding a new beer and wine store
license with a smoke shop does not align with the neighborhoods current efforts to
improve the community. They are also concerned that the issuance of this new license
will have a negative effect on their ongoing efforts to reduce crime and blight in their
community.

Applicant’s Statement
The applicant submitted the following statement in support of this application. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation in the statement are shown exactly as written by the
applicant on the City Questionnaire.

I have the capability, reliability and qualifications to hold a liquor license because:
“Growing my store trying to serve the community.”

The public convenience requires and the best interest of the community will be
substantially served by the issuance of the liquor license because:
“More convenience for our community.”

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends disapproval of this application based on the neighborhood protest.
Staff also notes that the applicant must resolve any pending City of Phoenix building
and zoning requirements, and be in compliance with the City of Phoenix Code and
Ordinances.

Attachments
Attachment A - Hatcher Beer and Smoke Shop LLC - Data
Attachment B - Hatcher Beer and Smoke Shop LLC - Map

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


Liquor License Data: HATCHER BEER AND SMOKE SHOP
LLC
Liquor License

Description Series 1 Mile 1/2 Mile

Microbrewery 3 1 1

Bar 6 3 0

Beer and Wine Bar 7 2 1

Liquor Store 9 4 3

Beer and Wine Store 10 10 4

Restaurant 12 10 4

Club 14 2 1


Crime Data

Description Average * 1 Mile Average ** 1/2 Mile Average***

Property Crimes 64.2 141.08 225.69

Violent Crimes 12.31 29.9 55.73
*Citywide average per square mile **Average per square mile within 1 mile radius ***Average per square mile within ½ mile radius



Property Violation Data

Description Average 1/2 Mile Average

Parcels w/Violations 40 117

Total Violations 69 184




Census 2020 Data 1/2 Mile Radius

BlockGroup 2020 Population Owner Occupied Residential Vacancy Persons in Poverty

1046001 2192 383 93 320

1046002 1075 138 91 338

1047011 1145 53 41 385

1047012 972 374 84 103

1047013 610 316 124 151

1047021 780 85 27 150

1047022 626 136 66 266

1047023 1801 298 77 294

1052003 1287 246 57 20

1053002 2247 273 65 285

Average 1601 393 60 177




Liquor License Map: HATCHER BEER AND SMOKE SHOP LLC
9501 N 7TH ST




Date: 11/3/2025




Ü
0 0.170.35 0.7 1.05 1.4
mi

City Clerk Department



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
City of Glendale

For $33,000 in payment authority for outstanding services owed for base charges
during the current Fiscal Year 2025-26 for Intergovernmental Agreement 123273 to
provide water and treatment services to the Camelback Ranch area located within the
boundaries of the City of Phoenix, but outside the City's water distribution system, for
the Water Services Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
State of Arizona, Office of the Auditor General

For $75,000 in payment authority to reimburse the State of Arizona Auditor General for
the annual Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Phoenix Convention Center
(PCC). The analysis is required under Arizona Revised Statutes 9-626 to measure the
effects of direct, indirect, and induced economic activity of the PCC expansion project
and to meet obligations to qualify for the State's payment for its debt service. The
Auditor General contracts an auditing firm to perform the annual study. The payment is
for work to be completed in 2025 and 2026.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Settlement of Claim(s) Gomez v. City of Phoenix

To make payment of up to $50,000 in settlement of claim(s) in Gomez v. City of
Phoenix, CV2023-052565, 22-0392-002, AU, BI, for the Finance Department pursuant
to Phoenix City Code Chapter 42. This is a settlement of a claim involving the Public
Works Department on July 5, 2022.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Settlement of Claim(s) Rojas v. City of Phoenix

To make payment of up to $50,000, in settlement of claim(s) in Rojas v. City of
Phoenix, CV2024-002078, 23-0377-001, AU, BI, for the Finance Department pursuant
to Phoenix City Code Chapter 42. This is a settlement of a claim involving the Police
Department on May 14, 2023.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code Chapter 12, Article VII, Division 2 to Add Section 12-1504
Relating to Campaign Finance Reporting Requirements (Ordinance G-7460) -
Citywide

Request to modify Phoenix City Code Chapter 12, Article VII, Division 2 to add new
Section 12-1504, that outlines the campaign finance reporting requirements for
Political Action Committees and Candidate Committees as required by State law,
noting that the new reporting requirements apply to the City's election year, which is
defined as the 12-month period beginning on April 1 through the following March 31.

Summary
SB1581, which was passed by the Arizona Legislature and enacted into law on May 2,
2025, changed the campaign finance reporting requirements for political action
committees and candidate committees. The changes for candidate committees
assume all jurisdictions hold their primary (1st) and general (2nd) elections in the same
calendar year. However, the City of Phoenix 1st (primary) election is held in November
of even-numbered years and the 2nd (general) election is held in March of odd-
numbered years. Therefore, the changes made by SB1581 for candidate committees
do not work for City of Phoenix elections. To remedy this issue, and to comply with the
legislature’s intent, staff recommends amending the Phoenix City Code (Attachment
A) to add the changes made by SB1581, but applying them to the City’s election year
which begins on April 1 and ends on March 31, instead of a regular calendar year
(January-December).

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City.

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





ATTACHMENT A

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



ORDINANCE G-XXXX

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12, ARTICLE VII,
DIVISION 2 OF THE PHOENIX CITY CODE BY ADDING
SECTION 12-1504 RELATING TO CAMPAIGN FINANCE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR POLITICAL ACTION
COMMITTEES AND CANDIDATE COMMITTEES.

_______________



BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX, as
follows:
SECTION 1. That the Arizona State Legislature passed and the Governor

signed and enacted into law on May 2, 2025, Senate Bill 1581 amending Section 16-

927 of the Arizona Revised Statutes relating to campaign finance contributions and

expenses. The changes to the campaign finance reporting requirements mandated by

Senate Bill 1581 assume all jurisdictions hold their primary and general election in the

same calendar year. The City of Phoenix does not. To address this issue and remain

compliant with the legislative intent of Senate Bill 1581, Chapter 12, Article VII, Division

2 of the Phoenix City Code is hereby amended to add Section 12-1504 to read as

follows:

DIVISION 2. CAMPAIGN FINANCE

12-1504. CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTING PERIOD.

A. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION, AN ELECTION YEAR
SHALL BE DEFINED AS THE 12-MONTH PERIOD BEGINNING ON APRIL 1



THROUGH THE FOLLOWING MARCH 31.

B. A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE SHALL FILE A CAMPAIGN
FINANCE REPORT IN EACH ELECTION YEAR COVERING EACH REPORTING
PERIOD AS FOLLOWS:

1. FOR A CALENDAR QUARTER WITHOUT AN ELECTION, THE
POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE SHALL FILE A QUARTERLY REPORT. THE
QUARTERLY REPORT SHALL BE:

(A) FILED NOT LATER THAN THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF THE
MONTH AFTER THE CALENDAR QUARTER.

(B) COMPLETE THROUGH THE LAST DAY OF THE
CALENDAR QUARTER.

2. FOR A CALENDAR QUARTER WITH AN ELECTION, THE
POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE SHALL FILE A PREELECTION AND
POSTELECTION REPORT AS FOLLOWS:

(A) A PREELECTION REPORT SHALL BE:

(i) FILED NOT LATER THAN FIFTEEN DAYS BEFORE
THE ELECTION.

(ii) COMPLETE FROM THE FIRST DAY OF THE
APPLICABLE CALENDAR QUARTER THROUGH
THE SEVENTEENTH DAY BEFORE THE
ELECTION.

(B) A POSTELECTION REPORT SHALL BE:

(i) FILED NOT LATER THAN THE FIFTEENTH DAY
AFTER THE APPLICABLE CALENDAR QUARTER.

(ii) COMPLETE FROM THE SIXTEENTH DAY BEFORE
THE ELECTION THROUGH THE LAST DAY OF
THE APPLICABLE CALENDAR QUARTER.

C. A CANDIDATE COMMITTEE SHALL FILE CAMPAIGN FINANCE
REPORTS COVERING EACH REPORTING PERIOD AS FOLLOWS:

1. AN ANNUAL REPORT THAT IS FILED FOR EACH YEAR OTHER
THAN THE ELECTION YEAR OF THE SECOND (GENERAL) ELECTION FOR THE
OFFICE THAT THE CANDIDATE IS SEEKING. AN ANNUAL REPORT SHALL BE


2 Ordinance No. G-XXXX
COMPLETE THROUGH THE END OF THE ELECTION YEAR AND SHALL BE FILED
NO LATER THAN APRIL 15TH.

2. A QUARTERLY REPORT THAT IS FILED FOR EACH CALENDAR
QUARTER IN AN ELECTION YEAR WHERE A SECOND (GENERAL) ELECTION
MAY TAKE PLACE AND THE CANDIDATE IS SEEKING OFFICE. A QUARTERLY
REPORT SHALL BE FILED NOT LATER THAN THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF THE
MONTH AFTER THE CALENDAR QUARTER.

3. IN ADDITION TO THE QUARTERLY REPORTS FOR THE
ELECTION YEAR OF THE SECOND (GENERAL) ELECTION FOR THE OFFICE
THAT THE CANDIDATE IS SEEKING AS PRESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH 2 OF THIS
SUBSECTION, A POSTPRIMARY REPORT SHALL BE COMPLETE THROUGH THE
PRIMARY ELECTION AND SHALL BE FILED NOT LATER THAN FIFTEEN DAYS
AFTER THE PRIMARY ELECTION. FOR CITY ELECTIONS, THE PRIMARY
ELECTION IS THE FIRST ELECTION HELD IN NOVEMBER OF THE EVEN-
NUMBERED YEAR.

D. THE REPORTING PERIOD FOR A CANDIDATE COMMITTEE’S FIRST
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT OF THE ELECTION CYCLE SHALL INCLUDE THE
ENTIRE ELECTION CYCLE TO DATE.

E. A COMMITTEE SHALL FILE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS UNTIL
TERMINATED.


PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this ___ day of ________,

2025.



MAYOR


________________________________
Date


ATTEST:



Denise Archibald, City Clerk




3 Ordinance No. G-XXXX
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Julie M. Kriegh, City Attorney



Deryck R. Lavelle
Chief Assistant City Attorney


REVIEWED BY:



Ed Zuercher, City Manager




4 Ordinance No. G-XXXX



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acquisition of Easements for the 16th Street and Ardmore Road Hohokam
Drainage Basin I Project (Ordinance S-52446) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or designee, to acquire easements either by
donation, purchase within the City's appraised value, purchase at a settlement amount
arrived through mediation and determined by the City Manager or designee to be
reasonable under the circumstances, or by the power of eminent domain, for the 16th
Street and Ardmore Road Hohokam Drainage Basin I Project. Further request
authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item.

Summary
Acquisition of easements are required for construction of a storm drain system which
includes a high capacity drop inlet and graded basins to effectively capture floodwater.
The collected flow will be conveyed through the storm drain and discharged at the
southeast corner of the proposed detention basins.

The parcels affected by this project are 1701 E. Dobbins Road and 1623 E. Pickrell
Drive, identified by Maricopa County Assessor's parcel numbers 301-37-009 and 301-
35-033.

Financial Impact
Funding for this project is available in the Street Transportation Department's Capital
Improvement Program budget.

Location
East Dobbins Road and South 16th Street
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, the City Engineer, and the Street
Transportation and Finance departments.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acquisition of Easements for the Basin 5 - Circle K Park Project (Ordinance S-
52448) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to acquire easements either
by donation, purchase within the City's appraised value, purchase at a settlement
amount arrived through mediation and determined by the City Manager or designee to
be reasonable under the circumstances, or by the power of eminent domain, for the
Basin 5 - Circle K Park Project. Further request authorization for the City Controller to
disburse all funds related to this item.

Summary
Acquisition of easements are required to alleviate drainage issues in the area. Highline
Canal Park will be redeveloped to incorporate a detention basin, which will serve as
the outfall for three future storm drain systems.

The parcel affected by this project and included in this request is located at 1307 E.
Pedro Drive, identified by Maricopa County Assessor's parcel number 300-37-514.

Financial Impact
Funding is available in the Street Transportation Department's Capital Improvement
Program budget.

Location
South of Euclid Avenue, between 7th and 14th streets.
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Street Transportation and
Finance departments.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acquisition of Easements for the 14th-15th Street Storm Drain Project
(Ordinance S-52449) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to acquire easements by
donation, purchase within the City's appraised value, or by the power of eminent
domain required for the 14th to 15th Street Storm Drain Project. Further request
authorization for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item.

Summary
The acquisition of easements is required to alleviate drainage issues in the area. A
storm drain and a high-capacity inlet will be constructed to capture runoff from the
mountains prior to 15th Street and Dobbins Road. The storm drain will discharge flow
to the southeast corner of the proposed detention Basin 5 at Circle K Park.

The parcels affected by this project are identified in Attachment A.

Financial Impact
Funding is available from the Street Transportation Department's Capital Improvement
Program budget, using General Obligation Bonds.

Location
South of Euclid Avenue, between 14th Street and 16th Street.
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, the City Engineer, and the Street
Transportation and Finance departments.





Attachment A
Property Identification

Acquisition of Easements for the 14th-15th Street Storm Drain Project


The following improved and/or unimproved parcels affected by acquisition and
included in this request are identified by the Maricopa County Assessor’s parcel
number (APN) and the address or location.

APN Address / Location
Northeast Corner of South 14th Street and East Dobbins
300-39-262
Road
Southeast Corner of South 14th Street and East Euclid
300-39-263
Avenue
300-72-026D 9415 S. 15th Street
300-73-027A 1433 E. La Mirada Drive




1 of 1 72



Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acceptance of an Easement for Drainage Purposes (Ordinance S-52451) -
District 1

Request for the City Council to accept an easement for drainage purposes; further
ordering the ordinance recorded. Legal descriptions are recorded via separate
recording instrument.

Summary
Accepting the property interests below will meet the Planning and Development
Department's Single Instrument Dedication Process requirement prior to releasing any
permits to applicants.

Easements
MCR: 20250594085
Applicant and Grantor: 15 Alameda, LLC; its successor and assigns
Date: October 14, 2025
Purpose: Drainage
Location: West of the northwest corner of N. 15th Avenue and W. Alameda Road
APN: 210-07-025C
File: FN 250027
Council District: 1

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








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Acceptance of an Easement for Public Utility Purposes (Ordinance S-52463) -
District 4

Request for the City Council to accept an easement for public utility purposes; further
ordering the ordinance recorded. Legal description is recorded via separate recording
instrument.

Summary
Accepting the property interests below will meet the Planning and Development
Department's Single Instrument Dedication Process requirement prior to releasing any
permits to applicants.

Easement
MCR: 20250614219
Applicant and Grantor: DAP Management Group, LLC; its successor and assigns
Date: October 23, 2025
Purpose: Public Utility
Location: 4610 N. 7th Avenue
APN: 155-37-001A; 155-37-097B
File: 250023
Council District: 4

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








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Loop Detector Installation Services Contract - IFB 26-0049 - Request for Award
(Ordinance S-52461) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Kimbrell Electric, Inc. to provide Loop Detector Installation Services for the Street
Transportation Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse
all funds related to this item. The total value of the contract will not exceed
$12,500,000.

Summary
This contract will provide the labor, materials and equipment required for the
installation of new and replacement traffic detection sensor loops throughout the City.
The underground magnetic sensors detect vehicles at signalized intersections,
improving traffic signal timing to provide for the safe, efficient and convenient
movement of people and goods on City streets.

Procurement Information
An Invitation for Bid procurement was processed in accordance with City of Phoenix
Administrative Regulation 3.10.

One vendor submitted a bid deemed to be responsive to posted specifications and
responsible to provide the required goods and services. Following an evaluation based
on price, the procurement officer recommends award to the following vendor:

Selected Bidder
Kimbrell Electric, Inc.

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about December 3, 2025, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $12,500,000. Funding is available in the
Street Transportation Department's operating budget.




Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Street Transportation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
***ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (SEE ATTACHMENTS)*** Union Comments on
Proposed Changes to Memoranda of Understanding - Citywide

Under the terms of the Meet and Confer Ordinance, employee organizations are
afforded an opportunity to comment after having submitted proposed changes to
existing Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) by December 1, 2025.

This item on the agenda allows the unions to inform the City Council as to their
priorities, concerns, and general goals for the Meet and Confer process.

The Meet and Confer Ordinance also requires that the public be given an opportunity
to make comments on the union proposals at the December 17, 2025, City Council
meeting.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager David Mathews and the Human
Resources Department.





Brittany Whittle

From: Jess Mayer
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 1:49 PM
To: Cathleen A Simpson
Cc: Brittany Whittle; Mailbox City Clerk Department CLK
Subject: AFSCME Local 2384 MOU
Attachments: Outlook-serensaf; 2026 2028 MOU Proposed changes.docx



CAUTION: This email originated outside of the City of Phoenix.
Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the sender and were expecting this email.

Report Suspicious

Dear Cathleen,

In accordance with the Phoenix City Code §2-218(B), AFSCME Local 2384 is enclosing the proposed
memorandum of understanding in the format the parties discussed on 11/10/2025.

Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information.

We look forward to meeting and conferring.

Regards,



Jess Mayer
President

AFSCME Local 2384
Phone: 602-230-2301
Mobile: 480-901-2627
Email:
jmayer@afscme2384.com
3636 North 15th Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85015
www.afscme2384.com
[afscme2384.com]




Section 3-1: Wages
A. All Unit 2 employees shall receive annual base-wage increases that equal or exceed the
greater of:

1. Three percent (3%) of base rate; or
2. The average percentage wage increase granted to any other City bargaining unit or
unclassified group within the same fiscal year.
These adjustments shall be automatic and not subject to budgetary deferral.

B. Unit 2 employees shall receive a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) each July 1 based on the
U.S. CPI-U (West Region), with a guaranteed floor of 2.5% and no cap. The City shall not offset
this COLA against other negotiated raises.

C. When the City achieves an operating-revenue surplus exceeding three percent (3%) of
forecast, one-half of that surplus shall be distributed as a lump-sum economic-share bonus to all
Unit 2 employees.

D. Licensed Pesticide Applicators shall receive $1.50 per hour above their base hourly rate for
all hours engaged in related duties.

E. Employees required to hold or maintain a Commercial Driver License (CDL) for any portion
of duties shall receive $0.75 per hour added to base pay.

F. Pay-schedule calculations shall follow rate tables jointly prepared by Human Resources and
AFSCME Local 2384. Any rounding shall round upward to the employee’s benefit.




Section 3-1A: Productivity Enhancement Pay
A. Eligible employees shall receive semi-annual Productivity Enhancement payments as follows:

1. After five (5) years of service: $150 per year of service, up to $5,000 annually at twenty-
two (22) years.
2. After twenty-three (23) years: $200 per year of service, up to $8,000 annually at twenty-
seven (27) years.

B. Eligibility requires:

1. Six (6) years continuous service;
2. A performance rating of “Met” or higher;
3. Active full-time status.

C. Payments shall be pro-rated each pay period. Any delays shall be issued retroactively.




D. Compensation shall not be reduced due to reclassification or movement; Productivity
Enhancement Pay is retained by the employee.




Section 3-2: Overtime
A. Overtime is defined as time assigned and worked beyond the regular shift or 40 hours per
week (or 10 hours per day for compressed schedules).

B. All paid leave counts as time worked for overtime eligibility.

C. Overtime shall be paid at 1.5 times the regular rate. Work exceeding twelve (12) consecutive
hours shall be paid at double time.

D. Overtime shall be voluntary whenever possible. Mandatory overtime shall rotate equitably.

E. Accurate overtime lists shall be posted monthly.

F. Employees may accrue up to 240 hours of compensatory time.

G. Employees may cash out up to 80 hours of compensatory time twice per fiscal year.




Section 3-2A: Call-Out Pay
A. An eight-hour protected rest period shall apply before each shift. Call-outs during this period
provide flexible reporting time or equivalent rest.

B. Call-outs guarantee three (3) hours minimum at double time.

C. Multiple call-outs within one rest period each trigger the minimum.




Section 3-3: Out-of-Class Pay
A. Employees performing higher-classification duties for two (2) hours or more shall receive the
higher rate for the entire shift.

B. Out-of-class assignments shall not exceed ninety (90) days without reclassification or posting
the position.

C. Out-of-class assignments shall rotate equitably by seniority.



Section 3-4: Sick Leave Conversion and Payout
A. At retirement, employees may convert unused sick leave: 100% up to 1,200 hours and 50%
thereafter.

B. Employees separating with ten (10) or more years of service (and not terminated for cause)
shall receive a 75% payout.




Section 3-5: Shift Differential Pay
A. Employees working between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. shall receive a 10% differential.

B. Weekend shifts earn an additional 5% differential.




Section 3-6: Stand-By Pay
A. Stand-by status earns two (2) hours of pay per day plus overtime for callouts.

B. Stand-by assignments shall rotate equitably.




Section 3-7: Show-Up Time
A. Employees reporting as scheduled who are not put to work shall receive four (4) hours
minimum pay.




Section 3-8: Jury Duty
A. Employees summoned to jury duty receive full pay with no loss of leave, benefits, or
seniority.

B. Employees released after 4 p.m. are not required to return to work.




Section 3-9: Deferred Compensation
A. The City shall match deferred-compensation contributions up to 3% of base pay.

B. Financial planning sessions shall be provided on paid time.




ARTICLE 4: Hours of Work / Working
Conditions
Section 4-1: Hours of Work
A. The standard work week shall consist of forty (40) hours, arranged in either five (5) eight-
hour days or four (4) ten-hour days, unless otherwise agreed by the Union.

B. Employees shall receive a regular, predictable schedule. Changes require ten (14) calendar-
days’ notice and prior Union consultation.

C. No employee shall suffer loss of pay or seniority due to City-initiated operational schedule
changes.

D. Temporary schedule changes shall be filled first by volunteers, then equitably by seniority.

E. Employees required to work on holidays or City-declared emergency days shall receive
double time plus holiday pay, with a four-hour minimum.




Section 4-2: Rest and Lunch Periods
A. Employees shall receive two (2) paid fifteen-minute breaks and one (1) uninterrupted thirty-
minute meal period each shift.

B. Interrupted breaks shall be rescheduled or paid.

C. Employees shall not be required to stay at workstations during unpaid breaks.

D. Supervisors shall provide climate-appropriate break areas with shade, seating, and potable
water.




Section 4-3: Clean-Up Time
A. Employees shall receive thirty (30) minutes before shift end for personal and equipment
cleanup.

B. Cleanup time involving hazardous materials shall be extended as needed and fully paid.

C. Departments shall provide adequate washing stations, lockers, and secure storage.




Section 4-4: Seniority
A. Seniority shall be the controlling factor for promotions, transfers, layoffs, recalls, overtime,
and shift bidding when qualifications are met.

B. Seniority shall be based on continuous City service or classification seniority, whichever
benefits the employee.

C. Seniority lists shall be verified jointly with the Union twice annually.

D. Temporary promotions or out-of-class assignments do not interrupt seniority accrual.




Section 4-5: Bump / Bid Procedure – Fleet Services
A. All reassignments and shift changes shall follow an open bidding process based on seniority,
qualifications, and employee preference.

B. Vacancies shall be posted for ten (10) days at all work sites.

C. Employees may review postings during work hours.

D. The Union shall receive all posting and award documentation.

E. Disputes are subject to expedited grievance review.

F. No employee shall be involuntarily reassigned without just cause and prior Union discussion.




Section 4-6: Technology



A. The City shall introduce new technology only after advance consultation with the Union.

B. No employee shall be laid off or demoted due to new technology without six (6) months’
notice and training or reassignment at equal pay.

C. All technology training shall occur on City time.

D. GPS or monitoring technology shall not be used for discipline inconsistent with employee
rights.

E. All technology issues are grievable.




ARTICLE 5: Benefits
Section 5-1: Health and Life Insurance
A. The City shall provide comprehensive medical, dental, and vision coverage at no cost to the
employee.

B. Multiple plan options shall be provided.

C. The Union shall approve all vendor or network changes.

D. The City shall provide life insurance equal to twice annual salary.

E. The City shall fund an Employee Assistance Program (EAP).




Section 5-2: Vacation Leave
A. Vacation accrues as follows:
● 0–4 years: 4.6 hrs/pay period
● 5–9 years: 6.2 hrs/pay period
● 10–14 years: 7.7 hrs/pay period
● 15+ years: 9.3 hrs/pay period

B. Employees may accumulate up to 600 hours.

C. Vacation scheduling shall be based on seniority.

D. Requests must be approved or denied within seven (7) days; otherwise approval is automatic.




Section 5-3: Holidays
A. Employees receive fourteen (14) paid holidays.

B. Holidays falling on days off shall be replaced with alternate paid days.

C. Holiday work is paid at double time plus holiday pay.

D. Floating holidays may be used with 48-hour notice.




Section 5-4: Sick Leave
A. Sick leave accrues at five (5) hours per pay period.

B. Sick leave may be used for illness, appointments, or family care.

C. No doctor’s note is required for three (3) days or fewer unless abuse is shown.

D. Sick leave may be donated to a Leave Bank.

E. The City shall provide twelve (12) weeks paid parental leave.




Section 5-5: Retirement Benefits
A. The City shall contribute at least one-half of ASRS obligations.

B. Retirement benefits may not be reduced without Union consent.

C. Phased-retirement options shall be offered.




Section 5-6: Other Benefits
A. Additional City-funded benefits include:
● Tuition reimbursement up to $6,000 per year
● Tool/uniform allowances
● Wellness screenings




● Short- and long-term disability insurance
● Employee recognition programs

B. All benefits are grievable and enforceable.




ARTICLE 6: Safety, Grievance Procedures,
and General Provisions
Section 6-1: Safety and Working Environment
A. The City shall maintain safe, healthy, and sanitary workplaces exceeding minimum standards.

B. Employees may refuse unsafe work without retaliation.

C. The City shall provide and replace PPE at no cost.

D. A Joint Labor-Management Safety Committee shall meet monthly.

E. Work areas shall include adequate lighting, ventilation, water, restrooms, and break areas.

F. Injured employees shall receive paid medical evaluation time.

G. All required training shall be provided on paid time.




Section 6-2: Reporting of Injuries and Hazards
A. Employees shall report hazards or injuries; the Union shall be notified within 24 hours.

B. No retaliation shall occur against reporting employees.

C. All investigations shall include Union participation.




Section 6-3: Grievance Procedure
A. Employees have the right to representation at all steps.

B. A grievance includes disputes over this MOU, safety, conditions, or discipline.



C. Step 1: Informal discussion within 14 days; response in 5 days.
D. Step 2: Written grievance to Director; meeting in 7 days; response in 10 days.
E. Step 3: Appeal to Labor Relations; response in 10 days.
F. Step 4: Arbitration; arbitrator selected from joint panel.

G. Arbitration decisions are final and binding, with full make-whole remedies.

H. Safety-related grievances shall be fast-tracked.




Section 6-4: Disciplinary Procedures
A. Discipline requires just cause.

B. Employees shall have representation rights.

C. Employees shall receive all evidence before discipline.

D. Discipline shall not be imposed until investigation is complete.

E. All discipline is grievable.




Section 6-5: Non-Discrimination and Anti-Retaliation
A. The City shall maintain a workplace free of discrimination and retaliation.

B. Retaliation for complaints or safety reporting is prohibited and grievable.




Section 6-6: Labor-Management Committees
A. A Joint Committee shall meet monthly to address working conditions, policies, and staffing.

B. No policy affecting Unit 2 employees shall be implemented without Union consultation.




Section 6-7: Savings Clause
A. Invalid provisions do not affect the remainder of the MOU.




B. The parties shall negotiate replacement language within 30 days.




Section 6-8: Entire Agreement
This MOU constitutes the complete agreement between the parties.




Section 6-9: Duration and Negotiations
A. This Agreement remains in effect for the adopted term.

B. Negotiations for a successor agreement shall begin six months before expiration.

C. Terms remain in effect until a successor is ratified.




MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

2026-2028

And
Unit 4 Employees




PREAMBLE .................................................................................................................... 4

ARTICLE 1: RIGHTS ...................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 1-1: PURPOSE/GENDER .............................................................................................................................. 4
SECTION 1-2: CITY AND DEPARTMENT RIGHTS ....................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 1-3: RIGHTS OF ASSOCIATION ................................................................................................................... 6
SECTION 1-4: RIGHTS OF UNIT MEMBERS .............................................................................................................. 11
SECTION 1-5: PROHIBITION OF STRIKE AND LOCKOUTS ......................................................................................... 20
ARTICLE 2: GRIEVANCE/ARBITRATION/LABOR MANAGEMENT .......................... 21
SECTION 2-1: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE .................................................................................................................. 21
SECTION 2-2: LABOR-MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ................................................................................................ 25
SECTION 2-3: RESOLVING GENERAL COMPLAINTS ................................................................................................ 26
ARTICLE 3: COMPENSATION/WAGES ...................................................................... 26
SECTION 3-1: WAGES ............................................................................................................................................. 26
SECTION 3-2: PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENT PAY ................................................................................................ 27
SECTION 3-3: TRAINING PAY ................................................................................................................................. 28
SECTION 3-4: COMPENSATION FOR INTERPRETING AND TRANSLATION BY SWORN POLICE OFFICERS .................. 29
SECTION 3-5: OVERTIME ........................................................................................................................................ 30
SECTION 3-6: COURT TIME OVERTIME .................................................................................................................. 32
SECTION 3-7: CALL-OUT PAY ................................................................................................................................ 33
SECTION 3-8: OUT-OF-RANK PAY .......................................................................................................................... 33
SECTION 3-9: SICK LEAVE CONVERSION AT RETIREMENT ..................................................................................... 34
SECTION 3-10: SICK LEAVE PAYOUT ..................................................................................................................... 36
SECTION 3-11: NIGHT SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL/WEEKEND SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL....................................................... 36
SECTION 3-12: STAND-BY PAY .............................................................................................................................. 36
SECTION 3-13: COURT TIME STANDBY PAY .......................................................................................................... 37
SECTION 3-14: OFF-DUTY EMPLOYMENT .............................................................................................................. 37
SECTION 3-15: JURY DUTY .................................................................................................................................... 38
SECTION 3-16: DEFERRED COMPENSATION AND DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS ................................................ 38
SECTION 3-17: NON-DIRECT PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION OR BENEFITS............................................................. 38
SECTION 3-18: DRUG RECOGNITION EXPERT PREMIUM PAY ................................................................................. 39
SECTION 3-19: PHLEBOTOMIST PREMIUM PAY ...................................................................................................... 39
ARTICLE 4: HOURS OF WORK/WORKING CONDITIONS ........................................ 39
SECTION 4-1: WORK SCHEDULES ........................................................................................................................... 39
SECTION 4-2: SENIORITY ........................................................................................................................................ 41
ARTICLE 5: BENEFITS ................................................................................................ 42
SECTION 5-1: HEALTH INSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 42
SECTION 5-2: RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE .......................................................................................................... 42
SECTION 5-3: DENTAL INSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 43
SECTION 5-4: LIFE INSURANCE .............................................................................................................................. 43
SECTION 5-5: LONG-TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE .............................................................................................. 44
SECTION 5-6: HOLIDAYS AND VACATION LEAVE .................................................................................................. 44
SECTION 5-7: OUT-OF-STATE VACATION RECALL ................................................................................................. 46
SECTION 5-8: MILITARY LEAVE ............................................................................................................................. 47
SECTION 5-9: UNIFORM, CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE ...................................................................... 47
SECTION 5-10: REIMBURSEMENT FOR EDUCATION EXPENSES ............................................................................... 52
SECTION 5-11: LEAVE OF ABSENCE ....................................................................................................................... 52
SECTION 5-12: WORKERS’ COMPENSATION ........................................................................................................... 52
ARTICLE 6: MISCELLANEOUS .................................................................................. 53
SECTION 6-1: SAVING CLAUSE ............................................................................................................................... 53
SECTION 6-2: COPIES OF MEMORANDUM ............................................................................................................... 53


SECTION 6-3: AID TO CONSTRUCTION OF PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING........................... 53
SECTION 6-4: CHANGES IN DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS ORDERS PURSUANT TO THIS MEMORANDUM .................. 54
SECTION 6-5: PHYSICAL FITNESS ........................................................................................................................... 54
SECTION 6-6: TERM AND EFFECT OF MEMORANDUM ............................................................................................ 55
ATTACHMENT A .......................................................................................................... 57

ATTACHMENT B .......................................................................................................... 58

ATTACHMENT C .......................................................................................................... 59




Preamble
WHEREAS the parties, through their designated representatives, met and conferred in
good faith pursuant to Chapter 2, Article XVII (Employer-Employee Relations), Phoenix
City Code in order to reach agreement concerning wages, hours, and working
conditions of employees in the Police Officers Unit, and

WHEREAS the parties hereby acknowledge that the provisions of this Memorandum are
not intended to abrogate the authority and responsibility of City government provided for
under the statutes of the State of Arizona or the Charter or ordinances of the City of
Phoenix except as expressly and lawfully limited herein,

NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed that this Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter
“Memorandum”) shall be submitted to the City Council of the City of Phoenix for its
consideration.



ARTICLE 1: Rights
Section 1-1: Purpose/Gender

Wherever any words used herein in the masculine, feminine or neutral, they shall be
construed as though they were also used in another gender in all cases where they
would so apply.


Section 1-2: City and Department Rights

A. The Association recognizes that the City and the Police Chief retain, whether
exercised or not, solely and exclusively, all express and inherent rights and
authority pursuant to law with respect to determining the level of and the manner
in which the City’s law enforcement activities are conducted, managed, and
administered, and the Association recognizes the exclusive right of Police Chief
to establish and maintain departmental rules and procedures for the
administration of the Police Department during the term of this Memorandum
provided that such rules and procedures do not violate any of the specific
express provisions of this Memorandum.

B. The City and Police Chief have the exclusive right and authority to schedule work
and/or overtime work as required in the manner most advantageous to the City

C. The City shall maintain patrol staffing at levels reasonably necessary to ensure
officer safety. When staffing falls below the level determined by the line-level
supervisor to be reasonably necessary for safe operations, the Department shall
take reasonable steps to increase staffing, including utilization of overtime.

D It is understood by the parties that every incidental duty connected with operations
enumerated in job descriptions is not always specifically described; nevertheless, it is
intended that all such duties shall be performed by the employee. 155
E. The Police Chief and City Manager reserve the right to discipline or discharge
employees for just cause, defined as follows, pursuant to the Civil Service laws. The
City reserves the right to lay off personnel of the Department.

1. The employer informed the law enforcement officer of the possible
disciplinary action resulting from the officer's conduct through agency
manuals, employee handbooks, the employer's rules and regulations, or other
communications to the officer or the conduct was such that the officer should
have reasonably known disciplinary action could occur.

2. The disciplinary action is reasonably related to the standards of conduct for a
professional law enforcement officer, the mission of the agency, the orderly,
efficient or safe operation of the agency, or the officer's fitness for duty.

3. The discipline is supported by a preponderance of evidence that the conduct
occurred.

4. The discipline is not excessive and is reasonably related to the seriousness of
the offense and the officer's service record.

F. The City and the Police Chief shall determine assignments and establish
methods and processes by which assignments are performed. This is not grievable
under the MOU.

G. The City and Police Chief shall have the right to transfer employees within the
Police Department in a manner most advantageous to the City. This is not grievable
under the MOU.

H. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Memorandum, the City and the
Police Chief retain unqualifiedly all rights and authority to which by law they are entitled.

I. The City shall have the authority without prior meeting and conferring to effect
reorganizations of the Police Department.

J. The Association recognizes that the City has statutory and Charter rights and
obligations in contracting for matters relating to municipal operations.

K. The Association pledges cooperation to the increasing of departmental efficiency
and effectiveness. Any and all rights concerning the management, organization, and
direction of the Police Department and the police force, including those set forth in this
Memorandum, shall be exclusively the right of the City and the Police Chief unless
otherwise provided by the express terms of this Memorandum as permitted by law.

L. The inherent and express rights of the City and the Police Chief, including those
herein specifically referred to, which are not expressly modified or restricted by a



5 156
specific provision of this Memorandum, are not in any way, directly or indirectly,
subject to the Grievance Procedure herein.


Section 1-3: Rights of Association

A. The Association, as the authorized representative, has the exclusive right to
serve as the meet and confer representative of all employees in the Police
Officers Unit as described in the City Code. Under no circumstances will the City
or Department allow any member or representative of any other labor group, or
their designee, to verbalize, memorialize in writing or insinuate that they
represent, or have the ability to represent, Unit 4 members.

Under no circumstance shall the department create or request unit members to
sign or agree to individual employment contracts without mutual agreement with
the Association. Unit members will still be required to sign for receipt of materials.

B. Union Release:
The Phoenix community benefits from harmonious and cooperative relationships
between the City and its employees. The City and the Association have
negotiated six full-time release positions, and release hours, as an efficient and
readily available point of contact for addressing labor-management concerns.
Examples of work performed by the release positions in support of the City
include ensuring representation for unit employees during administrative
investigations and grievance/disciplinary appeal meetings with management;
participating in collaborative labor-management initiatives that benefit the City
and the unit members; serving on Police Department task forces and
committees; facilitating effective communication between City and Department
management and unit employees; assisting unit members in understanding and
following work rules; and administering the provisions of the Memorandum of
Understanding. The cost to the City for these release positions, including all
benefits, has been charged as part of the total compensation contained in this
agreement in lieu of wages and benefits. The parties recognize that recent legal
precedent may require additional agreements between the City and the
Association regarding the implementation of release time positions. The parties
will develop any required agreements consistent with applicable law while
maintaining the release time framework and compensation provisions set forth in
this MOU.


1. Full-Time Release Positions:

a. The 6 full time release positions shall be sworn, full time, paid police
officers of the Phoenix Police Department, who will at all times remain
qualified to perform such duties as are normally expected and required of
a municipal police officer in the City of Phoenix, Arizona. These 6 full time
release positions will receive their regular salary including fringe benefits,
and the employer shall make all employer contributions to the Public
Safety Personnel Retirement System required by law so as to maintain
their full eligibility under the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System.
b. The 6 full time release positions shall participate in all appropriate training
requirements necessary to maintain membership in the department,
including all training mandated by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards
and Training Board (AZ POST).


c. The 6 full time release positions agree to be bound by the City’s and the
Police Department’s rules, regulations, and operations orders, including
but not limited to proper notification when utilizing sick or vacation leave.
The full time release employees may be subject to disciplinary action for
violations of any such rules, regulations, general or operations orders.
d. The 6 full time release positions may work supplemental overtime shifts
consistent with the processes and policies set in place by the Phoenix
Police Department for all sworn police officers. Employees will submit all
overtime slips to their current supervisor to ensure that overtime is being
used appropriately.
e. The 6 officers assigned to the Association and on full-time release
shall be considered as case carrying detectives with standby
responsibilities.


2. Association Representatives:

The Association may designate up to 42 representatives and shall notify the
Police Chief and Labor Relations in writing of such designations as they
occur. There shall be no obligation on the City to change or adjust normal
departmental scheduling or assignments of personnel as a result of such
designations or as changes occur.

Every quarter, PLEA will provide a list of stewards that will be posted.

a. Up to two PLEA representatives may, when the Association is designated
by the unit member as his representative, attend mutually scheduled
grievance meetings, Use of Force Boards, Disciplinary Review Boards,
IRP Meetings, and hearings with department representatives and hearings
scheduled and conducted by the Civil Service Board without loss of pay or
benefits. Up to two PLEA representatives may attend hearings with the
department representative if more than one department representative is
in attendance. Paid release time used for any other purposes, such as
gathering information, interviewing the grievant/appellant or witnesses, or
preparing a presentation shall be charged against the bank of release
hours as described in Section 1-3 D. PLEA representatives are required to
obtain the permission of their non-unit supervisor to absent themselves
from their duties to attend scheduled meetings and provide representation.

b. When new work units, precinct(s)/bureau(s) are created, the Association
may designate up to 1 additional representative per bureau and up to 3
additional representatives per precinct. The increased number will be
consistent with current practice and will be based solely on the addition of
new work unit(s). Any deviation from the above will be discussed at a
Labor-Management meeting. 158
3. Bank of Release Hours:

A bank of 1,859 hours of paid Association release time shall be created per
M.O.U. year for use by the Association to engage in legitimate Association
business. PLEA will utilize best efforts to provide advanced notice of the use of




7 159
these hours to Labor Relations so the affected chain of commands can be
notified. In all instances, PLEA will provide Labor Relations with notice of
hours used. The cost to the City for these release hours, including fringe, has
been charged as part of the total compensation contained in this agreement
in lieu of wages and benefits. Examples of how these hours are used by the
Association include:

a. For Executive Board members to attend meetings of the Executive Board,
meetings of the general membership, and for preparation for negotiations
pursuant to Chapter 2, Article XVII (Employer-Employee Relations),
Phoenix City Code.

b. For unit members to attend seminars, meetings, training classes and
conferences so that representatives better understand issues such as City
policies and practices, conflict resolution, labor-management partnerships,
and methods of effective representation.

c. For Association representatives to communicate with members, investigate
grievances or prepare for hearings. A PLEA representative wishing to enter a
work area for the purpose of investigating a formal grievance must first gain
the permission of the work area supervisor. This permission will not be
unreasonably withheld, giving proper consideration to essential work of the
department and the occupational safety of the PLEA representative. When
requesting a meeting with the work unit/site supervisor, the PLEA
representative will inform the supervisor of the purpose of the meeting. PLEA
representatives will attempt to schedule an appointment in advance whenever
possible. One additional PLEA representative may be allowed to attend such
meetings for training purposes.

Approval for use of paid release time hereunder shall be subject to
Departmental operational and scheduling factors. When using such paid
time, Association representatives and members of the Executive Board
shall give at least 24 hours written notice in advance.

In recognition of the mutual benefit to both the City and the Association, a
unit member using Association release time as defined by Articles in this
MOU to conduct Association business shall be accorded all insurance-
related benefits. Approval of claims made for benefits will be determined
on a case by case basis.

Any hours used in excess of the bank must be approved by the Police Chief,
the Labor Relations Administrator, and the PLEA president. The number of
hours used in excess of the bank at the end of the contract term will be
deducted from the bank at the start of the first year of the following contract.
Unused hours will be carried over into the first year of the next contract.

C. The president may appoint a legislative representative for the Association if the
legislative representative is registered with the Secretary of State as a lobbyist and


if the legislative representative has agreed to work with and assist the city’s
legislative lobbyist. The legislative representative shall receive 500 hours of
release time per MOU year.

D. A member of the Executive Board of the Association, or a designated PLEA
representative, will, with the approval of the Police Chief or his designee, subject
to 24 hours written notice in advance, be authorized to engage in Association
related activities during City work hours on a non-paid basis. Approval for such
authorization for more than 2 Executive Officers or Board members of the
Association or designated shift representatives is subject to 48 hours written
notice in advance. Approval for use of unpaid time hereunder shall be subject to
Department operational and scheduling factors and administration control as to
usage of such time, but shall not be arbitrarily withheld. There shall be no use of
official paid time for Association related activities under this paragraph.

E. Upon the Association’s filing of a Third Party Data Sharing Agreement with the
Labor Relations Division, during the term of this Memorandum, upon request, the
City shall furnish to the Association bimonthly at no cost a listing of all unit
members, indicating name, mailing address, phone number, employee ID, and
assignment. The City will also provide a monthly list of employees added that
month to Unit 4.

F. The City shall deduct monthly from the pay warrants of Association members the
regular periodic Association membership dues and/or special assessments in
accordance with Chapter 2, Article XVII (Employer-Employee Relations), Phoenix
City Code and pursuant to the City’s existing dues deduction authorization form
duly completed and signed by the Association member, and transmit such
deductions to the Association on a monthly basis; except, however, that such
deduction shall be made only when an Association member’s earnings for a pay
period are sufficient after other legally required deductions are made. The City
shall, at the request of the Association, make changes in the amount of the
deduction hereunder during the term of this Memorandum at cost for
implementing such change. The City shall not make dues deductions for unit
members on behalf of any other employee organization as defined in Chapter 2,
Article XVII (Employer-Employee Relations), Phoenix City Code during the term
of this Memorandum. The City assumes no liability on account of any action
taken pursuant to this paragraph.

G. The Association is authorized to use mutually agreed upon non-work areas in City
facilities for pick-up by or distribution to unit members of official Association literature
that is not political in nature, abusive of any person or organization, or disruptive of
the department’s operations, it being understood and agreed, however, that such
activity shall not be done during the on-duty time of any unit member. The
Association may, using its own resources, use the mailboxes at work locations to
communicate with unit members. The association may use Inter-departmental mail
to communicate with unit members on two occasions a year.




H. The Association and the Department will jointly present a 4-hour Employee
Wellness course to recruits who are expected to become sworn police officers.
Immediately following, the Association will be allowed 1 hour to talk to and
possibly sign newly sworn police officers into the Association and to explain the
rights and benefits under the MOU. This time will be allotted prior to reporting for
the first patrol training shift at the offices of the Association. The content of such
information shall not be political in nature, abusive of any person or the
Department or disruptive of the Department’s operation. Curriculum will be jointly
approved with the Training Bureau Division Chief.

I. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Article shall not be
interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked, any
hours or fractions of hours spent outside the unit member’s work shift in pursuit
of benefits provided by this Article. The employer shall count as time worked any
hours or fractions of hours spent within the unit member’s regular work shift in
pursuit of benefits provided by this Article.

J. Any unit representative attending any IRP, DRB, UFB, DAC, or any other review
board will be allowed to adjust their work schedule by an equal amount of time
spent in the meeting. The adjustment will require the approval of the
representative’s supervisor with operational consideration. Approval will not be
unreasonably withheld.

K. In the interest of encouraging continuing education for unit members, the
department will mail to the Association president the AZ POST calendar and all
other job related seminar notices it receives.

L. The Association will have 2 PLEA positions, designated in writing, on continuous
paid stand-by for the mutual benefit of both the City and the Association to
respond to critical incidents as needed. No member will be placed on stand-by if
the member is not available for call-out. If call-out occurs, overtime will be paid in
accordance with Article 3, Section 3.2.

M. Upon written request from the Association, the City will provide specific
information pertinent to a written grievance, arbitration case, or Civil Service
appeal. The City will also provide pertinent collective bargaining information. This
material will be supplied to the Association at no cost.

N. To improve communication and relationships between labor and management,
the Association will be allowed an opportunity to attend one mutually agreed
upon briefing quarterly with each squad to discuss Association business and
issues of mutual concern to labor and management. PLEA will utilize best efforts
to provide advance notice of meeting.

O. The City values and benefits from the participation of Union leaders on citywide task
forces and committees, Police Department task forces and committees, Labor –
Management work groups, and a variety of Health and Safety committees. These
activities take time away from expected tasks such as representation and


communicating with the membership and may occur outside the regular work day
of the Union officials. The full-time release positions agree to participate in these
important committees and task forces. In recognition of this commitment, the City
agrees to provide a 960 hour bank of compensation for use by the full-time
release positions each MOU year.

P. Unit members who are not Association members at the beginning of the last pay
period in June of each year will receive 3.5 hours of vacation time, in addition to
their normal annual accruals, credited to their vacation leave bank on the
second paycheck in August of that same year. Unit members who are not
Association members at the beginning of the last pay period in December of
each year will receive 3.5 hours of vacation time in addition to their normal
annual accruals, credited to their vacation leave bank on the second paycheck
in February of the following year.

The number of hours distributed to Unit members who are not Association
members will be deducted from the leave banks described in Section 1-3,
beginning with the Section 1-3(C) leave bank, then the Section 1-3(B)(3) leave
bank, and then the Section 1-3(O) leave bank. If there are not enough hours in
the leave banks to refund the hours to Unit members who are not Association
members, the Association will reduce the number of full-time release positions
for the remainder of the six-month period. The value of each reduced full-time
release position will be converted to hours and credited to the Section 1-3(B)(3)
leave bank.

The City will provide Unit members who are not members of the Association “opt
in” forms, to be approved by the Association, allowing them to donate vacation
leave to be deposited into the Section 1-3(B)(3) leave bank. At any time during
the term of this MOU, any Unit member may request this “opt in” form in order to
donate vacation time in the manner above-described.

Q. As the certified unit 4 bargaining unit, the Association will be notified electronically of
Use of Force Boards and Disciplinary Review Boards at the time of scheduling.


Section 1-4: Rights of Unit Members

A. A unit member has the right to have the Association serve as their meet and
confer representative as set forth in Chapter 2, Article XVII (Employer-Employee
Relations), Phoenix City Code.

B. A unit member has the right to be represented by the Association in dealings with
the City concerning grievances and matters pertaining to their individual
employment rights and obligations.

1. If a unit member requests, representation will be allowed when the member is
the subject of an administrative investigation by Professional Standards
Bureau, any Police Department supervisor, or other City employee who is


conducting an investigatory interview. The City will notify the Association who
will obtain the most readily available unit Association representative, who
must be a bargaining unit member. The unit representative will make every
reasonable attempt to arrive within one hour from the time a phone is made
available to the unit member. Management will make a concerted attempt to
release the association representative giving the consideration of the
departments’ and the associations’ scheduling concerns. The unit Association
representative may make a request for a caucus prior to, during, or after the
interview to bring to the investigator's attention issues which may be violations
of the MOU as set forth in this Memorandum or questions outside the scope
of the N.O.I. Prior to the conclusion of the meeting, the member, or
representative on behalf of the employee, will have the opportunity to make a
closing statement.

The Union representative may assist and consult with the employee, attempt
to clarify the facts or questions asked, and suggest other employees or
witnesses who may have knowledge of the underlying issues. The Union
representative may not turn the meeting into an adversarial proceeding,
unduly disrupt the interview, interfere with the objective of the examination, or
compromise the integrity of the interview. The Union representative may not
interrupt the employee’s response to a question, speak on behalf of the
employee, or prevent the employee from responding to a question. The Union
representative also may not behave in a violent, verbally abusive, insulting, or
demeaning manner toward the interviewer.

During the interview, the interviewer may insist that they are only interested in
hearing the employee’s own account of the matter under investigation at that
time. The interviewer may not prohibit the Union representative from
engaging in meaningful representation, including assisting and consulting with
the employee.

2. The interview session shall be a reasonable period of time, taking into
consideration the gravity and complexity of the misconduct being investigated.

3. Prior to conducting an administrative interview, the City/Department will
consider the necessity of interviewing a Unit Member who is impaired by
alcohol or drugs. If the City/Department deems an immediate administrative
interview is not necessary, it will/may be scheduled at a later time.

4. At the time of the scheduled interview, or request for a departmental
memorandum, by Professional Standards Bureau, a Police Department
Supervisor, or other City Employee, the investigator will provide the unit member
and / or their representative written notices of investigation informing the officer
of the alleged facts that are the basis of the investigation, the potential for
disciplinary action, and all relevant and readily available materials, including
complaints (except for complaints that are filed with the employer and that
include allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment or retaliation or
complaints that involve matters under the jurisdiction of the United States equal
employment opportunity commission). Material format may include video,


12 164
audio, reports, photographs, documents, and other materials in accordance
with A.R.S § 38-1104(A)(2) in effect during the term of this agreement. Upon
the request of either party, the parties shall meet and confer the impact of any
changes to the provisions of A.R.S § 38-1104(A)(2) during the term of this
agreement. All materials will be made available to the unit member and/or
their representative in the draft investigation prior to the investigative review
process (IRP).

For investigations related to critical incidents such as officer involved
shootings, in-custody deaths, and/or police contract that result in serious
physical injury or death, Body Worn Camera (BWC) video will be made
available to a unit member prior to their administrative (PSB) interview if the
unit member first completes the criminal interview process with criminal
investigators. The parties understand that there are inherent limitations to
BWCs and memory. They also recognize that the inability to review BWC
video can impact reporting accuracy.

During the course of the administrative investigation, the investigator will not
knowingly misrepresent any fact or material issue to the unit member.

Prior to interviewing an involved employee, an Internal Investigation Material
List form documenting what materials, the investigating supervisor or PSB
investigator provided to the involved employee will be completed.


5. A unit member under investigation, and the association, will be notified in
writing every 3 months as to the current status of the investigation. This will
include a brief description of the number of known witnesses still to be
interviewed and other investigative processes remaining to be completed, as
well as an estimated date of completion.

6. When a draft investigation is provided to a Unit member, it will contain an
explanation of the member’s right to review the investigation within the time
period provided in Ops Order 3.19 before signing the investigative review
control form.

7. If changes are made to an investigation after an IRP, the unit member and
representative will be provided with a revised draft of the investigation. The
unit member will have up to 5 business days to review the revised draft, and
may attach a rebuttal, before signing an IRC form.

8. If new information is added, outside what was discussed during the IRP, to
the draft investigation, the member reserves the right to have an additional
IRP to discuss the new information. The additional IRP will only be afforded to
specifically discuss the added information, not to revisit items already
discussed in the initial IRP. The additional IRP will be scheduled and
completed within 7 calendar days, unless mutually agreed upon in writing
prior to the deadline.


9. As the certified bargaining unit for all unit 4 members, all finalized
investigations will be provided to the Association monthly.

10. Analyses completed by artificial intelligence systems or programs ("Al") will
not be used as the sole basis for decisions related to Unit employee discipline
or officer assignments.

The City must notify officers, in writing, of the artificial intelligence systems or
programs ("Al") utilized by the City to review or analyze officer data, the
specific data collected and analyzed by these systems, and how any analyses
may be used.

If an "Al" system that is implemented by the department produces or presents
faulty data or misinformation related to officer reassignment or discipline; the
department in consultation with the association may will pause the utilization
of the "Al" system. At that time the City and the association will reconvene to
assess the issue and determine the appropriate action moving forward.

Artificial intelligence is the simulation of human intelligence processes by
machines, especially computer systems, to perform tasks requiring cognition,
including, but not limited to, learning, reasoning, self correction, and creativity.

C. A unit member has the right to present their own grievance, in person or by legal
counsel.

D. Unit members are entitled to representation if an overall "Not Met" performance
evaluation is appealed and is at the Executive Level (Assistant Chief or Chief) or
when management has more than one representative at the meeting to discuss
the appeal of the performance evaluation.

E.
1. A unit member covered hereunder shall, on their request and by appointment,
be permitted to examine their departmental or divisional personnel file, in the
presence of an appropriate supervisory official of the Department. The unit
member may be accompanied by another person of their choosing. When a
city directed work fitness/job performance medical evaluation process is
completed, the city agrees to give the city doctor a release to give the
information to the requesting employee.

2. No unit member shall have any adverse comments entered into their
departmental or divisional personnel file without the member being informed
by a supervisor. If the unit member requests, they may receive a copy of the
adverse comment.






3. A unit member may, at their discretion, attach rebuttal statements to any
material contained in their departmental or divisional personnel file which may
be adverse in nature.

4. Discipline older than 5 years from the date of issuance will not be considered
for progressive discipline or promotion/transfer purposes except for the
following types of discipline, which may be considered for the duration of
employment (and upon the employee's return to employment, if applicable):

Final sustained discipline of suspension or higher of the following;

• The employee has been abusive or threatening in attitude, language, or
conduct towards fellow employees;
• The employee has solicited or taken for personal use a fee, gift or favor in
the course of the assigned work or in connection with it, which would lead
toward favoritism or the appearance of favoritism or a conflict of interest;
• The employee has intentionally falsified records or documents made, kept,
or maintained for or on behalf of the City of Phoenix;
• The employee has stolen or is in unauthorized possession of City property
or the property of another employee or citizen;
• The employee is under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs on the job;
• The employee has violated City of Phoenix anti-harassment or anti-
discrimination policies;
• The employee committed a violation of the City's Ethics Policy;
• The employee committed an act of dishonesty;
• The employee committed an act meeting the elements of a felony; or
• The employee has committed a Class 3 violation of use of force.

5. A Supervisory Counseling is a documented warning presented to the
employee for signature. The effective date for any applicable appeal will start
from the date that the employee signs the Counseling.

6. Once a unit member has been disciplined, no further disciplinary action may
be imposed for the same specific allegation during the same incident of
misconduct. If a unit member has received a coaching for the same incident,
it may be considered as a mitigating factor in the final determination of
discipline. A unit member may be subjected to additional discipline if further
investigation reveals additional allegations arising from the same incident.

7. If the findings of a Departmental investigation result in a Class II or below
level of discipline, the Department will meet with the affected unit member, an
Association representative and the investigative command staff to
determine if the needs of the City and Department would be better served by
the affected member undergoing training in lieu of discipline, when
appropriate. The discipline would still be considered for purposes of transfers
and progressive discipline.

F. A unit member and Association Representative shall have the right to appear
before the departmental Disciplinary Review Board when disciplinary matters are
brought before the Board involving the unit member.
1. The purpose of such appearance is to give the unit member an opportunity to
respond to the assertions made against them.

2. The Department shall notify the unit member 10 calendar days prior to such
opportunity to respond to the Board. The notification shall contain the date,






time, violation(s) and basis of each violation that has been sustained. In addition,
the unit member, if they choose, may meet with their immediate supervisor along
with the second level supervisor or the unit member’s Bureau/Precinct
Commander for the purpose of discussing the basis of each violation to be
reviewed by the DRB. If the immediate supervisor conducted the investigation,
the unit member, if they choose, may meet with the next supervisor in their chain
of command. Such request shall be made in writing to the unit member’s
immediate supervisor. Also, the unit member, if they choose, may be
accompanied by an Association representative at either meeting.

a. At the IRP meeting, the unit member shall be afforded a reasonable
opportunity to review the written investigation. Realizing that in some
cases there may be information that would be detrimental to the
department’s ability to conduct misconduct investigations, that information
may be deleted. However, all other information will be available for review.

3. The unit member under investigation may request a copy of the DRB
information at no cost. The DRB information will be made available to the unit
member or their representative at the same time the unit member is served
with the DRB notice. Any written or electronic material to be presented by the
employee or their representative to the DRB shall also be given to the
department in a reasonable time. The information will be supplied
electronically if possible; if not, it will be supplied in written form. In addition,
the department will supply any audio/video tapes and computer graphics
which have been produced.

4. The unit member may, at their discretion, appear before the Board with an
Association representative of their choosing and may state the reasons why
the proposed action is unjustified. The unit member and their representative
may passively observe all presentations made to the board and all responses
made to questions by board members. The unit member and non-board
members will be excluded from the room during board deliberations.

5. The unit member may submit relevant written matter in support of their position.

6. If the unit member requests, representation will be allowed, consistent with
Article 1, Section 1-4(B)(1) of this Memorandum, during Use Of Force Board
(UFB) hearings. A unit Association representative will be allowed to observe
all presentations made to the Board and all responses to questions by Board
members.

a. At least 10 days prior to the convening of the UFB the unit member will be
provided at no cost with a copy of all documentation concerning their
involvement in the matter under investigation that is made available to the
UFB Board members.

b. At the conclusion of the UFB, the Board Chair will verbally advise the unit
member and representative of policies violated that support the


recommendation. The unit member and representative will also be
provided a copy of the UFB recommendation submitted to the Chief within
3 business days.

c. The Association has the right to meet with the Police Chief, or designee,
within 7 business days of the board’s decision, as scheduled by the Police
Chief’s office, to discuss an “out of policy” recommendation by the UFB
before a final decision is rendered.

7. A unit member will be provided written notice of a Loudermill hearing at least
5 working days before the scheduled hearing along with copies of all
supporting documentation. This is to ensure the member will have a
meaningful opportunity to prepare for the hearing. The unit member may
submit written information for the Chief’s consideration in advance of the
hearing. At the hearing, the unit member may present any information the
member deems relevant, including one character witness to provide a
statement. The witness will not read written statements submitted by others.

a. The timeline for written notice of a Loudermill hearing resulting from an
arrest for a felony crime under color of authority will be at the discretion of
the Police Chief.

8. In recognition of the mutual benefit to both the city and the unit member,
suspensions MAY BE served under the following time limits, at the unit
member’s option. Unit members may serve suspensions of more than 40
hours on an alternating weekly schedule. The city retains the option to deviate
from this provision for suspensions involving sexual harassment, violence in
the work place, felonies, and drugs/alcohol.

G. A unit member under investigation by Professional Standards Bureau or a Police
Department supervisor for a disciplinary matter that may lead to a written
reprimand, suspension, demotion, or discharge, and who is interviewed or
interrogated, or requested to produce any documentation, shall be given a written
Notice Of Investigation (Form 80-58DB) informing them of the specific nature of
the investigation, their status in the investigation, and all known allegations of
misconduct involved in the interview of the unit member. In addition, the unit
member and/or the Police Department supervisor/Professional Standard Bureau
representative may mechanically record such interview/interrogation. Should any
mechanical recordings take place, the department reserves the right to transcribe
any such interview/interrogation for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the
interview/interrogation and, if requested, the unit member shall sign the
transcription if it is accurate. In the event that the investigator intends to segment
the interview or the interrogation, the NOI will inform the member of the specific
nature and all known allegations pertaining to the portion or portions of the
investigation being covered by the segmented Notice of Investigation.




1. A copy of the signed and dated Notice of Investigation will be given to the unit
member prior to the beginning of the interview. The unit member shall have the
right to retain the NOI for their use throughout the entire course of the interview.

2. The unit member will be provided a copy of all the interview/interrogation in
digital media format.

3. If any unit member is told not to speak to anyone regarding an investigation,
this admonition does not apply to speaking with an attorney functioning within
the attorney-client relationship. In addition, if an accused unit member is told
not to speak to anyone regarding an investigation, this admonition does not
apply to speaking with an Association representative, who may discuss the
matter only with the grievance chairman/Association president or their
designated representative. Once the investigation is completed, any unit
member may speak with an Association representative regarding the incident.
When the investigation is completed, the accused unit member will be notified
in writing of the findings. A unit member under internal or administrative
investigation may be reassigned (may include reassignment to their home),
until the completion of the investigation.

4. If during the course of the above mentioned investigation, information is
learned concerning additional misconduct on the part of the unit member
being interviewed, an NOI will be issued to the unit member prior to the unit
member being questioned about the additional misconduct information.

5. Investigations alleging serious misconduct and/or issues of veracity will be
investigated by Professional Standards Bureau (PSB) or other appropriate
City entity.

6. Notification regarding the general nature of a Professional Standards Bureau
(PSB) interview at the time of scheduling will be left at the discretion of the
PSB Commander.

7. If any additional NOI’s are served during the course of a misconduct interview
where a PLEA representative is not present (has not been requested), a
break in the interview of up to 1 hour will be granted (if requested) for the
employee to obtain a PLEA representative.

8. The unit member or the unit member’s representative may make a request to
the Chief, or their designee, in unusual circumstances such as a unit
member’s extended duty or hospitalization, to delay the PSB interview for up
to 24 hours after a critical incident.

9. A unit member will not be terminated for the sole reason of having been
served with an order of protection or injunction against harassment unless
that court order precludes the officer from performing their essential functions,
including but not limited to carrying a firearm; until appeal processes have
been exhausted.


H. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Article, shall not
be interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked, any
hours or fractions of hours spent outside the unit member’s work shift in pursuit
of benefits provided by this Article. The employer shall count as time worked any
hours or fractions of hours spent within the unit member’s regular work shift in
pursuit of benefits provided by this Article.

I. The affected employee attending any IRP, DRB, UFB, DAC, Grievance meeting,
Civil Service Appeal, or any other review board while off duty shall be allowed to
adjust their work schedule by an equal amount of time spent in the meeting. The
adjustment will require the approval of the unit member’s supervisor, with
operational considerations. Approval will not be unreasonably withheld.

J. After a separation notice has been signed by the appropriate authorities, and if
the unit member is given the opportunity to resign, the unit member will have 3
hours to consult with an Association representative.

K. A unit member who receives a written reprimand will be provided a copy of the
official documentation, if any, supporting the written reprimand at the time the
unit member receives the reprimand.

L. If the Driving Analysis Committee sends a case to the DRB for review, the unit
member will receive a copy of the facts supporting the DAC position upon
request. Prior to the DAC review, unless the unit member declines, an IRP will be
completed with the unit member’s commander.

M. In accordance with the terms outlined in Section 1-4.E.4, a unit member seeking
an "at request" transfer will only have discipline of a relevant nature considered in
the determination of the transfer using the following prescribed time frames. The
class will be determined by the finalized PSB investigation.

Written Reprimands: 12 months
from date of NOI
Class I Discipline: 12 months
from date of NOI
Class II Discipline: 18 months
from date of NOI
Class III Discipline: 24 months
from date of NOI

N. If an employee is not given their performance evaluation by the annual review
date, the employee may request the merit increase in writing by sending a
memorandum directly to the Human Resources Officer in the Fiscal Management
Bureau. If the performance evaluation is an overall “met,” the request will be
processed within 21 calendar days of submittal and will be retroactive to the
performance evaluation annual review date.

O. Unit members will not be excluded from applying and/or competing in a transfer
process based solely on a pending investigation. The investigation is no longer
considered “pending” once the NOF has been served to the member. However,
the transfer process will not be delayed pending the conclusion of the related
investigation. If a unit member is passed over for transfer based on the pending
investigation, he/she may be eligible for the next available opening depending
upon the outcome of the investigation.

P. An association member, or the association at the request of the member, may
request the opportunity to discuss a good-of-the-department transfer decision
with the member's Division Commander. The Division Commander will make
him/herself available, but the transfer action will not be delayed based on this
provision. This provision does not apply to transfers made to adjust staffing
levels, reduce staff in a specific area or other similar operational need.

Q. A unit member or their representative may request the opportunity to discuss and
review a transfer that is the subject of a grievance with the Chief or their
designee. The Chief or their designee shall make themselves available to
discuss, but the transfer action will not be delayed based on this provision. The
transfer action could be delayed or reversed at the discretion of the Chief or their
designee. (This paragraph does not apply to at-request transfers or transfers
based on a selection process).

R. If the City overpays a unit member for any reason, the money will be recovered
at the same rate at which it was paid unless total amount is less than $250.00, at
which the entire amount may be recovered in one lump sum.

S. Progressive Discipline time periods will be based on date of the NOI. Only
discipline resulting from a sustained finding of a like or similar allegation will
be considered for progressive discipline purposes.

Section 1-5: Prohibition of Strike and Lockouts

A. The Association and the unit members covered by this Memorandum recognize and
agree that rendering of police services to the community cannot under any
circumstances or conditions be withheld, interrupted, or discontinued, and to do so
would endanger the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Phoenix.

B. The Association pledges to maintain unimpaired municipal services as directed
by the City. Neither the Association, nor any unit member, for any reason, will
authorize, institute, aid, condone or engage in a slowdown, work stoppage,
strike, or any other interference with the work and statutory functions and
obligations of the City or the Department. During the term of this Memorandum
neither the City nor its agents for any reason shall authorize, institute, aid or
promote any lockout of unit members covered by this Memorandum.

C. Should any unit member during the term of this Memorandum, and until such
time that it is expressly and legally rescinded, breach the obligations of Section
1-5B, the City Manager or his designee shall immediately notify the Association
that a prohibited action is in progress.

D. The Association shall forthwith, through its executive officers and other authorized
representatives, disavow said strike or other prohibited action, and shall notify in
writing all Association members and representatives of their obligation and
responsibility for maintaining compliance with this Article, including their
responsibility to remain at work during any interruption which may be caused or
initiated by others. Copies of such notification shall be delivered to the office of
the City Manager. In addition, the Association shall order all unit members
violating this Article to immediately return to work and cease the strike or other
prohibited activity. Such order shall be delivered both orally and in writing to all
unit members violating this Article with copies of the written order to be delivered
to the office of the City Manager.

E. Penalties or sanctions the City may assess against a unit member who violates
this Section shall include, but not be limited to:

1. Discipline up to and including discharge.

2. Loss of all compensation and benefits, including seniority, during the period of
such prohibited activity.

F. Should the Association during the term of this Memorandum and until such time
that it is expressly and legally rescinded, breach its obligations under this
Section, it is agreed that all penalties set forth in Chapter 2, Article XVII
(Employer-Employee Relations), Phoenix City Code, shall be imposed on the
Association, in addition to any other legal and administrative remedies available
to the City that in its discretion it may elect to pursue.

G. Nothing contained herein shall preclude the City from obtaining judicial restraint
or from seeking damages from the Association, in the event of a violation of this
Section.



ARTICLE 2: Grievance/Arbitration/Labor Management

Section 2-1: Grievance Procedure

It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Article shall not be
interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked, any hours or
fractions of hours spent outside the employee's work shift in pursuit of benefits provided
by this Article. The employer shall count as time worked any hours or fractions of hours
spent within the employee's regular work shift in pursuit of benefits provided by this
Article.

A. Informal Resolution

1. As a matter of good labor-management relations, unit members who believe
that they have a bona fide grievance will discuss and attempt to resolve it with
the appropriate lowest level of supervision.

2. If the above informal discussion is held and does not resolve the grievance,
the unit member may file a formal grievance in accordance with the following
procedure.

B. Definition of Grievance

1. A grievance is a written allegation by a unit member, submitted as herein
specified, claiming violation(s) regarding the specific express terms of this
Memorandum for which there is no other specific and formal method of review.
However, disputes specifically excluded in other Articles of this Agreement from
the Grievance and Arbitration procedure shall not be construed as within the
definition set forth above and shall not be handled in accordance with this
procedure. It is agreed that such excluded disputes are not grievable or arbitrable
under the terms of this Article or under this contract.

2. The City continues to retain the format used for grievances, including forms,
technology, etc.

3. A grievance which does not meet the requirements set forth in this Article shall
be null and void, and will not be processed in accordance with this procedure.

4. The City is not under any obligation to accept grievances where the City
Manager has previously decided on the same fact pattern.

C. Procedure

All grievances covered by this Article shall be handled exclusively in the following
manner:

A grievance must be reduced to writing, citing the specific Article and Section of
this Memorandum alleged to have been violated.

1. Step 1

The unit member shall reduce the grievance to writing by signing and
completing the grievance form provided by the City and submit it to the
Commander/Administrator, or designee, within 14 calendar days of the initial
commencement of the occurrence being grieved.

The Commander/Administrator, or designee, may investigate, further
consider, and discuss the grievance with the grievant and the grievant's
representative, if any, as deemed appropriate, and shall, within 14 calendar
days of having received the written grievance, submit a response thereto in
writing to the grievant. The parties by written mutual agreement may move
the grievance to Step 2 of the grievance procedure.

2. Step 2

If the written response of the Step 1 does not result in a resolution of the
grievance, the grievant may appeal the grievance by signing and completing
the City form and presenting it to the division head, or designee within 14
calendar days of the grievant's receipt of the Step 1 response.

The division head, or designee, may further consider and discuss the
grievance with the grievant and the grievant's representative, if any, as
deemed appropriate, and shall, within 14 calendar days of having received
the written grievance, submit a response thereto in writing to the grievant. The
parties by written agreement may move the grievance to Step 3 of the
grievance procedure.

3. Step 2.5

After the Step 2 response, but prior to review by the Grievance Committee,
the parties involved may mutually agree to submit the grievance to Labor
Relations. The grievance, as originally written and Step 1 and Step 2
responses, must be submitted to Labor Relations within 14 calendar days of
receipt of the Step 2 response. Labor Relations shall, within 14 calendar days
of the receipt of the grievance, meet with the department head, or designee,
and the grievant and the grievant's representative, if any, in an attempt to
resolve the grievance. Labor Relations shall then submit a written response to
all parties within 14 calendar days of the meeting.

4. Step 3

a. If the written response of the Step 2 (or 2.5 if applicable) does not result in
a resolution of the grievance, the grievant may, within 14 calendar days of
the Step 2 response, appeal the grievance by signing and completing the
City form and presenting it to Labor Relations. A Grievance Committee
hearing will be scheduled at which the grievant shall be afforded the
opportunity to fully present his position and to be represented.

The Grievance Committee shall be composed of:

Chairman – A member of the City Manager’s Office designated by the
City Manager.
Member – A City department head on a rotating schedule.
Member – The President of another union, other than the Grievant’s,
representing employees with the City of Phoenix.

The Grievance Committee shall submit findings and advisory
recommendation(s) to the City Manager. The City Manager shall make the
final determination of the grievance and submit it in writing to the grievant
and his designated representative.

b. If the grievant so elects in writing within the above time limit, in lieu of such
hearing the grievance may be reviewed by an arbitrator. The parties, or
their designated representatives, shall agree on an arbitrator, and if they
are unable to agree on an arbitrator within a reasonable time, either party
may request the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to submit to
them a list of 7 arbitrators who have had experience in the public sector.
The parties shall, within 7 calendar days of the receipt of said list, select
the arbitrator by alternately striking names from said list until one name
remains. Such person shall then become the arbitrator. The arbitrator so
selected shall hold a hearing as expeditiously as possible at a time and
place convenient to the parties, and shall be bound by the following:

i. The arbitrator shall be bound by the language of this Memorandum
and departmental rules and regulations consistent therewith in
considering any issue properly before him/her.

ii. The arbitrator shall expressly confine him/herself to the precise issues
submitted to him/her and shall have no authority to consider any other
issue not so submitted to him/her.

iii. The arbitrator shall be bound by applicable State and City law.

iv. The cost of the arbitrator and any other mutually incurred costs shall
be borne equally by the parties.

The arbitrator shall submit findings and advisory recommendations to the
City Manager. The City Manager shall make the final determination of the
grievance and submit it in writing to the grievant and his designated
representative.

D. Time Limits

Failure of City Management representatives to comply with time limits specified
in Paragraph C shall entitle the grievant to appeal to the next level of review; and
failure of the grievant to comply with said time limits shall constitute
abandonment of the grievance; except however, that the parties may extend time
limits by mutual written agreement in advance of the deadline.

E. Union Grievance

The Union may, in its own name, file a grievance that alleges violation by the City
of the rights accorded to the Union by the specific terms of Article 1-3 of this
Memorandum. The Union shall file such grievance at Step 3 of this Procedure.

F. Group Grievance




When more than one unit member claims the same violation of the same rights
allegedly accorded by this Memorandum, and such claims arise at substantially
the same time and out of the same circumstances, a single group grievance may
be filed in the name of all such members. Such group grievances shall be filed at
the Step of this Procedure which provides the lowest level of common
supervision having authority over all named Grievants. Each unit member that is
a party Grievant must be named in such group grievance.

G. Employer Grievances

Should they occur as a result of official Union activities or actions, including the
failure to act as required under the terms of this Memorandum, employer
grievances will be presented directly to the Union president or any officer of the
Union within 14 days of the occurrence prompting the grievance. The president,
or designee, shall in each case provide a written answer within 14 days from
receipt of the grievance. Unresolved employer grievances may be submitted to
arbitration pursuant to Step 3 so long as the City pays the cost of the arbitrator.


Section 2-2: Labor-Management Committee

A. There shall be a Labor-Management Committee consisting of up to 6
representatives of the Association and up to 6 representatives of the Department
and City. The purpose of the Committee is to facilitate improved Labor-
Management relationships by providing an informal forum for the free exchange
of views and discussions of mutual concerns and problems as distinguished from
meeting and conferring.

B. The Committee shall meet as needed by union request, quarterly at mutually
scheduled times. Parties may mutually agree to meet more frequently.

C. Representatives of the Association on the Committee who are unit members
shall not lose pay or benefits for meetings mutually scheduled during their duty
time up to a maximum of 3 hours per unit member per meeting.

D. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Section shall not
be interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked, any
hours or fractions of hours spent outside the unit member’s work shift in pursuit
of benefits provided by this Section. The employer shall count as time worked
any hours or fractions of hours spent within the unit member’s regular work shift
in pursuit of benefits provided by this Article.

E. For a unit member whose regular shift is other than Shift 1, there will be flexibility
in changing his normal work hours for the purposes of attending official Labor-
Management meetings called by or with the concurrence of City management or
the Police Chief or designee.




Section 2-3: Resolving General Complaints

In the spirit of continually developing good labor-management relations all parties
are encouraged to address general complaints at the lowest level of management in
attempt to seek resolution before escalating issues up the chain of command.



ARTICLE 3: Compensation/Wages

Section 3-1: Wages

A. Unit 4 employees will receive a non-continuous payment equal to the
economic value of 2.5% of their base wage to be paid out on the first full
pay period in August of 2024.

A. The Association and its members reserve the right to discuss base wage
issues upon the disclosure of City revenues and forecasts for the terms of
this Memorandum of Understanding during the designated negotiation
period.

B. Limited Reopener for FY 2025-2026: If the city projects and revenues will
exceed $1,750,000,000 for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 in the forecast that is
presented to the City Council in February 2025, the parties may reopen
Section 3-1 of this agreement for the sole and limited purpose of Meeting
and Conferring, In February 2025, over base wage increases, if any. Unless
held invalid by operations of law and or by final judgment of any tribunal of
competent jurisdiction, all other terms and conditions of this MOU shall
remain in full force and effect during any such reopener and throughout the
duration of this MOU.

B: Steps 1-4 of the current pay scale are eliminated, making the current step 5 the
new step 1 and proceeding. The new pay structure will be a 5-step
process to top step, with pay increments advancing for all Unit 4 employees
effective the first day of the 2026 fiscal year following the implementation of
section A (above).

C. Unit members assigned to the Air Support Unit, and who have achieved and
maintained the qualification level of Pilot in Command, shall be placed at step
one of Police Officer*Pilot, Job Code 62211, in the pay schedule outlined in
Attachment C.

D. Unit members assigned to the Air Support Unit, and who have achieved and
maintained the qualification level of Rescue Qualified Pilot or PC12 Qualified
Pilot, shall be placed at step one for Police Officer*Rescue Pilot, Job Code
62212, in the pay schedule outlined in Attachment C.

E. Unit members assigned to the Air Support Unit, and who have achieved and
maintained the qualification level of Unit Certified Flight Instructor, shall be
placed at step one of Police Officer*Flight Instr, Job Code 62213, in the pay
schedule outlined in Attachment C.

F. A unit member assigned to the Air Support Unit, and who has achieved and
maintained the qualification level of Chief Pilot, shall be placed at step one of Police
Officer*Chief Pilot, Job Code 62214, in the pay schedule outlined in Attachment C.







G. Unit members assigned to one of the four described Air Support assignments
may only qualify for and receive pay for one pay step at a time. Example: A unit
member qualified as a Unit Certified Flight Instructor and receiving pay at pay
step one of Job Code 62213 shall not receive the premium pay for any other pay
step the unit member may also qualify for.

H. Unit members designated as Team Leaders on SAU squads will receive an
additional 5% base hourly rate of pay while assigned to this position.

I. It is understood that for implementation purposes, the practice of rounding of
fractional cents shall be done in accordance with accepted mathematical and
accounting principles.

J. When a conflict arises between the Pay Schedule attached hereto as
Appendices and the Pay Ordinance due to mathematical, typographical, or
printing error, the Pay Ordinance shall be the controlling authority.

K. It is the intent of the parties to permanently move the effective date of any wage
increase to the start of the first pay period in July.

L. Lateral Pay:

A Lateral Police Officer will be placed into the pay step one below where a
their previous agency has 250 or more allocated sworn positions. (I.E. 5
year lateral officer would be placed in step 4.)

A Lateral Police Officer will be placed into the pay step two below where a
their previous agency has less than 250 allocated sworn positions. (I.E. 5
year lateral officer would be placed in step 3.)

M. At least once during the MOU term, the city will conduct a market analysis of law
enforcement agencies located in Maricopa County, including the Department of
Public Safety and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, which will itemize and
compare total compensation, salary, and other benefits. This study will be
provided to the Association at no cost.

Section 3-2: Productivity Enhancement Pay

In recognition of dedicated public service and overall performance, the City agrees to
implement the following Productivity Enhancement Pay formula for unit members:

A. Pay Benefit:

1. In December 20242025, June 20252026, December 20252026, and June
20262027, a unit employee who has completed at least 7 years of continuous
full-time service and who meets the additional qualifications specified in this
Article shall receive $80, pro-rated and included each pay period in the
qualifying unit member’s regular pay check, for each full year of continuous
full-time service in excess of 6 years, up to a semi-annual maximum of
$1,040, annual maximum of $2,080 at 20 years. 181
2. In December 20242025, June 20252026, December 20252026, and June
20262027, a unit employee at 20 years and one day of continuous full-time
service shall receive $125, pro-rated and included each pay period in the
qualifying unit member’s regular pay check, for each full year of continuous
service in excess of 6 years, up to a semi-annual maximum of $2,000, annual
maximum of $4,000 at 22 years or more.

B. Qualifications:

1. A unit member must have completed at least 1 year of continuous full-time
service at the top step in his classification. Employees in step 8 as of July 8,
2002 will receive Productivity Enhancement Pay when they reach one year at
step 8 and maintain their Productivity Enhancement Pay eligibility when they
move to step 9. Employees in step 7 or below as of July 8, 2002 will be required
to complete one year at step 9 to be eligible for Productivity Enhancement Pay.

2. A unit member must have completed 7 years of continuous full-time service.
A unit member who has continuous, full time City service in another
classification(s) may apply that time to the 7 year requirement.

3. A unit member must have achieved the overall performance rating of meets
standards or better on his latest scheduled performance evaluation on file in
the Human Resources Department.

4. A unit member who receives a less than meets standards rating may appeal
that rating by memo through his chain of command to the Police Chief. A unit
member’s eligibility shall be reinstated once the unit member receives a
scheduled or unscheduled performance rating that meets standards.

5. A unit member must be on full-time active status. A unit member on industrial
leave shall qualify for this payment for only the first year of the industrial
leave. However, the entire period of industrial leave shall qualify as
continuous service when the unit member returns to active employment.

C. Terms of Payment:

1. The City will make adjustments to an employee’s Productivity Enhancement
payment within 30 days of the qualifying date.


Section 3-3: Training Pay

A. Field Training Officers (FTOs) whom the department selects to conduct
department-approved officer field training; will receive an additional 5% of their
base hourly rate of pay for every day they are assigned to an officially authorized
field training position.




28 182
B. Field Training Officers who train in place or unit member assigned to train an
O.I.T. in traffic/DUI enforcement will receive 5% base hourly rate of pay for every
day the unit member actually trains.

C. Unit members assigned to the Canine Unit, who have achieved and maintain the
qualifications for the position of Canine Unit Trainer, will receive an additional 5%
of their base hourly rate of pay for every day they are assigned to an officially
authorized Canine Unit Trainer Position. The following is a list of requirements to
receive payment as a Canine Unit Trainer:

1. The unit member must be, or be designated by the Department to become,
certified by an outside association to train police service dogs. The
certifications include patrol, narcotics detection and/or explosive detection.

2. Training being provided must include basic level training for canines and
handlers assigned to the unit. This section is not meant to include a canine
handler training only his or her assigned canine; it is meant for those who
provide basic and in service training to other canine teams in the unit.

3. An officially authorized Canine Unit Trainer Position must include responsibility
for proper written evaluation of each canine and handler being trained.

D. Detectives selected by the department selects to conduct department-approved
new Detective or civilian investigator training will receive an additional 5% of their
base rate of pay for every day they perform such training.

E. Officers selected by the department to mentor and evaluate newly assigned
special assignments bureau members will receive an additional 5% of their base
rate of pay for every day the new member is under their mentorship.

Section 3-4: Compensation for Interpreting and Translation by Sworn Police
Officers

A. Purpose

1. This regulation is written to provide guidelines for adjusting the compensation
of sworn police officers who are authorized and required by a sworn police
supervisor to utilize a language other than English, including sign language,
to conduct an official Police Department function or activity.

2. This compensation shall be for police-related functions or activities in which
the unit member is called upon to interpret in addition to their normal assigned
duties.

B. Payment Authorization

Compensation provided for by this regulation shall be given only when approved
by a sworn police supervisor prior to the actual interpretation or translation.

C. Performance Activities Approved for Special Compensation
1. Verbal interpretation, in excess of 7 consecutive minutes per occurrence,
while conducting any assigned formal police function or activity.

2. Written translation, in excess of 7 consecutive minutes per occurrence, while
conducting any assigned formal police function or activity.

3. Signing interpretation and translation, in excess of 7 consecutive minutes per
occurrence, while conducting any assigned formal police function or activity.

D. Compensation

A unit member who meets linguistic skills qualifications, as determined by a
management review panel, or in the case of sign language determined by
presenting certification recognized by the Arizona Commission for the Deaf and
Hard of Hearing (ACDHH), shall be paid a premium of $10 15.00 per hour
calculated to the nearest 1/4 hour, in addition to his base hourly rate, for each
hour he is engaged in assigned and authorized interpretation, translation, or
signing activities.

Consistent with Section 5-10, 3 of this Memorandum and A.R. 2.51, employees
are eligible to use the seminar and professional membership portion of their
reimbursement benefit for the ACDHH certification.

E. Supervisory Authorization

Authorization must be provided by a sworn police supervisor in each case.
Written notification which includes a listing of the specific time periods for which
the premium payment is sought along with signatures of the unit member and the
appropriate supervisor should be forwarded to the Police Department’s Fiscal
Management Bureau before the end of the pay period in which the additional
duty occurred.


Section 3-5: Overtime

A. Overtime is defined as time assigned and worked beyond the regularly
scheduled 40 hour work week or 8 hour work shift, or 10 hour work shift if a 4 day
work week is implemented. Duly authorized paid leave shall be considered as
time worked for purposes of the regularly scheduled work week. This provision
shall not apply to unpaid leave.

B. Overtime shall be worked and shall be allowed if assigned by the Police Chief or
his designees.

C. Overtime work will be compensated in either cash or compensation time at 1-1/2
times the regular rate of pay after the first 7 minutes assigned and worked
beyond the end of the unit member’s regularly scheduled shift, calculated to the
nearest 1/4 hour.


D. A unit member may, subject to approval of his non-unit supervisor based on
considerations of departmental scheduling and operations factors, request to use
overtime as compensatory time subject to the limitation of 300 hours on the
accumulation of compensatory time. Use of compensatory time shall be subject
to advance approval of the non-unit supervisor. If a unit member submits
overtime requests that are in excess of 300 hours, he will be paid the difference.

E. Unit members may contribute accrued compensatory time to other employees in
accordance with City policy governing contributions of leave for serious illness of
an employee or their immediate family member.

F. A unit member may be paid for accumulated compensatory time by submitting a
memorandum to the Fiscal Bureau requesting payment for any portion of the
compensatory time. This may be done at any time upon the unit member’s
request, and such payment will be made in the pay period following receipt of the
memorandum by the Fiscal Bureau.

G. At the direction of the immediate supervisor in each case, a unit member shall be
entitled to overtime in accordance with Article 3, Section 3-6 hereof, while he is
being evaluated by the authorized and designated City physician for return to
work at times he is not scheduled to be on duty nor is on paid leave or disability
benefit status, based on actual check-in and check-out time recorded by Health
Center staff. This time shall not qualify for the guaranteed minimum overtime
provision contained in Section 3-8, but shall be compensated at a minimum of 1
hour at 1-1/2. No unit member shall be compensated for other than the
supervisor directed evaluation(s) by the City physician for return to work.

H. After 4 consecutive hours of overtime, a unit member shall be entitled to a paid
meal break of 1/2 hour, but in no event shall a unit member be entitled to more
than one such meal break for every 8 consecutive hours of overtime.

For a unit member participating in the 4/10 schedule, this provision shall mean
that before a unit member is entitled to a second 1/2 hour paid meal break, he
shall have worked on an overtime basis for a minimum of 4 hours beyond the
end of his regularly scheduled 10 hour work shift.

I. If work demands preclude a unit member from taking a meal period, the unit
member will be paid an additional 30 minutes at the straight time rate. This
benefit shall apply only if the interruption occurs during the first 30 minutes of the
meal period.

J. When a unit member is off duty and is contacted by telephone by his supervisor
because of the unit member’s official duties, for purposes other than call-out, or a
supervisor approves of the making or receiving of the call, the unit member will be
paid a minimum of 15 minutes at time and one-half his regular rate of pay when any
combination of calls equals 7 minutes or more. If the call extends past this



minimum, the overtime will be calculated to the nearest 1/4 hour. He will not receive
overtime for additional duty-related calls received during this compensation period.

K. A unit member on industrial leave and assigned to his home will be considered to
have the same duty hours and N-days, up to a 7 calendar day period, as the
squad he was on when the injury/illness occurred. After the 7 days, he may be
reassigned to new duty hours and/or N-days.

L. A unit member who scheduled a leave day 30 calendar days in advance through
his immediate non-unit supervisor in accordance with departmental policy and
who subsequently is placed on court stand-by, or is required to appear in court
will, by his choice, receive overtime pay in accordance with this Section and
Section 3-7 and/or Section 3-8, in addition to the leave day.

M. A unit member who scheduled a leave day but failed to do so within 30 calendar
days in advance, and who is placed on stand-by or called to court, will receive
overtime pay in accordance with this Article and Section 3-7. However, the
number of leave hours taken will be reduced by the number of overtime hours
paid. Court stand-by hours do not apply to this provision.


Section 3-6: Court Time Overtime

A. When court time constitutes overtime, a unit member shall be entitled to overtime
compensation/minimum call-out pay consistent with Section 3-8 of this
Memorandum.

1. Court time overtime shall be continuous time compensated consistent with
Section 3-6, subsection C.

2. No cost parking will be provided for unit members who are called to testify or
appear at any City of Phoenix Municipal Court facility for any official police
department business, whether on or off-duty.

3. If performed virtual, the unit employee must report to a Phoenix Police facility
to be eligible for Court Time Overtime. If performed at a location of the unit
employee’s discretion, other than a work location, the unit member will be
paid a minimum of 15 minutes at time and one-half his regular rate of pay
when any combination of calls equals 7 minutes or more. If the call extends
past this minimum, the overtime will be calculated to the nearest 1/4 hour.
The unit employee will not receive overtime for additional duty-related calls
received during this compensation period.

B. For purposes of this Article the term Court shall be defined as including Federal
District Court; Superior Court, State of Arizona; City Court, City of Phoenix, State
of Arizona; Municipal Courts in Maricopa County; Justice Court; Federal, State,
County Grand Juries; Motor Vehicle Department hearings, and Prosecutorial and
Defense interviews. It is understood that this Article shall not apply to


administrative hearings including but not limited to arbitration hearings pursuant
to the MOU, Civil Service Board hearings, PERB hearings, and hearings
pursuant to the A.R. 2.61 grievance procedure.

C. After a unit member verifies his need to appear in court to testify concerning the
performance of his official duties at a time other than his regularly scheduled tour
of duty, and he is notified less than 12 hours in advance of the scheduled
appearance time that he need not appear, the unit member will receive 2 hours
of pay at 1-1/2 times his base hourly rate of pay.


Section 3-7: Call-Out Pay

A. A unit member called back because of his own negligence, whether in the proper
care and use of City equipment, or for his failure to complete official reports prior
to securing for the day, shall be paid for such call- back consistent with Section
3-6, subsection C, provided, however, the unit member shall not be eligible for
the 3 hour guaranteed minimum pursuant to this Article. If a claim of negligence
is disputed, it may become subject to the grievance procedure herein.

B. Anytime that a unit member is called back after leaving City facilities at a time
other than his regularly assigned shift, the unit member will receive a minimum of
3 hours pay at time and one-half the unit member’s base pay calculated to the
nearest 1/4 hour, except that a unit member shall not be eligible for additional
compensation during that three hour period.

Compensation to a unit member who is called out at times other than his regularly
scheduled shift will begin at the time the unit member is notified. The compensation
will continue up to 30 minutes beyond the completion of the duties for which the unit
member was called out, or until the member returns to his residence, whichever is
first. Where applicable, the travel time shall be paid only if the total work and allowed
travel time exceed the minimum call out guarantee. Travel time shall not apply when
a unit member is working overtime planned in advance.

C. A unit member beginning an overtime period within 3 hours or less prior to the
regularly scheduled duty reporting time, will be compensated from the time the
overtime period begins to the time he is scheduled to report for duty except that a
unit member shall not be eligible for additional compensation during that period.

D. Holdover time, i.e., being held over on shift (no break in duty exceeding 15
minutes) will be compensated for actual time spent in accordance with Section 3-
6, subsection C.


Section 3-8: Out-of-Rank Pay




A. A unit member who is temporarily required to serve in a regular authorized
position in a supervisory classification, (e.g., sergeant), shall be compensated at
the higher rate of pay in accordance with the following:

B. To be eligible for the additional compensation, the unit member must first
accumulate 10 regular working shifts of assignment in the higher rank within any
12 month period; satisfactory performance during a previous appointment to the
higher rank will be credited to the qualifying period. The days of out-of-rank
assignment need not necessarily be consecutive. Once this qualification is
satisfied, no additional re-qualification will be required. All shifts worked beyond
the 10th shift in the supervisory classification will be subject to the higher rate of
pay.

C. Temporary assignments out-of-rank shall be recorded only in full shift units. A
unit member working out-of-rank for less than 1 full shift will not be credited with
working out-of-rank service time.

D. To qualify for out-of-rank pay, a unit member must be assuming substantially the
full range of duties and responsibilities of the higher level position. Out-of-rank
pay is not authorized, for example, if the organization of a work unit is such that
each unit member carries on his normal duties during the temporary absence of
a supervisor, without a need for the direction which the supervisor would provide
on a longer term basis.

E. Time worked in a higher rank shall not earn credits toward the completion of
probationary requirements in the higher rank.

F. A unit member who has qualified under these provisions shall be compensated at
the minimum rate established for the higher rank for all shifts worked beyond the
10th shift served in the higher rank. In the event of overlapping salary ranges, a
one-step differential shall be paid for out-of-rank assignments. The higher rate of
pay shall be used in computing overtime when authorized overtime is served in
out-of-rank work assignments; the overtime rate shall be the rate established by
the overtime regulations that apply to the higher rank.


Section 3-9: Sick Leave Conversion at Retirement

Effective at the beginning of the first pay period in July, 1992, the following benefits shall
apply:

A. Definitions:

1. Qualifying hours - the minimum number of accrued and unused sick leave
credits existing on the last day of service prior to retirement, which are
necessary before a unit member can participate in the benefit program.




2. Base number of hours or base hours - the number of hours of accrued and
unused sick leave credits which are uncompensated under this Article and
above which the City will compensate the unit member.

3. Base hourly wage - the base hourly rate of pay being paid at the time of
retirement to the retiring unit member who qualifies for participation in this
benefit program.

B. Benefit and Eligibility:

1. A member that has between 1 – 899 hours of sick leave remaining in their
sick leave bank at the time of retirement, shall be eligible for payment of
100% their base wage for 50% of their hours accrued.

2. A member who has accumulated a minimum of 900 – 1,285 hours of unused
sick leave at the time of retirement, shall be eligible for payment of 100% their
base hourly rate for 65% of their remaining sick hours.

3. A member who has accumulated a minimum of 1,286 – 1,713 hours of
unused sick leave at the time of retirement, shall be eligible for payment of
100% their base wage for 80% of their remaining sick hours.

4. A member who has accumulated a minimum of 1,714 hours of unused sick
leave at the time of retirement, shall be eligible for payment of 100% their
base wage for 100% of their remaining sick hours.

5. A unit member who has accrued 1,286 hours or more of unused sick leave
may elect to have 150 hours of sick leave paid out at the member’s hourly
rate in one lump sum. A unit member may only elect to exercise this benefit 3
times in their career, and not more than 1 time in a fiscal year. Eligible
employees may elect to buy back their hours between July 1 and the last pay
period in January each fiscal year.

6. The payments described in numbers 1 through 5 above are not considered
Final Average Salary for purposes of pension calculations.

C. Administration:

1. At the time of retirement, the City’s Employee Benefits Division, or such other
individual or agency as the City may designate, shall determine the unit
member’s eligibility and the amount of unused sick leave to be compensated.

2. The unit member shall verify in writing the computations of the Employee
Benefits Division.

3. In the event a unit member’s eligibility for participation or the amount of
compensation is disputed, then the dispute shall be submitted to the City
Auditor for binding resolution.


Section 3-10: Sick Leave Payout

All accumulated sick leave hours on the city's official file at the time of the member's
death will be paid. Payment will be based upon the member's base hourly rate at the
time of death.


Section 3-11: Night Shift Differential/Weekend Shift Differential

A. A unit member shall receive $2.00 per hour in addition to his base hourly rate of
pay when working a night shift or any portions of a night shift which ends at or
after 10:00 PM.

B. A unit member shall receive night shift pay differential only for hours scheduled
and worked, and not while on paid leave time.

C. A unit member who is called out and works between the hours of 10:00 PM and
6:00 AM will be paid night shift differential for all hours worked at the rate
specified in this Article. If a unit member was called out while on a stand-by
status, he will not receive night shift differential.

D. A unit member shall receive $1.00 per hour in addition to his base hourly rate of
pay and any other shift differential or any other premium pay he may be receiving
for working a weekend shift. A designated weekend shift is defined as any shift
that starts on or after 2:00 PM on Friday, and continuing through any shift that
starts on or before, but not after 11:59 PM on Sunday.

1. A unit member shall receive weekend shift pay differential only for hours
scheduled and worked, and not while on paid leave.

2. A unit member who is called out and works between 2:00 PM on Friday and
11:59 PM on Sunday will be paid weekend shift differential for all hours
worked at the rate specified in this Article. If a unit member was called out
while on stand-by status, he will not receive weekend shift differential.


Section 3-12: Stand-By Pay

A. When a unit member is required and assigned to be available for immediate
emergency call-out at times that they are not otherwise on duty and the unit
member complies with departmental regulations incident thereto, the unit
member shall be compensated as follows: $100.00 on the unit member’s non-
work day and $80.00 on a workday.

B. When management determines it is necessary to provide call-out service, stand-
by assignments will be maintained by any detail in the department.


Section 3-13: Court Time Standby Pay

A. When a unit member receives a subpoena or other notice requiring him to stand-
by to appear in court to testify concerning the performance of his official duties at
a time other than his regularly scheduled tour of duty, and he was not notified 12
hours or more in advance of the court appearance that he need not stand-by, he
shall be entitled to a minimum of 2 hours of pay at 1-1/2 times his base hourly
rate of pay for court dockets scheduled before 1200 hours, and an additional
minimum of 2 hours of pay at 1-1/2 times his base hourly rate of pay for court
dockets scheduled after 1200 hours, for each day the subject court proceeding is
in session and the Unit member is subject to call, providing the provisions of
subsection B hereof are satisfied. If a unit member is required to remain on
stand-by after 1200 hours, the unit member shall receive an additional 1 hour of
pay at 1-1/2 times his base hourly rate of pay.

If call-out occurs before the expiration of stand-by pay, then stand-by status shall
continue until the occurrence of either (a) the expiration of stand-by pay; or (b)
arrival at the duty location or participation in virtual appearance begin. Call-out
pay and stand-by pay shall not be permitted to overlap resulting in the
compounding of compensation.

B. If a unit member fails to exercise his responsibility to contact the appropriate
representative of the court or a party 16 hours or less before the time indicated
on the subpoena to determine the continued need for him to stand-by, he is not
eligible for any stand-by pay.

C. For the purpose of this Memorandum, subpoena refers to a subpoena duly
issued by a court or the Arizona Motor Vehicle Department.

D. For purposes of this Article the term Court shall be defined as including Federal
District Court; Superior Court, State of Arizona; City Court, City of Phoenix, State
of Arizona; Municipal Courts in Maricopa County; Justice Court; Federal, State,
County Grand Juries; Motor Vehicle Department hearings; Mental Health Court;
and Prosecutorial and Defense interviews. It is understood that this Article shall
not apply to administrative hearings including but not limited to arbitration
hearings pursuant to the MOU, Civil Service Board hearings, PERB hearings,
and hearings pursuant to the A.R. 2.61 grievance procedure.


Section 3-14: Off-Duty Employment

A. The Department agrees to maintain a list of unit members who are interested in
off-duty work for use in making job referrals, provided the unit member has
received prior approval to engage in off-duty employment from the immediate
supervisor.


B. Off-duty employment shall be governed by the rules and regulations of the
Phoenix Police Department. Should the Department contemplate any changes in
these rules and regulations during the term of this Memorandum, it shall meet
and consult with the Association on such changes in the Labor-Management
Committee prior to implementation.

C. The Police Chief agrees to eliminate the limitation of the number of off-duty work
hours permitted. However, the Department reserves the right to take appropriate
action in the event that a unit member’s wellness, welfare, or performance is
adversely affected.

D. A unit member who works off duty in a police function for a City-sponsored event
or project, and is paid through City payroll, will be compensated at time and one-
half his regular rate of pay for all time worked.

E. The Department agrees to maintain a list of all current off duty jobs, with officers
separated by rank, as well as the hourly salary and all billable hours for all off duty
employment that specifically calls for an officer to perform the duties it entails.


Section 3-15: Jury Duty

When a unit member is called upon to serve as a juror in any court action, he will be
allowed leave from his duties without loss of pay for the time required for his service.


Section 3-16: Deferred Compensation and Defined Contribution Plans

A. The City’s contribution to DCP will continue at 2.56 4.42%.

B. At the employee’s separation, for either retirement or exiting the Deferred
Retirement Options Program, the employee’s sick leave payout amounts will be
automatically contributed into the City’s 401(a) plan. Any excess amount over the
Internal Revenue Code 401(a) plan contribution maximum limits will be
automatically contributed into the City’s 457(b) plan. Any portion of the excess
amount that cannot be contributed to the 457(b) plan because of Internal
Revenue Code 457(b) plan contribution maximum limits will be paid as taxable
income. The 401(a) Plan document as approved by the Deferred Compensation
Board will be the governing document.


Section 3-17: Non-Direct Payment of Compensation or Benefits

Various sections of this Memorandum contain a form of compensation, wages, or benefits
that have been negotiated in good faith and may or may not provide a direct payment of
wages or other benefit to each member. Those forms of compensation, wages, or benefits
that do not provide a direct payment to each unit member have been negotiated in place of
a direct payment and costed as part of the overall economic package. Examples include:
life insurance, long term disability insurance, leave payouts, etc.




38 192
Section 3-18: Drug Recognition Expert Premium Pay

Department qualified/certified Drug Recognition Experts (DRE) who are current in all
training and requirements set forth in police, and have completed all necessary training,
shall be paid a premium of $15.00 per hour, calculated to the nearest ¼ hour, in
addition to their base hourly rate, for each hour they are engaged in DRE activities.


Section 3-19: Phlebotomist Premium Pay

Department qualified/certified phlebotomists who are current in all training and
requirements set forth in police, and have completed all necessary training, shall be
paid a premium of $15.00 per hour, calculated to the nearest ¼ hour, in addition to their
base hourly rate, for each hour they are engaged in phlebotomy activities.

Section 3-20: CIT Pay

The Department shall pay a $15.00-per-hour premium, calculated to the nearest quarter
hour, to any Department-certified and current CIT-qualified employee for the hours the
employee actually performs CIT duties—whether or not assigned to a CIT squad—with
assignment alone not qualifying an employee for the premium.




ARTICLE 4: Hours of Work/Working Conditions

Section 4-1: Work Schedules

A. The regular duty hours for a unit member shall be 5 consecutive shifts of 8 hours
in a 7 calendar day work week. These 5 consecutive shifts will be preceded and
followed by 2 “N” days. If, by reason of transfer, a unit member’s “N” days are
changed, the provisions of this section pertaining to “N” days shall not apply. The
8 duty hours per shift shall be consecutive and may include any “briefing time”
and shall include a meal period of 30 minutes. When work demands permit, with
a supervisor’s approval, a unit member may combine this 30 minute meal period
with one of his 15 minute rest periods described under Subsection D of this
Article to achieve a 45 minute meal period. This shall also apply to a unit member
working a 4/10 schedule. At times, the department may have operational needs
which necessitate a change in current work schedules. The department shall give
a unit member a minimum 7 day advance written notice when his “N” days or
hours will be changed. If this (7 day written notice is not given, and there is no
operational need for not providing the notice, the “N” days or hours change will
be rescheduled to allow for a 7 day notice period.

B. If a 10 hour, 4 day work week is implemented; the regular duty hours for an affected
unit member shall be 4 consecutive shifts of 10 hours in a 7 calendar day work 193
week. These 4 consecutive shifts will be preceded and followed by 3 “N” days. If, by
reason of transfer, a unit member’s “N” days are changed, the provisions of this
Subsection pertaining to “N” days shall not apply. The 10 duty hours per shift shall
be consecutive and may include any “briefing time” and shall include a meal period
of 30 minutes. At times, the department may have operational needs which
necessitate a change in current work schedules. The department shall give a unit
member a minimum 7 day advance written notice when his “N” days or hours will be
changed. If this 7 day written notice is not given, and there is no operational





need for not providing the notice, the “N” days or hours change will be
rescheduled to allow for a 7 day notice period.

C. All unit four members assigned to patrol squads with beat responsibility will only
work the work schedule defined in subsection B of this section (4/10’s) through
June 30, 2026.

A. The regular duty work hours for a unit member performing a patrol function with
precinct, squad area and/or beat responsibility will only be 4 consecutive 10-hour
shifts in a 7- calendar day work week, preceded and followed by 3 consecutive N
days. The 10 duty hours per shift will be consecutive and will include any “briefing
time” as well as a 40-minute meal period. When work demands permit, with a
supervisor’s approval, a unit member may combine this 40-minute meal period
with one of their 15-minute rest periods described under subsection D of this
Article to achieve a 55-minute period. If, by reason of transfer, a unit member’s N
days are changed, the provisions of this section pertaining to N days shall not
apply.

B. The regular duty hours for a unit member performing any other duties will be 5
consecutive 8-hour shifts in a 7-calendar day work week, preceded and followed
by 2 consecutive N days. The 8 hours per shift will be consecutive and will include
any “briefing time” as well as a 30-minute meal period. When work demands
permit, with a supervisor’s approval, a unit member may combine this 30-minute
meal period with one of their 15-minute rest periods described under subsection D
E of this Article to achieve a 45-minute period. If, by reason of transfer, a unit
member’s N days are changed, the provisions of this section pertaining to N days
shall not apply.




C. If a unit member’s normal duty hours are changed with less than 7 days’ notice,
then the unit member is entitled to premium pay.

If a unit member’s normal “N” days are changed, then the unit member is entitled
to premium pay.

"Premium Pay" is calculated as follows:

• For a unit member assigned to a 5/8’s schedule:
• A change in normal duty hours: 2 hours at their base hourly rate of pay.
• One “N” day change: 4 hours at their regular rate of pay.
• Two “N” days changed: 20 hours at their regular rate of pay.
• For a unit member assigned to a 4/10’s schedule:
• A change in normal duty hours: 2.5 hours at their base hourly rate of
pay.
• One “N” day change: 5 hours at their regular rate of pay.
• Two “N” days changed: 10 hours at their regular rate of pay.
• Three “N” days changed: 20 hours at their regular rate of pay.
If the period during which these hours and/or N days will be changed exceeds 7
calendar days, the rate of pay for the affected unit member will become 1 ½ times their
current hourly rate for the entirety of the period following that week for which the
change occurred.


Subject to the discretion of the Chief, or designee, official mobilization as defined
in Operations Order 9.1 TM 9-00-9 is exempt from this section, however such
official mobilizations are not to be ordered for patrol coverage or similar issues.

A unit member, who requests a change in work schedules, will not receive
premium pay since the request is not a department directed change.

This section does not apply to the 30 hour or more block of annual module training.

A unit member is not eligible to receive both premium pay and overtime for the
same hours.

D. When used in the context of this Article, “Operational Needs” will be defined as:
Service demand beyond routine patrol staffing, or other required actions performed
to accomplish the mission of the department. These actions may be routine
(anticipated) or emergency (unanticipated). For routine anticipated operational
actions, a seven-day written notice will be given to change schedules. For
emergency unanticipated operational actions, unit members will be provided with
as much advance notice and information as the situation will allow.

E. In addition to all duties as assigned by the Police Chief or his designees, work
hours shall continue to include two15-minute rest periods as work demands
allow.






F. There shall be a minimum of 15 hours off between shifts, 13 hours for a unit
member working a 4/10 schedule. If this is not possible, the unit member shall
receive overtime compensation at his regular rate of pay for each full hour
worked within the described 15 hour period, 13 hour period for a unit member
working a 4/10 schedule. A unit member assigned to a specialty bureau may sign
individual statements waiving the provisions of this section. Signed waivers shall
continue in effect per fiscal year.

This section does not apply to mandatory training conducted by the Advanced
Training Detail when a member is given 30 days written notice of the required
training. The intent is not for supervisors to work employees on a double shift.
Employees’ chain of command will ensure employee’s shift prior to training is
adjusted to afford 13/15 hours off before reporting to training.

G. A unit member will be permitted to take the meal period at a location within the
squad/team area, or if no suitable eating location is available, then with the
approval of the designated supervisor, at a location outside the squad/team area.
A meal period may be taken at a private residence, with supervisory approval,
provided such residence is within the unit member’s beat area.

H. A unit member may return to his work station 20 minutes before his scheduled
end of shift if work demands permit for the purpose of completing required
paperwork, notifying oncoming unit members of any beat conditions, and to notify
his supervisor of any unusual occurrences he encountered during his shift.

I. A unit member assigned to the Canine Detail shall be allowed 4 hours of paid
time per work week to care for his police dog at his residence. The City will
determine when and how the hours will be scheduled.

J. A unit member may waive the provision of section A and B of this section to
facilitate an alternative work schedule upon written agreement of both the
Association and the Department.

K. “On duty” training will be approved at the Division Chief level.


Section 4-2: Seniority

A. The City shall provide the Association with a list of unit members showing each
unit member’s City employment date and class employment date.

B. Seniority shall be by length of service within a class. If seniority within the class is
not determinative, then length of service with the City shall prevail.

C. Seniority shall be used as a factor consistent with established Civil Service
procedures in choice of work assignments, vacation schedules and in the
determination of layoffs.

Section 4-3: No cost parking
All unit members shall be provided with free parking at a City-owned or leased parking
facility when reporting to work at their primary duty assignment if there is not a free
parking facility available at their primary duty assignment.
ARTICLE 5: Benefits

Section 5-1: Health Insurance

A. The City and Association agree to maintain the current 80/20 split for health
insurance monthly contribution for the single and family coverage. If there is a
rate increase or decrease, the city will pay 80% of the new monthly contribution
and the employee will pay 20%.

B. If there is a substantive change in the City’s Health Insurance Plan design, the
Labor Relations Administrator will discuss such change with the Association.

C. In the event of the death of a unit member while on duty or while performing a
police function as determined by the City, the City will, at a minimum, continue
to pay the full monthly health insurance premium for the spouse or qualified
domestic partner (QDP) and all eligible dependents. Should the surviving
spouse remarry or enter into a new QDP, the benefits of this provision shall be
discontinued for the spouse. Benefits for remaining eligible dependents, e.g.
children, step children, or adopted children, will remain in effect as federal law
prescribes.

In the event of the death of a unit member while commuting to or from his work
location, for a period of two hours each way, the City will continue to pay the full
monthly health insurance premium for the spouse and all eligible dependents.
The City will cover the payment of a supplementary commutation life insurance
policy for each unit member. The Association will pay the cost of this benefit, if
any, the first year of each new Memorandum period.

D. In the event Congress or the State of Arizona passes legislation which considers
the amount the City contributes to health or dental insurance as imputed income,
then the City will consider such contributions as income to the employee.


Section 5-2: Retiree Health Insurance

A. Upon retirement of a unit member, or bargaining unit member who retired on
August 1, 1992 or later, the City’s contribution to health care premiums will be
calculated without regard to age.

B. In no event will the combination of this contribution and the amount paid by the
PSPRS (Public Safety Personnel Retirement System) exceed the monthly
premium for the chosen health insurance benefit.

C. The City of Phoenix agrees to participate in the Post Employee Health Plan (PEHP)
for unit members in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Plan's

Participation Agreement, a copy of which is attached to this agreement. The
Employer agrees to contribute to the Plan on behalf of unit members:

Effective July 1, 2017, the Employer shall contribute for each unit member the
amount of $ 6.00 per pay period. If any contribution is an amount other than an
equal dollar amount per unit member, that contribution shall be deposited in the
unit member's Health Insurance Premium Reimbursement sub -account,
otherwise the Employer's equal dollar amount contribution per unit member shall
be deposited into the unit member's Universal Health Care Reimbursement sub-
account pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Plan.

D. By July 1, 2026, the City will establish a stand-alone trust with the sole
purpose of supplementing retiree health care for Officers. An Association member will
be on the board of any established trust created for this purpose. This trust will not be
included as a line item in the City budget, and the monies shall be for the exclusive
purpose of providing this benefit to retired officers eligible to participate in the trust’s
plan of benefits. No portion of the trust may be used or diverted for any other purpose.
This trust will be funded as follows:

In addition to any off-duty detail hour rate, a $5 per hour fee that will be
payable to a jointly established trust for the sole purpose of supplementing retiree health
care for Officers that were employed by the city on or after July 1, 2025. This fee will be
in addition to any administrative fee established by the City and/or any additional fees
due to a third-party contractor. This fee will be incurred regardless of whether the
officer employed is a City of Phoenix employee or not, and regardless of the rank of the
employed officer. The Association will have the right to audit the records of the off-duty
detail program to ensure accurate payment of the above fees.

The trust board shall determine the amount available for reimbursement for
benefits for each retiree, with the advice of an actuary or accountant, and shall
determine each retiree’s eligibility.



Section 5-3: Dental Insurance

A. The City shall pay the full premium costs for single coverage for employees
enrolled in the base HMO or PPO plan. and 75% of the premium costs for family
coverage for a City dental plan.

B. At a minimum, the plan shall include a PPO option that consists of 100%
payment of reasonable and customary charges covered for preventive and
preventive-related diagnostic services and 80% payment of reasonable and
customary covered charges for basic services and major services. At least
one plan shall include an orthodontia benefit providing for 80% payment of
reasonable and customary charges up to a maximum lifetime benefit of $4,000
per person. Dental plans may be subject to the deductibles and limitations
contained in the contract between the dental insurance carrier and the City of
Phoenix. Enrollment in prior City of Phoenix dental plans counts toward major
services time limit exclusions.

Section 5-4: Life Insurance
A. The City will continue the existing off-the-job and on-the-job life and
dismemberment insurance coverage, and will continue the face value of the
policy at $15,000. The City will continue the current policy for death in the line of
duty at $100,000.00.

B. Effective August 1, 2001, the City will increase the $35,000.00 line of duty life
and dismemberment insurance coverage to each unit member to $100,000.00.

C. Additionally, the City will provide to each unit member a $200,000 death benefit
covering the unit member’s commute to and from his city work location. The City
will cover the unit member’s commute for up to two hours before his shift begins
and two hours after his shift concludes. The Association will only pay the cost of
this benefit the first year of the MOU.








Section 5-5: Long-Term Disability Insurance

A. The City will offer a long-term disability benefit for all full-time, regular unit members
pursuant to A.R. 2.323 as may be amended (providing that such amendments shall
not be in conflict with the MOU). Employees who have been continuously employed
and working on a full-time basis for twelve consecutive months are eligible for long-
term disability coverage. Applicants must apply for benefits they may be eligible to
receive. After an established 90 calendar day qualifying period, the plan will provide
up to 66-2/3% of the employee's basic monthly salary at the time disability occurs
and continue up to age 75 for employees who have been employed full-time for 36
months and one day. Employees who have been employed full-time with the City of
Phoenix for 36 months or less, will be eligible to receive a long term disability benefit
for no more than 30 months.

B. This benefit will be coordinated with sick leave, industrial insurance payments,
social security benefits, unemployment insurance and disability provisions of the
retirement plan.


Section 5-6: Holidays and Vacation Leave

A unit member shall be entitled to holiday benefits as set forth in Paragraph 2 of
Operations Order No. 3.6, including overtime compensation for hours assigned and
worked on a specified holiday in accordance with and subject to Article 3, Section 3-6,
Overtime.

A. The compensation of a unit member who actually works on a day designated as
a holiday shall include, in addition to his regular day’s pay, additional pay or
compensatory time for hours worked up to 8 excluding overtime pay.

B. A unit member who is not scheduled to work on a designated holiday will still be
compensated for 8 hours pay or compensatory time for each holiday.

C. Paid holidays shall include:

New Year’s Day
Martin Luther King, Jr's Birthday
President’s Day
Caesar Chavez Birthday
Memorial Day
Juneteenth Day
Independence Day
Labor Day
Indigenous Peoples’ Day
Veterans Day
Thanksgiving Day
Friday after Thanksgiving
Christmas Day


Two Personal Leave Days* & **

* After 6 months of continuous service.
** Personal leave will be a total of 20 hours for all unit members.

Subject to operational and scheduling factors, a unit member’s personal
leave days shall be taken each calendar year on any day of the unit
member’s choosing.

D. For a unit member participating in the 4/10 schedule, holiday pay shall be applied
as follows:

1. When a designated paid holiday falls on a unit member’s scheduled day off,
the unit member shall be paid 8 hours of holiday pay.

2. When a designated paid holiday falls on a unit member’s normally scheduled
work day and the unit member is directed to not work that day, the unit
member shall be paid for 8 hours of holiday pay. The additional 2 hours
necessary to receive 10 hours of pay will be deducted at the unit member’s
discretion as either non-paid time, accumulated vacation or compensatory
time. If a unit member has no accumulated vacation or compensatory time,
the unit member will receive only 8 hours of pay. waived at no penalty.
Alternatively, the unit member may work for 2 hours on the holiday, paid at
straight time, performing tasks at the direction of a supervisor. The
compensation of a unit member who actually works on a day designated as a
holiday shall include, in addition to his regular day’s pay, additional pay or
compensatory time for hours worked up to 8 hours, excluding overtime pay.

E. A unit member will continue to receive holiday pay while on industrial leave.

F. Holidays shall be observed on the calendar days on which they fall for unit
members directly involved in providing continuous 24-hour or seven-day service
operations.

G. The City agrees to maintain its present vacation selection procedure and, to
every extent practicable, allow a transferred unit member to maintain his previous
vacation schedule.

H. A unit member who works a schedule at full time 52 weeks of the year shall be
credited with vacation credits for every completed calendar month of paid service
according to the following schedule:

1. Through 5 years of service 8 hrs. per month
1. 6th tThrough 10th year of service 10 hrs. per month
2. 11th through 15th year of service 11 hrs. per month
3. 16th through 20th year of service 13 hrs. per month
4. 21st year of service and thereafter 15 hrs. per month



I. Unit members who have accrued 312 hours or more of vacation, may elect to
have 150 hours of vacation leave paid out at the member’s hourly rate in one
lump sum or converted into their comp bank. The member may only elect to
exercise this benefit 4 times in their career, and not more than 1 time in a fiscal
year. This payment is not considered Final Average Salary for purposes of
pension calculations. Eligible employees may elect to buy back their hours
between July 1 and the last pay period in January each fiscal year.

Additionally, 80 hours of vacation time can be accumulated above the maximum
vacation carryover into the last 3 years of service. These hours must be used as
paid time off prior to retirement.

J. Vacation accrual, carryover and compensation at separation is as follows:

MAX ACCRUAL THAT
CAN BE
MONTHLY ACCRUAL MAXIMUM CARRYOVER COMPENSATED AT
YEARS OF SERVICE RATE (HOURS) (HOURS) SEPARATION (HOURS)


0 – 5th 8 10 232 280

6th - 10th 10 280 340

11th - 15th 11 304 370

16th - 20th 13** 352 430

21st+ 15** 400 490

** In the last three years of service an additional 80 hours may be carried over
into a new calendar year.

K. For the purposes of determining monthly vacation Accrual rates for a unit
member who had a break in service, if the unit member was reemployed within 5
years, the amount of time the person is gone is subtracted from his previous
service, thereby giving the unit member a new accrual service date.

L. A unit member may sell back up to 80 hours of vacation time each calendar year
(unit member must use a minimum of 40 hours of vacation/comp-time leave
during the calendar year to qualify for this benefit). This payment shall be made
on the first payday of December of each year, and shall be included in the unit
member’s regular, bi-weekly paycheck.


Section 5-7: Out-of-State Vacation Recall

When a unit member is temporarily recalled to duty from out-of-state while on an
authorized vacation by order of the Police Chief, or designee, he shall be reimbursed for
necessary and provable transportation expenses as determined by the Police Chief.

Section 5-8: Military Leave

A. Definition
1. Pursuant to ARS 26-168 and ARS 38-610, employees who are members of
the Arizona National Guard or the Reserves of the United States Armed
Forces, will be entitled to a leave of absence from their duties for a period not
to exceed 30 days when they are engaged in ordered annual training or to
attend camps, maneuvers, formations, or drills under orders of any branch,
including the reserve or auxiliary.

Officers that are ordered or deployed to active military status will be granted a
leave of absence from their duties for the entirety of the deployment without
loss of pay or other employment rights, less the amount of pay for military
activities while on active status, however annual vacation and sick leave will
not be accrued.


2. This leave will be granted without loss of pay or other employment rights.

B. Leave Guidelines
1. National Guard and Military Reserve leave time will be calculated using
working days.

2. Employees will not be charged with military leave time for days that fall on
their regularly scheduled days off.

3. Leave days do not have to be taken consecutively, the only limitation is the
300-hour maximum in any two consecutive military fiscal years (October 1
through September 30). This 300 hour limitation does not apply to officers
that are ordered or deployed to active military status.

4. Travel time will not be allowed in addition to inclusive dates shown on requests.

5. A copy of the Military Orders will accompany leave requests.


Section 5-9: Uniform, Clothing and Equipment Allowance

A. Department-issued equipment, as follows:

1. The Police Department will furnish to each unit member entering the
department the following:
1Uniform Belt
1Handcuff Case
1 Holster 204
1 Helmet
1 Magazine Pouch
1 Service Weapon
1 Pepper Spray Holder
1 Pepper Spray Canister
1 Pair of Handcuffs and Key





1 Uniform Breast Badge
1 Flat Badge with Case
1 (pair) Puncture resistant gloves

The department also agrees to provide spit masks on a continuous basis.

2. Pilot’s equipment list as follows:

The Police Department will furnish the following to each unit member
assigned to the Air Support Detail:

2 Nomex (or equivalent in quality) Flight Suits
1 Flight Helmet
1 Standard Headset

3. The Department shall replace those items as they, in the judgment of the
Department, become unserviceable due to wear or damage in the course and
scope of official duties.

B. A unit member will receive $1,150 1,500.00 clothing allowance per annum.
Barring unforeseen circumstances, payment for uniform allowance will be made
on or before August 1 of each fiscal year. Such payment will be made to cover
the cost of uniforms, maintenance, cleaning of such uniforms, and for other duty-
related expenses and for the unit member to provide a required flashlight and
fresh batteries.

C. A new unit member will receive an initial fiscal year uniform allowance equal to
1/12 of the annual allowance per month from the first day of the month of his
employment through the end of the fiscal year. This payment will be made in a
lump sum during the first 60 days of employment.

D. A unit member who leaves City Employment shall repay to the City the uniform
allowance equal to 1/12 of the annual allowance per month for each month
remaining in the fiscal year after the last day of the month in which separation
occurs, provided, however, that a unit member who retires will not be required to
repay any uniform allowance. In addition, the family or beneficiary of a unit
member who dies while in the employment of the City shall not have to pay back
any uniform allowance.

E. A unit member who has been on extended leave (paid or unpaid), excluding
industrial leave, sick leave, or military leave of 2 months or longer, shall have the
next annual uniform allowance reduced by 1/12 of the annual allowance for each
month of extended leave.

F.
1. On or before August 1 of each fiscal year, a unit member assigned to the
following details/squads/units will, in addition to his annual clothing allowance,



be provided a one-time payment per the following schedule upon initial
transfer to that assignment.

Canine $320
SAU (Tactical) $320
Air Unit $320
Solo Motor $320
TRU*** $320
Detectives* $320
Bike Officers** $320
Honor Guard $320
SAU Negotiators $320
Drone Pilots $320

* Detective is defined as a certified detective who is in a detective or
investigative assignment or an assignment that normally requires the unit
member to wear civilian business clothes.

** Bicycles will be furnished by the City. To be eligible for the one-time payment
of $320, a bicycle officer must successfully complete the 40-hour bicycle
certification class and be assigned to NET, DOU, CAO, the airport, or a
School Resources Assignment, or any designated bike squad approved by
the Police Chief (i.e. the Desert Horizon Precinct Bike Squad).

2. A unit member assigned to the following details/squads/units will receive, on
or before August 1 of each fiscal year, in addition to his initial uniform
allowances described in section F1 above, an annual maintenance allowance
per the following schedule:

Canine $320
SAU (Tactical) $320
Air Unit $320
Solo Motor $320
Detectives $320
TRU*** $320
Bike Officers** $320
Honor Guard $320

The provisions of Subsection D of this Section shall apply to this Subsection.

** To be eligible for the one-time payment of $320, a bicycle officer must
successfully complete the 40-hour bicycle certification class and be assigned
to NET, DOU, CAO, the airport, or a School Resources Assignment, or any
designated bike squad approved by the Police Chief (i.e. the Desert Horizon
Precinct Bike Squad). All bicycle officers, assigned to one of the details
above, who do not ride during the course of their regular duties, will be
required to work at a minimum, one shift every fiscal year with DOU, during a
regular shift or a special event, utilizing Department issued


bicycles. This event will be coordinated with DOU command staff and the
affected units’ command. Proper notice of schedule change will occur of
the shift is outside of the unit members normal work hours.

*** TRU is defined as an officer who has completed the annual TRU
certification course and is assigned to a TRU response/support squad.
The Unit member must attend annual training and maintain certification to
be eligible for allowances.

G.
1. A unit member who purchases a new ballistic vest shall, upon showing proof
of purchase, be reimbursed an amount up to, but not exceeding, $1,000.

2. At the time of the purchase, the member can utilize the remainder of stipend
to purchase department authorized armor plates.

3. Upon replacement of his ballistic vest, a unit member shall be entitled to the
above $1,000 reimbursement every 5 years.

H.
1. The City agrees to reimburse a unit member for the repair or replacement of
uniform items and for other personal property damaged in the course of
employment and performance of their assigned duties without fault or
negligence on the part of the unit member, other than normal wear and tear in
accordance with the schedule of items and maximum amounts authorized for
reimbursement outlined below:

Business Suit $250
Business Dress $100
Sport Coat $150
Dress Shirt $50
Dress Trousers $75
Dress Skirt $75
All Shoes $100
Uniform Boots ALL
Motorcycle Boots ALL
Motorcycle Gloves $100
Glasses and contacts RX ALL
Sunglasses -non-RX $80
Watches $80
Jewelry $75
Police Uniform Trousers ALL
Police Motorcycle Breeches ALL
Police Uniform Shirt ALL
Police Jacket ALL
Police Motorcycle Jacket ALL
Flashlight $100
Ballistic Vest ALL


Service Weapon and (up to cost of City weapon) authorized
attached accessories

2. Reimbursements for full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, value are based on the supervisor’s
evaluation and recommendations of the article’s condition and age. Items not
listed above are not covered by the policy.

3. The option to repair or replace damaged items, and to determine whether
replaced property will be returned to unit member, rests with the City.

4. The provisions of this policy shall not apply if the unit member has concealed
or misrepresented any material fact or circumstances concerning the subject
of the loss, his interests therein, or in the case of any fraud or false
statements by the unit member relating thereto.

I. Upon duty related retirement, the City will provide the retiring member a Retired
Police Officer’s Commission Card similar in appearance to the regular
Commission Card.

J. Upon retirement, with Chief approval, a unit member will receive his breast
badge mounted on a plaque, a retired flat badge and case, handcuffs, and his
fully functional department-issued service weapon, including all 3 duty
magazines, for $1.00. If the unit member dies in the line of duty or while
employed by the department, the unit member’s spouse or an adult survivor may
elect to receive these items, except for the flat badge and case, for $1.00 which
will be paid by PLEA. The unit member’s spouse or adult survivor will have the
option of receiving the service weapon in a fully functional condition, or may
request the unit member’s service weapon be disabled and mounted in a shadow
box, or may decline receiving the service weapon. The choice will be made in
writing. PLEA will provide a gun safety device, upon request by the unit member.

K. A unit member assigned to the Canine Detail will have the option of purchasing
his dog as follows:

1. If both the police dog and the unit member have been in the Canine Detail in
excess of 5 years, at retirement the unit member may purchase his dog for
$1.00.

2. If both the police dog and the unit member have been in the Canine Detail in
excess of 5 years and the unit member leaves other than for retirement, the
decision to allow the purchase of his dog will be made on a case by case
basis and this decision will not be arbitrary.

L. Unit members who are assigned a rifle, currently qualified, and assigned to patrol or
a patrol specialty unit, Downtown Operations Unit, and Airport Bureau will receive a
stipend to offset costs of any Department authorized equipment already purchased,
that assists them with deployment and utilization of their rifle as follows:



• Eligible employees will be able to submit a memo with attached receipts
for new and/or replacement rifle related equipment up to a limit of $500
every 5 years.

Members will accumulate receipts for newly purchased equipment and will make
one submission to fiscal for reimbursement.


Section 5-10: Reimbursement for Education Expenses

A. A unit member who participates in the Tuition Assistance Program shall be
eligible for tuition reimbursement pursuant to the following provisions:

1. For the 2021-2023 fiscal years, An employee may submit tuition expenses
incurred in the prior fiscal year such that the maximum total reimbursed does not
exceed $13,000 across any two-year period. Funds from the upcoming fiscal
year may be applied to any approved academic or training course in the current
fiscal year, should the tuition for said course exceed the maximum amount noted
in AR 2.51 per fiscal year (currently $6500).


2. To be eligible for any reimbursement, a unit member must have successfully
completed academic or training courses approved by the Police Chief and
the Human Resources Director, or be currently meeting academic standards
in a continuous academic program extending into the next fiscal year, as
provided in existing regulations.

3. Unit members shall be allowed to use up to $500 800.00 of their
reimbursement benefit for job-related seminars, workshops, and professional
memberships each fiscal year. Reimbursement will be made no later than the
pay period following submission of the request.


Section 5-11: Leave of Absence

Subject to development of administrative controls, a unit member who has no other
accumulative paid leave may use up to 10 hours per year of accumulated sick leave for
non-emergency home care or medical treatment for a member of the unit member’s
immediate family subject to operational and scheduling factors. When utilizing this
benefit, the member shall identify the use of such time as non-emergency family illness.
Such leave request shall not be unreasonably withheld.


Section 5-12: Workers’ Compensation

A. Employees shall continue to receive 100% of their current rate of pay while off-
duty due to an industrial injury based on current practice which is a maximum of
1 year per injury, thereafter the rate becomes 66-2/3%.

B. Should the Association believe that a dispute in jurisdiction is unduly delaying a
Workers’ Compensation claim, or if the Association believes the City needs to
provide greater assistance to an employee trying to reopen an old claim, the
Association may request a meeting with City Workers’ Compensation staff
(provided the involved employee signs a release to do so) and such meeting will
be scheduled within 14 calendar days.

C. The City will first attempt to use physicians from specialty lists created by City of
Phoenix Pension Boards for Independent Medical Examinations for employees in
Unit 4.

D. Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave shall not run concurrent with leave
paid as industrial injury/illness (e.g. Workers’ Compensation).








ARTICLE 6: Miscellaneous

Section 6-1: Saving Clause

A. If any Article or Section of this Memorandum should be held invalid by operation
of law or by a final non-appealable order of the Phoenix Employment Relations
Board or a final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, or if compliance
with or enforcement of any Article or Section should be restrained by such
tribunal, the remainder of this Memorandum shall not be affected thereby; and
upon issuance of such final order or decree, the parties, upon request of either of
them, shall meet and confer to endeavor to agree on a substitute provision or
that such a substitute provision is not indicated.

B. It is recognized by the parties that currently the provisions of the Fair Labor
Standards Act are applicable to certain of the wage and premium pay provisions
of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and that this MOU shall be
administered in compliance with the Act for so long as the Act is applicable.

C. It is recognized by the parties that currently the provisions of the Americans with
Disabilities Act are applicable to certain of the provisions of this Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) and that this MOU shall be administered in compliance
with the Act for so long as the Act is applicable.


Section 6-2: Copies of Memorandum

Within 60 days from the date that this Memorandum is adopted by the City Council, the
Association will arrange for printing of it for furnishing one to every unit member, unit
supervisor and to management personnel. The cost of such duplication and distribution
will be borne equally by the Association and the City. Printing vendors secured by the
Association shall comply with Chapter 18, Articles IV (City Construction Contractors'
Affirmative Action Requirements) and V (Supplier's and Lessee's Affirmative Action
Requirements), Phoenix City Code.


Section 6-3: Aid to Construction of Provisions of Memorandum of Understanding






A. It is intended by the parties hereto that the provisions of this Memorandum shall be
in harmony with the rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities which by law
devolve upon the City Council, City Manager, Police Chief, and other City boards
and officials, and these provisions shall be interpreted and applied in such manner.

B. The Association recognizes the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Police
Chief as set forth in the Charter and Ordinances and that pursuant thereto the
Police Chief has the authority to establish rules and regulations applicable to the
operation of the Police Department and to the conduct of the police officers
employed therein, subject to the express provisions of this Memorandum.

C. The lawful provisions of this Memorandum are binding upon the parties for the
term thereof. The Association having had an opportunity to raise all matters in
connection with the meet and confer proceedings resulting in this Memorandum
is precluded from initiating any further meeting and conferring for the term thereof
relative to matters under the control of the Police Chief, the City Council or the
City Manager. This section shall not be construed to limit free and informal
discussions under, Section 2-2 hereof.


Section 6-4: Changes in Department Operations Orders Pursuant to
this Memorandum

A. Within 60 days from the date this Memorandum is adopted by the City Council,
the Department shall provide electronic copies of those Department and
Operations Orders reflecting changes pursuant to this Memorandum. Copies of
such changes shall be available to each unit member on or about July 1 of each
fiscal year or as soon thereafter as possible.

B. During the preparation of changes to the Department’s Operations Orders, and
precinct/bureaus manuals, drafts of the proposed changes will be staffed out to
the Association.


Section 6-5: Physical Fitness

A. It is recognized by the parties that it is the responsibility of a unit member at all
times to make every effort to maintain his physical condition so as to be fully fit to
perform his duties with maximum effectiveness.

To assist a unit member in this respect, the City agrees to provide and maintain
exercise equipment for each precinct station, Deer Valley, Resource Bureaus,
Police Headquarters, and at the Training Academy.

B. The City will provide required FAA physicals to pilots assigned to the Air Support
Unit.




C. If a unit member, while carrying out his official duties is exposed to an infectious
disease/virus, the City agrees to pay the expenses for inoculation of the member.

D. Unit members are allowed to work out on their “Code 7” at Police Department
facilities. Unit members are required to remain in workpants/boots. Employees
who work out on their “Code 7”:

• Must adhere to Operations Order 4.1 (Meals and Breaks);
• Must submit a workout memo through the Chain of Command to the
Department Fitness Coordinator;
• Adhere to Operations Order 3.7 (Industrial Injuries);
• Must limit their activity to Strength Training/Cardio Training;
• May not work out on their “Code 7” during overtime shifts; and,
• May not work out during the last 2 hours of their duty shift,
unless approved by their supervisor.

Program viability will be reviewed annually by the Police Chief.


Section 6-6: Term and Effect of Memorandum

A. This Memorandum shall remain in full force and effect beginning with the first
regular pay period commencing in July 20242026, up to the beginning of the first
regular pay period commencing in July 20262028.

B. Except as expressly provided in this Memorandum, the City shall not be required
to meet and confer concerning any matter, whether covered or not covered
herein, during the term or extensions thereof. This paragraph is not intended to
preclude informal discussions under Article 2, section 2-2 hereof.

C. The provisions of this Memorandum shall be subject to Federal, State, Charter,
and existing local laws that vest jurisdiction and authority in the City Council,
Phoenix Employment Relations Board, and Phoenix Civil Service Board.

D. This Memorandum constitutes the total and entire agreements between the
parties and no past written or verbal statement/agreements shall supersede any
of its provisions.




ATTACHMENT A

DRUG TESTING
The Phoenix Police Department’s Operations Order 3.21, Controlled Substance
Screening policy, is added to this Memorandum as Attachment A.




ATTACHMENT B

RETIREE HEALTH CONTRIBUTION


The City shall provide Basic Medical Reimbursement Plan (MERP) benefits to MERP
eligible unit retirees and to unit members who are hired before August 1, 2007 and are
eligible to retire no later than August 1, 2022 (the date of an individual’s retirement
eligibility was determined on August 1, 2007), at the monthly amounts based on years
of service listed below:

5 to 14 years of service $135.00
15 to 24 years of service $168.00
25 or more years of service $202.00

Unit employees hired on or after August 1, 2007, regardless of years of service, may
qualify for a Post Employment Health Plan (PEHP) account.



Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (These benefits are not under City of
Phoenix control)*

Retiree only not on Medicare $150.00
Retiree & family not on Medicare $260.00
Retiree only on Medicare $100.00
Retiree - one with Medicare $215.00
Retiree - all on Medicare $170.00
*Rates shown are for the 2012 calendar year. For current rates, see http://www.psprs.com/




ATTACHMENT C
Unit 4 – Police Officers
WAGES
Police Officer, Job Code 62210
Effective July 8, 2024
STEP HOURLY BI-WEEKLY ANNUAL
1 35.75 2,860.00 74,360.00
2 37.44 2,995.20 77,875.20
3 39.22 3,137.60 81,577.60
4 41.09 3,287.20 85,467.20
5 43.04 3,443.20 89,523.20
6 45.08 3,606.40 93,766.40
7 47.23 3,778.40 98,238.40
8 49.48 3,958.40 102,918.40
9 51.84 4,147.20 107,827.20

Police Officer*Pilot, Job Code 62211
Effective July 8, 2024
STEP HOURLY BI-WEEKLY ANNUAL
1 49.02 3,921.60 101,961.60
2 51.35 4,108.00 106,808.00
3 53.79 4,303.20 111,883.20

Police Officer*Rescue Pilot, Job Code 62212
Effective July 8, 2024
STEP HOURLY BI-WEEKLY ANNUAL
1 50.83 4,066.40 105,726.40
2 53.26 4,260.80 110,780.80
3 55.79 4,463.20 116,043.20

Police Officer*Flight Instr, Job Code 62213
Effective July 8, 2024
STEP HOURLY BI-WEEKLY ANNUAL
1 52.76 4,220.80 109,740.80
2 55.26 4,420.80 114,940.80
3 57.88 4,630.40 120,390.40

Police Officer*Chief Pilot, Job Code 62214
Effective July 8, 2024
STEP HOURLY BI-WEEKLY ANNUAL
1 54.69 4,375.20 113,755.20
2 57.28 4,582.40 119,142.40
3 60.01 4,800.80 124,820.80



MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

2026 – 2028

CITY OF PHOENIX

AND

PHOENIX FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION

(IAFF, LOCAL 493)

REPRESENTING UNIT 5 EMPLOYEES




TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREAMBLE .................................................................................................................................. 2

Article 1: Rights .......................................................................................................................... 2
Section 1-1. Gender ................................................................................................................................. 2
Section 1-2. City and Department Rights................................................................................................. 2
Section 1-3. Rights of the Union .............................................................................................................. 3
Section 1-4. Rights of Unit Employees ..................................................................................................... 8
Section 1-5. Prohibition of Strikes and Lockouts ................................................................................... 16

Article 2: Grievance/Arbitration/Labor Management ............................................................ 16
Section 2-1. Grievance Procedures ....................................................................................................... 16
Section 2-2. The RBO / Labor-Management Process ........................................................................... 20
Section 2-3. Productivity Discussions .................................................................................................... 22

Article 3: Compensation/Wages ............................................................................................. 22
Section 3-1. Wages................................................................................................................................ 22
Section 3-2. Productivity Enhancement Pay .......................................................................................... 25
Section 3-3. Overtime ............................................................................................................................ 26
Section 3-4. Call Out Pay....................................................................................................................... 27
Section 3-5. Out-of-Class Pay ............................................................................................................... 28
Section 3-6. Sick Leave Conversion at Retirement ............................................................................... 28
Section 3-7. Deferred Compensation and Defined Contribution Plans .................................................. 30
Section 3-8. Non-Direct Payment of Compensation or Benefits ............................................................ 30

Article 4. Hours of Work/Working Conditions ....................................................................... 30
Section 4-1. Hours of Work .................................................................................................................... 30
Section 4-2. Shift Trades ....................................................................................................................... 33
Section 4-3. Filling Vacancies ................................................................................................................ 33

Article 5. Benefits..................................................................................................................... 34
Section 5-1. Health Insurance................................................................................................................ 34
Section 5-2. Dental Insurance................................................................................................................ 35
Section 5-3. Life Insurance .................................................................................................................... 36
Section 5-4. Long Term Disability Insurance ......................................................................................... 36
Section 5-5. Holidays, Vacations, and Donated Vacation Leave ........................................................... 36
Section 5-6. Uniforms ............................................................................................................................ 40
Section 5-7. Tuition Reimbursement...................................................................................................... 42
Section 5-8. Wellness, Health and Fitness ............................................................................................ 42
Section 5-9. Worker’s Compensation .................................................................................................... 43
Section 5-10. Employee Benefit Trust Fund ........................................................................................... 44

Article 6. Miscellaneous .......................................................................................................... 46
Section 6-1. Saving Clause.................................................................................................................... 46
Section 6-2. Printing of M.O.U. .............................................................................................................. 47
Section 6-3. Fire Watch ......................................................................................................................... 47
Section 6-4. Term and Effect of Memorandum ...................................................................................... 47

ATTACHMENT A ....................................................................................................................... 50
ATTACHMENT B ....................................................................................................................... 56






PREAMBLE

WHEREAS, the parties, through their designated representatives, met and
conferred in good faith pursuant to Ordinance G-3303 in order to reach agreement
concerning wages, hours, and working conditions of employees comprising the Fire
Fighter Unit, and,

WHEREAS, the parties hereby acknowledge that the provisions of this
Memorandum are not intended to abrogate the authority and responsibility of City
government provided for under the statutes of the State of Arizona or the Charter or
ordinances of the City of Phoenix except as expressly and lawful limited herein,

NOW, THEREFORE, having reached this complete agreement concerning wages,
hours, and working conditions for the term specified, the parties submit this Memorandum
to the City Council of the City of Phoenix with their joint recommendation that body resolve
to adopt its terms and take such other action as may be necessary to implement its
provisions.


Article 1: Rights

Section 1-1. Gender

Whenever any words used herein in the masculine, feminine or neutral, they shall be
construed as though they were also used in another gender in all cases where they would
so apply.


Section 1-2. City and Department Rights

A. The Union recognizes that the City and the Fire Chief retain, whether exercised or
not, solely and exclusively, all express and inherent rights and authority pursuant to
law with respect to determining the level of and the manner in which the Fire
Department's service delivery activities are conducted, managed, and administered,
and the Union recognizes the exclusive right of the Chief to establish and maintain
departmental rules and procedures for the administration of the Fire Department
during the term of this Memorandum provided that such rules and procedures do not
violate any of the specific express provisions of the Memorandum.

B. The City and the Chief have the exclusive right and authority to schedule work and/or
overtime work as required in the manner most advantageous to the City subject to
the express terms of this Memorandum.

C. It is understood by the parties that every incidental duty connected with operations




enumerated in job descriptions is not always specifically described; nevertheless, it
is intended that all such duties shall be performed by the employee.

D. The Chief and City Manager reserve the right to discipline or terminate employees
for just cause subject to Civil Service procedures.

E. The City and the Chief shall determine and establish methods and processes by
which duties are performed subject to the express terms of this Memorandum.

F. The City and Chief shall have the right to transfer employees within the Department
in a manner most advantageous to the City subject to the express terms of this
Memorandum.

G. Except as otherwise specifically provided in the Memorandum, the City and the Chief
retain unqualifiedly all rights and authority to which, by law, they are entitled.

H. The City shall have the authority to effect reorganizations of the Department.
However, any such reorganization shall be discussed by the Labor-Management
Committee prior to implementation.

I. The Union recognizes that the city has statutory and Charter rights and obligations in
contracting for matters relating to municipal operations.

J. The inherent and express rights of the City and the Chief, including those herein
specifically referred to, which are not expressly modified or restricted by a specific
provision of this memorandum, are not, in any way directly or indirectly, subject to the
Grievance Procedure herein.

K. Nothing herein shall be construed to diminish the rights of the City under provisions
established in the Meet & Confer Ordinance, Chapter 2, Article XVII, of the City Code
or to diminish the provisions of the Civil Service Rules.


Section 1-3. Rights of the Union

A. The Union, as the authorized representative, has the exclusive right to serve as the
meet and confer representative of all employees in the Fire Fighter's Unit as certified
by the Phoenix Employment Relations Board on July 29, 1976.

B. The Phoenix community benefits from harmonious and cooperative relationships
between the City and its employees. The Union plays an important role furthering this
relationship and ultimately improving service to the City and its citizens. Accordingly,
the City and the Union have negotiated various rights for unit employees as set forth
in this MOU, in exchange for services to the City and in lieu of increased
compensation. These bargained-for rights will promote and improve enhanced




service delivery models and public safety, along with other tangible benefits to the
City’s residents.

C. The Phoenix City Council has determined, and Unit 5 agrees, there are specific
activities that confer a public benefit; a dual public/private purpose or an exclusively
public purpose. Consistent with this mutually beneficial relationship, Local 493
desires to negotiate a resolution in alignment with recent legal precedent.
Accordingly, up to 2 Unit 5 (IAFF) members may be released to perform these duties
under City Business.

D. The City’s Labor Relations Administrator or authorized designee will be responsible
for coordinating the City Business Time. The Labor Relations Administrator shall
work directly with Unit 5 in order to confirm any and all paid activity of the Authorized
Employees is consistent with the activity approved below. The two Unit 5 members
identified in Subsection B shall submit reports each pay period to the Labor Relations
Administrator documenting the City Business and any leave (e.g., donated leave,
vacation leave, sick leave, etc.) used during that pay period. The City has the right
to audit time cards submitted. In the event there is disagreement, the parties will
meet to discuss the matter at the request of Unit 5 or the City. The audit may result
in Unit 5 reimbursing the City, by submitting Union Release hours, donated leave,
personal leave, or monetary payment from the Union, for activity not deemed City
Business under this Agreement.

E. City Business Time

The City has determined there are activities that confer a public benefit, a dual
public/private purpose or an exclusively public purpose for which members of Unit 5
should be released from their official duties to perform. Unit 5 acknowledges its
members will receive City Business time for the time spent performing the following
activities:

1. Authorized Employees will attend trainings that have been authorized in advance
by Administration.

2. Authorized Employees will facilitate communication between employees and
management ensuring a safe and efficient delivery of services, as well as
developing a heightened degree of labor/management cooperation.

3. In coordination with management, Authorized Employees will communicate new
programs and/or policy changes to the broader City workforce that are members
of the bargaining unit in order to streamline service delivery and ensure timely
implementation of changes in policy or programs. Changes in safety or security
policy and procedure will be prioritized.

4. In coordination with management, as a means of achieving a healthier workforce




and driving down costs associated with workers’ compensation, the cost of
providing healthcare and the use of sick time, Authorized Employees will assist
bargaining members with understanding coordination of benefits.

5. In order to ensure City resources are well coordinated, upon the direction of the
City and consent of IAFF, Authorized Employees will participate in various City
committees, labor management meetings, or labor management work groups as
a member of the committee or group.

6. Participate in Department-authorized or City-sponsored authorized community
projects and events.

7. Represent employees involved in critical incidents at the time of incident (e.g.,
personal injury related).

8. As a means of controlling administrative and litigation costs associated with
employee matters in a large and complex City and with the goal of resolving
matters at the earliest possible stage, at management’s request Authorized
Employees will assist bargaining unit members/employees and management in
matters related to employer/employee relations.

9. Legislative, lobbying or political activities with the approval of the City Manager
or authorized designee.

F. Activities not eligible for City Business Time

Authorized Employees shall be prohibited from engaging in any of the following
activities while on paid City Business time:

1. Lobbying. This includes letter writing or telephone calls, without approval of the
City Manager or authorized designee.

2. Legislative Activity. This includes participating in the preparation or distribution
of legislative proposals, without approval of the City Manager or authorized
designee.

3. Organizing. This includes preparing and/or distributing union related materials.

4. Civil Service Discipline. This includes the representation of any bargaining unit
member/employee in disciplinary matters before the Civil Service Board.

5. Bargaining/Negotiations. This includes any matters deemed to be a mandatory
subject of bargaining.

6. Representation in grievance or disciplinary proceedings.




G. Requests for City Business Time

1. A union member who wishes to use City Business time must submit a written
request (e-mail will suffice) as soon as the need for time is known but no later
than 72 hours in advance, when practical, of the time requested to an individual
designated by the Labor Relations Administrator or authorized designee. Any
such request must specify what the time will be used for. A request for City
Business time will be approved only if the activity has either a dual public/private
purpose or an exclusively public purpose. Upon Labor Relations Administrator
approval, Fire Department time management will be notified of the approved
leave for entry into Telestaff.

H. Union Representatives

1. The Union may designate one (1) 493 Executive Director, three (3) 493 Directors,
and four (4) Union Representatives to represent members of our unit when
appropriate. The Phoenix Chapter President shall notify the Fire Chief of these
designations. There shall be no obligation on the Department to change or adjust
normal departmental scheduling or assignments of personnel as a result of such
designations.

2. Union representatives may attend mutually scheduled grievance, investigative,
and disciplinary meetings and hearings with department representatives during
duty hours by using the Bank of Donated Leave. Time spent during duty hours
for any other union activity, such as gathering information, interviewing the
grievant or witnesses, attending a union meeting, or preparing a presentation
shall also be charged against the Bank of Donated Leave as described in Article
5, Section 5-5.

I. Union members may be authorized in advance in writing to engage in Union related
activities during duty hours on a non-paid basis by the Fire Chief at such time and in
such instances when in the discretion of the Chief such will not in any manner
interfere with the efficient and economical operations of the Department nor
adversely impact the level of Fire Fighting services or support services.

J. There shall be no use of official time for Union-related activities except as expressly
authorized under Section 1-3E of Article 1. The Department shall maintain
procedures to administer and control use of official time in conformity with the
provisions of this Section.

K. Upon the Union’s filing of a Third Party Data Sharing Agreement with the Labor
Relations Division, the City shall furnish to the Union on request, at actual cost, a
listing of Union members on City payroll deduction in July and January during the
term of this agreement indicating name, mailing address, and job assignment. The




City will also provide a monthly list of employees added that month to Unit 5.

L. The City shall, in conformity with the provisions established in the Meet & Confer
Ordinance, Chapter 2, Article XVII, of the City Code, deduct monthly the Union
members regular periodic Union membership dues and/or special assessments
pursuant to authorization on a form to be provided by the City, duly completed and
signed by the Union member, and transmit such deductions to the Union on a monthly
basis; except, however, that such deduction shall be made only when the employee's
earnings for a pay period are sufficient after other legally required deductions are
made. The City shall, at the request of the Union, make changes in the amount of the
deduction hereunder during the term of this Memorandum at cost for implementing
such change. The City shall not make dues deductions for Unit employees on behalf
of any other employee organization during the term of this Memorandum. The City
assumes no liability on account of any action taken pursuant to this paragraph. In
addition, with sufficient notice the Union may request a change in dues deduction to
either monthly or bi-weekly for the entire membership each July 1 or at other times
agreed to by the parties. By filling out and submitting a voluntary deduction form for
membership dues, each unit member/employee is clearly and affirmatively
consenting to the deduction of the stated amount of money for membership dues
from their pay check.

M. The City will continue to provide those bulletin boards as designated by the City in
the past exclusively for posting of official Union literature that is not political in nature,
abusive of any person or organization, or disruptive of the department's operations.
In addition, the Union will be allowed to use all Fire Department Communications
tools to disseminate such information when necessary. Such announcements shall
not be political in nature, nor shall they be abusive of any person or organization or
disruptive of the department's operation. The Assistant Chief in charge of personnel,
or his designee, shall review the content of the buck slip communications prior to
distribution.

N. Nothing herein shall be construed to diminish the Union's rights under the provisions
established in the Meet & Confer Ordinance, Chapter 2, Article XVII, of the City Code.

O. The City will provide the Union, upon request, non-confidential and readily available
information concerning the Union that is necessary to Union representatives for
negotiations, and is not otherwise available to the Union, such as personnel census,
employee benefit data, and survey information. Such requests shall be made through
the Assistant Chief in charge of personnel. Any unusual costs incurred by the City in
connection with this Section shall be borne by the Union.

P. The Union and the Department will jointly present training to new Fire Fighter recruits
about the activities that are mutually beneficial to the City and the Community. This
time will be allotted sometime during the last 4 weeks of training of said recruits at
the Training Academy. During such discussions, Union representatives shall avoid




the dissemination of information that is political in nature, abusive of any person or
organization or disruptive of the Department's operation. City business time will be
available for this purpose.

Q. Seniority

1. The City shall provide the Association with a list of unit members/employees
showing each unit member’s/employee’s City employment date and class
employment date.
2. Seniority shall be by length of service within a class. If seniority within the class is
not determinative, then length of service with the City shall prevail.
3. Seniority will be applied in conjunction with City of Phoenix Personnel Rule 14.
4. The Department will also post an annual seniority list (beginning of the fiscal year)
on the Department’s internal webpage. In addition, new promotional lists for Fire
Engineer and Fire Captain will be posted on the internal webpage after they are
certified and finalized by City HR.


Section 1-4. Rights of Unit Employees

A. All employees have the right to have the Union serve as their meet and confer
representative without discrimination based on membership or non-membership in
the Union or any other organization. Whenever the terms “employee, Unit employees,
grievant” or some derivation of those, is used in this MOU it shall be synonymous
with the term “Unit member/employee.”

B. Union employees have the right to be represented or not to be represented by the
Union in dealings with the City concerning grievances and matters pertaining to their
individual employment rights and obligations.

C. Equal and Consistent Treatment
All employees covered by this Memorandum shall be treated equitably and consistently with
similarly situated employees regarding the terms and conditions of employment, including
but not limited to recruitment, assignment of work, training, promotion, transfer, discipline,
layoff, recall, termination, compensation, and benefits.


D. Equal Employment Opportunity
The City affirms its commitment to an Equal Employment Opportunity policy. It shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicant on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age,
national origin, ancestry, disability, marital status, medical condition, sexual orientation,
gender identity, or any other characteristic protected by law. All employees shall be afforded
equal consideration and opportunity in hiring, advancement, performance evaluation,
promotion, and compensation.





E. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by Section 1-4 of Article 1
shall not be interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked
any hours or fractions of hours spent outside the employee's work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section. The employer shall count as paid leave any hours
or fractions of hours spent within the employee's regular work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section.

F. The official discipline record is maintained in the Personnel File by the Human
Resources Department. Copies maintained in either the Supervisory and/or
Department files are not the official record. Employees may request to
remove/inactivate eligible documents based on the below criteria by contacting the
department Human Resources Officer. Official records may only be inactivated and
not removed per records retention law, and members/employees will receive
confirmation once the requested record is removed/inactivated.








Department File Personnel File
Document Supervisory File (if applicable) (OFFICIAL FILE)
Maintain original
in file.
Coaching’s/Supervisory Not maintained Not maintained
Remove annually
Counseling’s in file. in file.
provided no further
incidents.
Maintain copy
Maintain original
in file.
in file.
Employee may
Employee may
Written Reprimands request to remove
request to inactivate
after 2 years from
after 3 years from the
the date of
date of infraction.
infraction.
Maintain copy
Maintain copy
in file. Maintain original
in file.
Remove annually in file.
Employee may
Suspensions provided no further Employee may
request to remove
(other than below) incidents. request to inactivate
after 5 years from
after 5 years from the
the date of
date of infraction.
infraction.
Discipline under 21b2,
Maintain copy Maintain original
21b4, 21b5, 21b12,
in file. in file.
21b13, 21b14, 21b15,
Cannot Remove May not be inactivated
21b18, 21b19, 21b20.

Discipline older than 5 years from the date of infraction will not be considered for
progressive discipline or promotion/transfer purposes except for the following types of
discipline, which may be considered for the duration of employment (and upon the
employee's return to employment, if applicable):

Sustained discipline of 40-hour suspension or greater of the following types:

• The employee has been abusive or threatening in attitude, language, or conduct
towards fellow employees, customers of the City, or the public.
• The employee has solicited or taken for personal use a fee, gift or favor in the
course of the assigned work or in connection with it, which would lead toward
favoritism or the appearance of favoritism or a conflict of interest.
• The employee is in possession of a deadly weapon (as defined in ARS 13-3101),
excepting a pocketknife (as provided in ARS 13-3102) at a City worksite1, unless
such employee is a police officer.
(A worksite includes not only City buildings and property, but also City vehicles
and private vehicles while being used on City business, and other assigned work
locations).
• The employee has intentionally falsified records or documents made, kept, or
maintained for or on behalf of the City of Phoenix.
• The employee has stolen or is in unauthorized possession of City property or the
property of another employee or citizen.




• The employee is under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs on the job.
• The employee has violated City of Phoenix anti-harassment or anti-discrimination
policies.
• The employee committed a violation of the City's Ethics Policy.
• The employee’s actions meet the elements of a felony.
• The employee committed an act of dishonesty.

G. Supervisors are encouraged to discuss concerns and attempt to resolve those
concerns with a member/employee without utilizing a formal investigatory process.
Supervisors are encouraged to not utilize an investigatory process unless they have
a reasonable belief that discipline (a written reprimand or higher) could result. Should
information be made during a conversation to attempt to resolve an issue that could
result in discipline, the supervisor will stop the meeting and utilize an investigatory
process as outlined below. Any interview becomes investigatory when facts or
evidence sought by the City may result in a disciplinary action.

1. Anonymous or third-party complaints shall require corroboration within 30 days of
being received or they will be dismissed.

2. The City may, at its discretion, either conduct investigatory interviews with
members/employees or issue members/employees written questions. In either
case, a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) form will be used. The intent of the NOI is to clearly
put members/employees on notice that they are under investigation that could
result in discipline, inform them of the nature of the allegations against them, and
inform them of their right to representation.
a. The Notice of Inquiry shall be provided within 7 days of any complaint.
b. The Notice of Inquiry shall included any alleged facts, complainant identity
(if known), and all available evidence.

3. If the City elects to issue written questions to the member/employee, the following
shall apply:

a. If an NOI is being issued and there is no active questioning, representation
is not required. Members/employees may bring a representative if they
desire, however there will be no discussion during the issuance of the NOI.

b. The member/employee will have 72-hours excluding holidays and N-days
to respond in writing and provide any other material requested. This
deadline may be extended by mutual agreement if there are extenuating
circumstances.






4. If the City elects to conduct an investigatory interview, the following shall apply:

a. Prior to the member/employee being interviewed, the member/employee
shall be advised of their right to a representative at all interviews.

b. The NOI form will be issued at the meeting.

c. The union representative may assist and consult with the
member/employee, attempt to clarify the facts or questions asked, and
suggest other members/employees or witnesses who may have knowledge
of the underlying issues. The union representative may ask questions, make
statements, and advocate on the member’s behalf.

d. The member/employee or representative may ask for a caucus during the
meeting. Caucuses will be granted for a reasonable timeframe.

e. The interviewer may not prohibit the union representative from engaging in
representation, including consulting with the member/employee. The
member shall be allowed to seek advice from their representative in caucus
during the interview. The member/employee will be given the opportunity to
clarify their answer after the caucus.

f. All parties may not behave in a violent, verbally abusive, insulting, or
demeaning manner toward the interviewer.

g. Prior to the conclusion of the meeting, the member/employee or
representative shall have the opportunity to make a closing statement.

h. If the department requires a written statement at an investigatory meeting,
the member/employee will be compensated up to one hour of City time to
write the statement. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the
department and will not be withheld arbitrarily.

i. The City will notify the Unit member/employee within 7 calendar days
following the conclusion of all investigative interviews and final preparation
the draft summaries. Upon notification, the Unit member/employee will
have 7 calendar days to make a written request for the audio files and/or
the draft summary of the Unit member/employee’s interview, which the City
will provide. After receiving the requested audio files and/or the draft
summary of the Unit member/employee’s interview, the Unit





member/employee will have 7 calendar days to provide, in writing,
clarification of the Unit member/employee’s interview answer, draft
summary of Unit member/employee’s interview, and/or a written response.
If, upon review of the audio file and/or draft summary, the Unit
member/employee provides written clarification that identifies any factual
discrepancies, omissions, or mischaracterizations of their statements, the
City shall ensure that such clarification is attached to and becomes part of
the official investigative record. The City shall further require that any
investigator, HR representative, or individual with custodial authority over
the record correct or amend the draft summary and any derivative
documents to accurately reflect the Unit member/employee’s clarification.
No investigative finding, report, or personnel action shall rely upon a version
of the record that fails to incorporate the Unit member/employee’s written
clarification.

j. Except for emergency situations, the unit members/employees shall have a
minimum of 48 hours to arrange for union representation when the
member/employee is the subject of an administrative investigatory
interview. The union representative will make every reasonable attempt to
arrive within the 48 hours. A member/employee may waive the 48-hour time
requirement if the member/employee is not opting for representation.

k. Provide the complete investigative file to the member/employee before
discipline is imposed. Including, but not limited to reports, recordings,
photos, exculpatory materials be

5. Regardless of whether the City elects to interview the member/employee, or issue
written questions, the following shall apply:

a. The member/employee will be instructed not to speak to anyone regarding
an investigation. This restriction does not apply to the union, the union’s
attorney, the member/employee’s family, the member/employee’s attorney,
the investigator, or chain-of-command.

b. The member/employee will be advised if the inquiry is supervisor initiated
or the result of a citizen complaint, employee/co-worker complaint, or other.

c. The member/employee shall also be informed of the Garrity protections
afforded to public employees who may also be under criminal investigation





or whose actions meet the elements of a crime [Garrity v. New Jersey, 385
U.S. 493, 87 S.Ct. 616 (1967)].

d. The Department will make available for review to the unit member and/or
his representative any relevant and readily available material that is being
used as the basis for an allegation of misconduct.

Material includes any video, audio, photographs, or documents known at
the time the internal investigation is initiated and that are specifically related
to the conduct of the unit member under investigation. Material does not
include audio recorded interviews of witnesses; complaints that are filed
with the employer and that include allegations of unlawful discrimination,
harassment, or retaliation or complaints that involve matters under the
jurisdiction of the United States equal employment opportunity
commission); material(s) or facts that would impede the investigation; or
investigative leads captured during the investigative process.

Prior to interviewing an involved employee, the investigating supervisor will
complete and provide an investigation material list to the involved
employee.

e. A unit member/employee shall receive a copy of any statement that they
are asked to sign.

f. Every 60 days, the Chief assigned to Human Resource, or a sworn
designee will provide, either verbally or in writing, a status update to a unit
member/employee who is under investigation. If a member/employee is in
an at home work assignment, that communication will take place every 45
days.

6. Miscellaneous

a. A unit member/employee identified solely as a witness shall have the right
to a union representative.
b. All interviews shall be recorded, including witnesses.

c. No witnesses who participate in an investigation or appeal will be retaliated
against.






d. No investigatory documentation, such as the NOI or witness statements
shall be kept in the Personnel or Supervisory Files after the investigation is
concluded.

e. The City will not require or compel Unit 5 members/employees to make any
self-incriminating statements during criminal investigations.

7. Unit members/employees will be permitted to apply and/or compete in a transfer
process while in a pending investigation. The transfer process will not be delayed
pending the conclusion of the related investigation.

8. A member/employee who receives a written reprimand or suspension may request
a copy of the information upon which the written reprimand or suspension was
based, pertaining to what was specifically cited in the discipline at no cost to the
member/employee.

9. All investigations shall be confidential. The public release of investigative materials
shall be prohibited until the completion of the investigation and/or appeal process.

10. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Article shall not be
interpreted or applied as requiring the member/employer to count as time worked,
any hours or fractions of hours spent outside the member/employee's work shift in
pursuit of benefits provided by this Article unless otherwise specified in this MOU.
The employer shall count as time worked any hours or fractions of hours spent
within the member/employee's regular work shift in pursuit of benefits provided by
this Article.

H. Member Discipline

1. Any member/employee receiving discipline that results in a loss of hours, or
days or work, will have those hours converted to match their appropriate work
schedule. Discipline for 40-hour members/employees shall be equal to 8
hours for one work day. Discipline for 56-hour members/employees shall be
equal to 11.2 hours for one work day. Any discipline exceeding one day will
be increased proportional to the hours outlined in this section. A 56-hour
member/employee may choose to use earned vacation or compensatory time
to account for the remaining workday hours.

2. A just cause definition shall be provided to members receiving discipline that
shall include notice, reasonableness, preponderance of evidence, and
proportionality.





I. Investigative timeline

Investigations shall be completed within 180 calendar days (extendable only with
written justification). Any investigation not completed in good faith within that time line
would be expired.


Section 1-5. Prohibition of Strikes and Lockouts

A. The Union pledges to maintain unimpaired Fire Fighting and related supported
services as directed by the Fire Chief. It shall not cause, condone, counsel or permit
employees, to strike, fail to fully and faithfully perform duties, slow down, disrupt,
impede or otherwise impair the normal functions and procedures of the Department.

B. Should any employees of the bargaining Unit during the term of this Memorandum,
and until such time that it is expressly and legally rescinded, breach the obligations
of Paragraph A, the Fire Chief or his designee shall immediately notify the Union that
a prohibited action is in progress. The Union shall forthwith disavow said strike or
other prohibited action and shall endeavor in good faith to cause such employees to
immediately return to work and/or cease the prohibited activity or, alternatively accept
the responsibility for the strike or other prohibited activity.

C. There shall be no lockout by the City during the term of the Memorandum.

D. The provisions of Section 2 (17) and section (13) of Ordinance G-1532, are
incorporated into this Memorandum.



Article 2: Grievance/Arbitration/Labor Management

Section 2-1. Grievance Procedures

It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by this Article shall not be
interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked, any hours or
fractions of hours spent outside the employee's work shift in pursuit of benefits provided
by this Article. The employer shall count as time worked any hours or fractions of hours
spent within the employee's regular work shift in pursuit of benefits provided by this
Article.

A. Informal Resolution

1. As a matter of good labor-management relations the parties encourage unit
members/employees who believe that they have a bona fide grievance to discuss




and attempt to resolve it with their immediate non-unit supervisor.

2. If the above informal discussion is held and does not resolve the grievance, the
unit member/employee may file a formal grievance in accordance with the
following procedure.

B. Definition of Grievance

1. A grievance is a written allegation by a unit member/employee, submitted as
herein specified, claiming violation(s) regarding the interpretation and/or
application of the specific express terms of this Memorandum for which there is
no other specific and formal method of review; and doesn’t have a fact pattern
that has been presented to and decided upon by the City Manager in a prior
grievance. However, disputes specifically excluded in other Articles of this
Agreement from the Grievance and Arbitration procedure shall not be construed
as within the definition set forth above and shall not be handled in accordance
with this procedure. It is agreed that such excluded disputes are not grievable or
arbitrable under the terms of this Article or under this contract.

2. The City continues to retain the format used for grievances, including forms,
technology, etc.

3. A grievance which does not meet the requirements set forth in this Article shall
be null and void, and will not be processed in accordance with this procedure.

C. Procedure

All grievances covered by this Article shall be handled exclusively in the following
manner:

A grievance must be reduced to writing, citing the specific Article and Section of this
Memorandum alleged to have been violated.

1. Step 1

The unit member/employee shall reduce the grievance to writing by signing and
completing the grievance form provided by the City and submit it to the division head,
or designee, within 14 calendar days of the initial commencement of the occurrence
being grieved. (Not withstanding other pertinent time bars, statute of limitations, etc.,
the City acknowledges that certain violations may constitute “continuing violations”
thereby permitting submission within 14 calendar days of subsequent occurrences, if
applicable.)

The division head, or designee, may investigate, further consider, and discuss the
grievance with the grievant and the grievant's representative, if any, as deemed




appropriate, and shall, within 14 calendar days of having received the written
grievance, submit a response thereto in writing to the grievant. The parties by written
mutual agreement may move the grievance to Step 2 of the grievance procedure.

2. Step 2

If the written response of the Step 1 does not result in a resolution of the grievance,
the grievant may appeal the grievance by signing and completing the City form and
presenting it to the department head, or designee within 14 calendar days of the
grievant's receipt of the Step 1 response.

The department head, or designee, may further consider and discuss the grievance
with the grievant and the grievant's representative, if any, as deemed appropriate,
and shall, within 14 calendar days of having received the written grievance, submit a
response thereto in writing to the grievant. The parties by written agreement may
move the grievance to Step 3 of the grievance procedure.

3. Step 2.5

After the Step 2 response, but prior to review by the Grievance Committee, the parties
involved may mutually agree to submit the grievance to Labor Relations. The
grievance, as originally written and Step 1 and Step 2 responses, must be submitted
to Labor Relations within 14 calendar days of receipt of the Step 2 response. Labor
Relations shall, within 14 calendar days of the receipt of the grievance, meet with the
department head, or designee, and the grievant and the grievant's representative, if
any, in an attempt to resolve the grievance. Labor Relations shall then submit a
written response to all parties within 14 calendar days of the meeting.

4. Step 3

a. If the written response of the Step 2 (or 2.5 if applicable) does not result in a
resolution of the grievance, the grievant may, within 14 calendar days of the
Step 2 response, appeal the grievance by signing and completing the City form
and presenting it to Labor Relations. A Grievance Committee hearing will be
scheduled at which the grievant shall be afforded the opportunity to fully
present his position and to be represented.

The Grievance Committee shall be composed of:
Chairman – A member of the City Manager’s Office designated by the City
Manager.
2 Members – Mutually agreed upon by City Manager’s Office and Local 493.

The Grievance Committee shall submit findings and advisory
recommendation(s) to the City Manager. The City Manager shall make the
final determination of the grievance and submit it in writing to the grievant and




his designated representative.

b. If the grievant so elects in writing within the above time limit, in lieu of such
hearing the grievance may be reviewed by an arbitrator. The parties, or their
designated representatives, shall agree on an arbitrator, and if they are unable
to agree on an arbitrator within a reasonable time, either party may request
the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to submit to them a list of 7
arbitrators who have had experience in the public sector. The parties shall,
within 7 calendar days of the receipt of said list, select the arbitrator by
alternately striking names from said list until one name remains. Such person
shall then become the arbitrator. The arbitrator so selected shall hold a
hearing as expeditiously as possible at a time and place convenient to the
parties, and shall be bound by the following:

i. The arbitrator shall be bound by the language of this Memorandum and
departmental rules and regulations consistent therewith in considering
any issue properly before him/her.

ii. The arbitrator shall expressly confine him/herself to the precise issues
submitted to him/her and shall have no authority to consider any other
issue not so submitted to him/her.

iii. The arbitrator shall be bound by applicable State and City law.

iv. The cost of the arbitrator and any other mutually incurred costs shall be
borne equally by the parties.

The arbitrator shall submit findings and advisory recommendations to the
City Manager. The City Manager shall make the final determination of the
grievance and submit it in writing to the grievant and his designated
representative.

c. The City is not under any obligation to accept grievances where the City
Manager has previously decided on the same fact pattern.

D. Time Limits

Failure of City Management representatives to comply with time limits specified in
Paragraph C shall entitle the grievant to appeal to the next level of review; and failure
of the grievant to comply with said time limits shall constitute abandonment of the
grievance; except however, that the parties may extend time limits by mutual written
agreement in advance of the deadline.

E. Union Grievance





The Union may, in its own name, file a grievance that alleges violation by the City of
the rights accorded to the Union by the specific terms of Article 1-3 of this
Memorandum. The Union shall file such grievance at Step 3 of this Procedure.

F. Group Grievance

When more than one unit member/employee claims the same violation of the same
rights allegedly accorded by this Memorandum, and such claims arise at substantially
the same time and out of the same circumstances, a single group grievance may be
filed in the name of all such members. Such group grievances shall be filed at the
Step of this Procedure which provides the lowest level of common supervision having
authority over all named Grievants. Each unit member/employee that is a party
Grievant must be named and must sign such group grievance.

G. Employer Grievances

Should they occur as a result of official Union activities or actions, including the failure to
act as required under the terms of this Memorandum, employer grievances will be
presented directly to the Union president or any officer of the Union within 14 days of the
occurrence prompting the grievance. The president, or designee, shall in each case
provide a written answer within 14 days from receipt of the grievance. Unresolved
employer grievances may be submitted to arbitration pursuant to Step 3.


Section 2-2. The RBO / Labor-Management Process

A. The purpose of the Relationships by Objectives (RBO) committee is to enhance
service delivery models and address public safety employee-related issues. The
RBO process is done through the facilitation and open discussion of mutual concerns
and problems which may include; implementation of major department programs
and/or substantial modifications of existing major programs that will have a significant
impact on service delivery or work schedules. Items of concern are then enacted as
initiatives to be in accomplished over the course of the year that follows.

B. The RBO Committee shall meet annually at mutually scheduled times, and at other
mutually agreed upon times as necessary. The RBO Committee process consists
of a Correlating Team. The Correlating Team includes the following representatives
from Labor and Management: the Fire Chief and Executive Staff (Assistant Fire
Chiefs) and the Union President and Labor Executives. For each initiative mutually
identified in the RBO process, a Committee is established consisting of
representatives from labor and management and facilitated by co-chairs. Sub-
committees are further developed to facilitate meetings to achieve goals as set forth
in the agreed upon initiatives. Throughout the year, Committees and Sub-
Committees will meet regularly to accomplish their RBO initiatives.





C. There shall be a Fire Labor-Management Committee consisting of the Fire Chief and
Union President. The Fire Labor-Management Committee provides oversight for the
entire RBO / Labor-Management Process.

D. A standing agenda will be developed. The members shall, in advance of a meeting,
provide the co-chairs with proposed additional agenda items, and the co-chairs will
provide the members with the meeting agenda. To ensure clarity and continuity,
the parties agree that meetings should be audio recorded and the recordings
maintained in a secure database accessible to both parties for future
reference. The individuals assigned to record meeting minutes are
encouraged to capture sufficient detail of discussions and any agreements
reached, particularly when significant changes are considered, so that both
parties may accurately reference these records in the future.

E. Representatives of the Union on the Committee shall not lose pay or benefits for
meetings mutually scheduled during their duty time.

F. The Sub-Committees may be supplemented by representative(s) of the City Manager
if it is proposed to discuss mutual aid or fire protection contract matters.

G. The Sub-Committees may, if they deem proper, suggest recommendations to the
Fire Chief and the City Manager for their consideration and determination.

H. Employees who are designated by the Fire Labor-Management Committee as
RBO/Labor Management Coordinators will be eligible for compensation from a bank
of 2,112 hours. These individuals, limited to no more than 11 employees, will work
with management on the priorities determined through the RBO (Relationships by
Objectives) process. These initiatives pertain to enhancing operational efficiencies,
service delivery, and improvements to employee safety and organizational
performance.

I. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by Section 2-2 of Article 2
shall not be interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked
any hours or fractions of hours spent outside the employee's work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section. The employer shall count as paid leave any hours
or fractions of hours spent within the employee's regular work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section.

J. The City will provide the professional services of a secretary for the labor-
management process. The secretary will be assigned to the community affairs
division of the Phoenix Fire Department and will work at the direction of the Fire
Labor-Management Committee. The selection process for this position shall be
determined by the Fire Labor-Management Committee.





K. In the interest of encouraging member total wellness and providing customer service
delivery, the City of Phoenix Fire Department and Phoenix Fire Fighters Association
Local 493 will develop a drug testing policy through the Fire Labor/Management
process. The drug testing program will be administered and managed by the Fire
Department.


Section 2-3. Productivity Discussions

A. Recognizing the need to provide the highest practical level of fire protection and
emergency medical service to the citizens of Phoenix, the City, Fire Department, and
Union, pledge to continue to work towards increasing the productivity of the Phoenix
Fire Department. In a continuing commitment towards increased productivity, the joint
Labor-Management Productivity Committee shall meet on a regular basis during the
term of the M.O.U. to discuss the development of structured productivity programs
within the Phoenix Fire Department.

B. The distribution of any demonstrated economic savings or other productivity
rewarding measures resulting from the implementation of productivity programs shall
be a proper subject for the Meet and Confer process pursuant to the provisions
established in the Meet & Confer Ordinance, Chapter 2, Article XVII, of the City Code.

C. It is understood by the parties that the benefits granted by Section 2-3 of Article 2
shall not be interpreted or applied as requiring the employer to count as time worked
any hours or fractions of hours spent outside the employee's work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section. The employer shall count as paid leave any hours
or fractions of hours spent within the employee's regular work shift in pursuit of
benefits provided by this Section.



Article 3: Compensation/Wages
Section 3-1. Wages
Wage Proposal Summary – Firefighter, Engineer, and Captain Classifications
A. Phoenix continues to experience extraordinary growth, both in population and in Fire
Department recruitment. This expansion presents an opportunity for the City to reaffirm
its commitment to hiring and retaining the very best candidates as we meet increasing
service demands.
In alignment with the Mayor’s stated goal that “Public Safety is key to a successful city,”
the parties agree that base wage adjustments for Firefighters, Engineers, and Captains
are essential to achieving the objective of making Phoenix Fire Department personnel
the highest paid in the State of Arizona.




Through collaboration with City Human Resources following the Class and
Compensation implementation, additional flexibility was created within the existing pay
structure—allowing greater separation between the top Firefighter step and the entry
step for the Engineer rank. Accordingly, the parties propose a minimum five percent
(5%) base hourly increase for the rank of Firefighter as an initial adjustment to
reflect this realignment.
This five percent increase establishes the minimum standard; however, both parties
recognize that additional adjustments may be warranted to achieve and maintain the
stated goal of ensuring Phoenix Fire Department personnel remain the highest paid in
base wages among comparable Arizona fire service agencies.
This effort underscores a shared commitment to recruitment, retention, and operational
excellence, ensuring that Phoenix Fire Department wages remain among the top two
highest paid public safety agencies in the State of Arizona. To ensure Phoenix Fire
Department wages stay among the top two highest paid public safety agencies in the
State of Arizona the city of Phoenix will do an annual pay in comp study for firefighters
starting in January of 2027.


A. Employees assigned to, or assigned as rovers to, Special Operations Teams, canine
search specialists team, and the ARFF program team, and who have also achieved
and maintained the level of Technician, or equivalent, through specific training and
education, shall receive Special Ops Team pay. Members certified in both hazmat
(HMT) and technical rescue (TRT) and assigned to, or assigned as rovers to fill cross
trained positions on the heavy rescue squads and/or C-957 shall receive Bi-Tech
Team pay, which is the sum of HMT & TRT Special Ops Team pay combined.

An employee who is awarded a position on a team in this section shall receive their
Team Pay no later than 6 months, if the Fire Department has not offered the employee
a training spot in the required entry level Special Operations course within 6 months
of accepting their team position.

If Employees who are required to obtain dual technician certification (C957 Captains
and employees assigned to heavy rescue squads) do not have either team pay and
employee has not been offered a training spot in the required entry level Special
Operations course within 6 months of accepting their assignment, they will receive
team pay for one of the two disciplines. If the employee has one technical certification
in good standing and is receiving team pay, the member will receive assignment pay
for the second discipline if the employee has not been offered a training spot in the
required entry level Special Operations course within 6 months of accepting their team
position.

B. Employees who meet the Fire Department’s linguistic skill qualifications and become
certified, shall receive a premium of $75.00 per month.




C. It is understood that the pay rates set forth in Attachment “A” are interpreted to be
specific with regards to steps as implemented in the classification and compensation
and passed in Ordinance S-49802 by the City Council on May 31, 2023, except that
performance related items including, but not limited to, special merit increases, special
salary adjustments, demotions, assignment pay and extensions in merit pay
anniversary dates resulting from extended leave without pay, industrial, and
reinstatements may alter an employee’s step progression and monthly salaries as
indicated in Attachment “A.”

If an employee is not given his/her performance evaluation by the annual review date,
the employee may request his/her merit increase in writing by sending a memorandum
directly to the Human Resources Officer. If the performance evaluation is an overall
“met,” the request will be processed within 21 calendar days of submittal and will be
retroactive to the performance evaluation annual review date.

D. Employees assigned by the Fire Chief to staff assignments in authorized staff
positions (40 hours) will be entitled to 10% assignment pay if such assignment is to
exceed 2 consecutive pay periods, and shall continue to receive such assignment pay
for the duration of such assignment. This provision shall not apply to employees
attending recruit training or employees assigned to limited duty. Employees assigned
to authorized 40 hour staff assignments and who begin receiving staff assignment pay
shall also be eligible to continue all other current assignment pays provided all
required certifications are maintained. Employees assigned to limited duty shall
continue to receive holiday pay and FLSA/work week adjustments (Section 4-1,
Paragraph E, of Article 4) for the duration of their limited duty assignment, irrespective
of their actual work hours.

E. Employees assigned to any 40 hour staff positions shall receive 2 8 hour or 10 hour
professional development days per year depending on their schedule. The employee
shall decide the days and areas of development. These days shall be assigned
through the vacation signup process. No employee shall receive these days in addition
to the full amount of Local 493 days.

F. The Fire Department's 21-day pay schedule normally begins on C-shift Mondays. In
any leap year, ERSO, South Shift Command, Payroll and Local 493 will identify the
first and most appropriate "Payroll Monday" to switch to a leap year schedule. The
objective will be to balance out holiday shifts between A, B, and C shift.

In the event the Department and Local 493 mutually approve and implement
an alternative Operations schedule, such as the proposed 1-3-2-3 model, the
parties agree to collaboratively review and, if necessary, adjust the 21-day pay
schedule and corresponding shift rotation to ensure proper alignment with
payroll cycles and operational continuity. Any such adjustments shall be made
jointly by ERSO, South Shift Command, Payroll, and Local 493 through the




Labor-Management process.

G. Effective the first full pay period in July 2023, Unit 5 employees shall be paid Nightwork
Pay of $5.00 $7.50 per hour on all hours actually worked between 2200 hours and
0600 hours. No employee shall receive the hourly Nightwork Pay while on paid leave.

Nightwork Pay must be accounted for in base wage computations for the purposes of
any and all classification and compensation studies and comparisons.

The parties agree to evaluate this program during the term of the 2023-24 M.O.U.

H. Union Requested Job Classification Studies

1) The Union may submit a prioritized written request of classifications specific to
the unit that they wish to have studied each contract term. All written requests
shall include a full explanation of why the classification should be studied. This
explanation shall indicate whether the Union is requesting a full classification
study (including job levels and job architecture) or if the request is limited to a
compensation review to assess market competitiveness and grade and salary
levels. Requests from the Union will be prioritized with other standing requests.

2) The Union and the City have met regularly since the implementation of the 2023
class & comp study to resolve issues that resulted. As such, the Union and City
Human Resources Department (including representatives from the Class &
Comp Division) will meet with Union leadership monthly during the term of this
MOU to discuss issues arising from the 2023 citywide classification and
compensation study.

I. FEMA/USAR Deployment Wage Payment

Members who deploy on a FEMA or USAR event shall have wages paid within
30 days of return from the deployment.



Section 3-2. Productivity Enhancement Pay

A. In recognition of the significant increase in service delivery and cost savings to the
implement the following Productivity Enhancement Pay formula for employees:

1. In November of each calendar year and June of each calendar year, employees
who have completed at least 7 years of continuous full-time service and who meet
the additional qualifications specified in Section 3-1A of Article 3 shall be paid
$80.00, pro-rated and included each pay period in the qualifying unit




member’s/employee’s regular pay check throughout the year, for each full year of
continuous full-time service in excess of 5 years, up to a semi-annual maximum
of $2,000.00, annual maximum of $4,000.00 at 30 years.

2. Employees on industrial leave shall qualify for this payment for only the first year
of the industrial leave. However, the entire period of industrial leave shall qualify
as continuous service when the employee returns to active employment.

3. Adjustments to payments will be made as soon as possible but no later than 30
days of the qualifying date.

B. An employee must have achieved the overall performance rating of "meets
standards" on his latest scheduled performance evaluation on file in the Human
Resources Department.

C. An employee who receives a below "meets standards" evaluation shall receive
another evaluation within 90 to 120 days, and if that evaluation is "meets standards,"
he will be eligible for Productivity Enhancement Pay starting with the next qualifying
date.


Section 3-3. Overtime

A. Employees who are assigned to be and are on duty beyond their scheduled work
shift shall be compensated for such assigned overtime work at 1 ½) times their
regular rate, 56 hours or 40 hours, after the first 7 minutes of assigned and worked
overtime calculated to the nearest 1/4 hour.

B. Employees shall have the option of being paid in cash for overtime, or allow the
overtime to accrue as compensatory time up to a maximum of 168 hours for
employees working a 56 hour schedule, or 120 hours for employees working a 40
hour schedule.

C. Overtime compensation shall not be paid twice for the same hours worked.

D. Use of compensatory time shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Fire
Chief and shall take into consideration departmental scheduling and operational
factors.

E. Payment for time worked shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Fire
Chief and shall take into consideration departmental scheduling and operational
factors.

F. The provisions of Section 3-2 of Article 3 shall not apply where an employee is
assigned out-of-class to a non-Unit position.




G. Allocation and opportunities for overtime shall be discussed in the
Labor/Management process.

H. The Fire Department will maintain daily “peak time” opportunities on either 2 person
rescues or 4 person units on a peak time basis only. Special events staffing and
overtime opportunities outside of the 9-11 response system will not be counted as a
peak time opportunity.

This item reflects an agreement between the Fire Department and the Union in 1984
on the future staffing of the rescues. The increased work-load and responsibility of
the full time rescues was incented by agreement that there would be overtime
opportunities on peak time rescues. Further, the department was reorganized
through the RBO process in 1993 to enhance ALS and rescue capabilities throughout
the city. This reorganization included a pool of employees to staff back rescues and
guarantee that no new employee would have to work more than 200 shifts on a
rescue. Employees agreeing to be in this pool are then entitled to work on the peak
time rescues on an overtime basis when their name comes up in a rotation. The Fire
Department and Local 493 will continue to work jointly through the RBO Process to
determine the deployment of peak time units to ensure the greatest benefit to the
service delivery system and provide adjustments, when needed.

The parties acknowledge the existence of a current side agreement between the
Phoenix Fire Department and Local 493 regarding the deployment, staffing, and
operation of peak-time rescue units. Recognizing that this agreement is active but
not yet incorporated into the Memorandum of Understanding, both parties agree to
include this item as a standing topic during the Meet and Confer process for review,
clarification, and potential modification. Any mutually agreed-upon changes resulting
from these discussions shall be formally incorporated into this Memorandum of
Understanding upon ratification.


Section 3-4. Call Out Pay/Standby Pay

A. Call out time shall be at a minimum of 3 hours at 1 ½ times the employee’s regular
rate of pay, 56 hours or 40 hours depending on assignment, after the first 7 minutes
calculated to the nearest 1/4 hour. If a unit member/employee leaves a call out event
without authorization prior to the termination of the event, Section 3-2A of Article 3
shall not apply.

B. The provisions of this Section shall not apply where an employee is assigned out-
of-class to a non-Unit position.

C. Standby pay shall be compensated at five percent (5%) of the employee’s regular
hourly rate of pay for each hour assigned to standby status.




D. If an employee is called out while on standby, those hours shall be compensated
in accordance with the established Call-Out Pay formula which is noted above.



Section 3-5. Out-of-Class Pay

Pursuant to A.R. 2.201, 16 hours of out-of-class work on a shift for employees will
constitute a full shift of out-of-class assignment pay. There will be no out-of-class pay for
working less than 16 hours. Employees assigned to work out-of-class shall receive
compensation at a rate of five percent (5%) above their base salary for the duration of the
shift.
Employees who are deemed qualified to work in an out-of-class assignment shall receive
out-of-class assignment pay immediately upon performing the duties of the higher
classification. No minimum qualifying hours shall be required.

Employees on a 40 hour schedule will complete 11 shifts, 6 hours minimum of out-of-
class assignment, to satisfy the minimum qualifications for out-of-class pay.


Section 3-6. Sick Leave Conversion at Retirement

The following benefit will apply:

A. Definitions

1. "Qualifying Hours" - The minimum number of accrued and unused sick leave
credits existing on the last day of service prior to retirement, which are necessary
before an employee can participate in the benefit program.

2. "Base Number of Hours" or "Base Hours" - The number of hours of accrued and
unused sick leave credits which are uncompensated under Section 3-4 of Article
4 which the City will compensate the employee.

3. "Base Hourly Rate" - The base hourly rate of pay being paid at the time of
retirement to the retiring employee who qualifies for participation in the benefit
program.

B. Benefit and Eligibility

1. An employee that has between 1 – 1,259 hours of sick leave remaining in their
sick leave bank at the time of retirement, or the 40 hour equivalent, shall be
eligible for payment of an amount of compensation equal to his/her base wage for
50% of their hours.




2. An employee who has accumulated a minimum of 1,260 qualifying hours or more
of accrued and unused sick leave at the time of retirement, or the 40 hour
equivalent, shall be eligible for payment of an amount of compensation equal to
his/her base hourly rate for 65% of their sick hours.

3. An employee who has accumulated a minimum of 1,800 qualifying hours or more
of accrued and unused sick leave at the time of retirement, or 40 hour equivalent,
shall be eligible for payment of an amount of compensation equal to his/her base
hourly rate for 80% of their sick hours.

4. An employee who has accumulated a minimum of 2,400 hours, or the 40 hour
equivalent, or more of accrued and unused sick leave at the time of retirement
shall be eligible for payment of an amount of compensation equal to 100% of
his/her base hourly wage for all hours.

5. Effective July 1, 2014, and thereafter, an employee who has accrued at least 1286
hours for 56 hour members, or 919 hours for 40 hour employees, of unused sick
leave may elect to have 168 hours for a 56 hour unit member/employee, or 120
hours for a 40 hour unit member/employee paid out in a lump sum. Any unit
member/employee may only elect to exercise this benefit 3 times in their career,
and not more than one time in a fiscal year. Eligible employees may elect to buy
back their hours between July 1 and the last pay period in January each fiscal
year.

6. The payments described in numbers 1 through 5 above are not considered Final
Average Salary for purposes of pension calculations.

C. Administration

1. At the time of retirement or death of an active employee who is eligible for
retirement, the City's Employee Benefits Division, or such other individual or
agency as the City may designate, shall determine the employee’s eligibility and
the amount of accrued and unused sick leave to be compensated.

2. The employee shall verify in writing the computation of the Employee Benefits
Division.

2. In the event an employee’s eligibility for participation or the amount of
compensation is disputed, the dispute shall be submitted to the City Auditor for
resolution.
3. 100% of employees sick leave will be paid at the full hourly rate to
dependents/beneficiaries/survivors in the event of a Non-Line of Duty Death.






Section 3-7. Deferred Compensation and Defined Contribution Plans

A. The City shall contribute an amount equal to 4.42% 6% of each employee’s biweekly
gross pay to the City’s 401(a) Defined Contribution Plan. Pension contributions will
be made by both the City and the employee on the contributions.

B. At the employee’s separation, for either retirement or exiting the Deferred Retirement
Options Program, the employee’s sick leave payout amounts will be automatically
contributed into the City’s 401(a) plan. Any excess amount over the Internal Revenue
Code 401(a) plan contribution maximum limits will be automatically contributed into
the City’s 457(b) plan. Any portion of the excess amount that cannot be contributed
to the 457(b) plan because of Internal Revenue Code 457(b) plan contribution
maximum limits will be paid as taxable income. The 401(a) Plan Document as
approved by the Deferred Compensation Board will be the governing document.


Section 3-8. Non-Direct Payment of Compensation or Benefits

Various sections of this MOU contain a form of compensation, wages, or benefits that
have been negotiated in good faith and may or may not provide a direct payment of wages
or other benefit to each member. Those forms of compensation, wages, or benefits that
do not provide a direct payment to each unit member/employee have been negotiated in
place of a direct payment and costed as part of the overall economic package. Examples
include, but are not limited to: life insurance, 493 and Personal Development Days, long
term disability insurance, leave payouts, member donated release time, etc.



Article 4. Hours of Work/Working Conditions


Section 4-1. Hours of Work

A. The duty hours for employees assigned to Operations or Emergency Services,
excluding 40 hour staff assignments, shall continue to average 56 hours per week.
Shifts shall continue to be 24 and/or 48hours hours in duration. Both parties
acknowledge that discussions within the RBO process regarding alternative
scheduling models, including the proposed 1-3-2-3 schedule, are ongoing, and agree
to continue collaborative efforts to evaluate, refine, and formally codify any mutually
agreed-upon changes to duty hours and shift structure through future amendments
to this Memorandum. Any such implementation shall be designed to ensure cost
neutrality to the City while guaranteeing that no Unit 5 member experiences any
reduction in annual compensation or benefits as a result of the transition, and shall
be executed in a manner that maintains the Department’s operational readiness,
service delivery standards, and commitment to public safety.




B. The work hours and schedule of employees assigned to an administrative staff
assignment (Non-Operations/56-hour schedule) shall be 5 8 hour days (excluding
authorized meal breaks), or 4 10 hour days (excluding authorized meal breaks) at the
preference of the employee, subject to operational needs and mutual agreement with
the Department.


The work hours and schedule of employees assigned to the Fire Investigations
Section may only be mutually changed by the Fire Chief and the Union President
through the Labor-Management process. Fire Investigation employees will be
assigned to one of two 40-hour schedules that may include a 4/10 or a modified A,
B, C shift schedule. All schedules will equal a 40-hour work week. All Fire
Investigators, regardless of schedule will be paid overtime at the 40-hour rate.

C. Fire Investigation employees assigned to the modified shift schedule will be required
to work on City paid holidays when their regular schedule shift occurs on that day.
Those employees required to work on a City holiday as a result of the shift schedule
will receive pay in lieu of time off. The Fire Department shall continue its long-standing
practice of using sworn Fire Captains as Fire Investigators.

The Fire Department will attempt to maintain staffing levels of the Investigations
Section, in order to provide for investigatory needs of the Department. The staffing
level shall be a minimum of 4 investigators on A, B, and C shift as soon as 15
investigators are fully trained. Any future proposed staffing level recommendations
will be discussed through the labor/management process. A maximum of one
vacation shift will be allowed per shift for those employees assigned to the modified
A, B, C shift schedule, unless pre-approved by department head or designee. If
implementation of the proposed 1-3-2-3 schedule requires adjustment to the Fire
Investigation Section’s work schedule, both parties will collaborate through the Labor-
Management process to ensure any change remains cost neutral to the City and does
not reduce member compensation, benefits, or operational effectiveness.


C. When an employee is required to change from one type of a schedule to another by
the Fire Department, the Department shall allow a minimum of 16 hours between
tours of duty.

D. The work week for employees on a 56 hour schedule shall be 53 hours. Employees
will continue to work the existing 56 hour schedule. Employees working the existing
56 hour schedule will be compensated as follows: Provided, however, that if the 1-3-
2-3 schedule currently under consideration in the RBO process is adopted after full
review and agreement by both the members and the organization, the listed monetary
figures may be adjusted as necessary to ensure that Unit 5 members experience no




reduction in their annual compensation.


1. The first 53 hours will be paid at the base 56 hour rate.

2. The 54th hour will be paid at 1 ½ times the regular hourly rate.

3. The 55th and 56th hours will be paid at 2 times the base 56 hour rate.

E. Employees attending a Department Sponsored Training Programs or courses may
be placed on one of two optional training schedules, based upon Operational,
Training, and budgetary considerations:

Schedule 1. Employees may be placed on a 40-hour work week schedule and be
entitled to a 10% increase in pay in accordance with Section 3-1 (H) of this
Memorandum of Understanding. Employees shall be paid on a 40-hour work week
until completion of the respective Training Program. In the event an employee
attending the Training Program does not receive their regular Local 493 Days (as per
Section 3-1 (I) of this Memorandum of Understanding), any missed Local 493 Days
will be re-scheduled prior to the employee’s return to the Operations Division.

Schedule 2. Employees may remain on their normal Operations schedule (A, B, or
C Shift) and be provided paid Fire Department leave to attend the Training Program
when their training is scheduled on shift. When members are required to attend
training on their days off, employees will be compensated at 1 ½ times their regular
rate for the hours they are in attendance. Compensation and Local 493 Days will
remain the same as any other employee assigned to a 56-hour work week. The
decision to utilize Schedule 1 or 2 will be discussed in a labor/management setting.

F. Each 56 hour unit employee shall receive 8 shifts off per year, referred to in this MOU
as Local 493 days. This will allow for an hours reduction without specifying a specific
number of hours in this reduction or reducing current rates of pay, FLSA, or hours
reduction pay as specified in Section 4-1, Paragraph E, of Article 4. The rotation
system shall be worked out between the Fire Chief and the Union President with the
consent of the Labor Relations Division. These Local 493 Days shall be awarded
based on total seniority as a sworn member of the Fire Department. Unit 5
employees may submit a request to work a Local 493 day. Management may hire
members to work a Local 493 day in the event the constant staffing process is utilized
to meet minimum staffing requirements. Employees who work a Local 493 day must
work the entire 24-hour shift and shall be compensated at a rate of one and one-half
(1½) times their regular rate of compensation, in addition to their regular pay.
Employees shall have the option of being paid cash or allow the compensation to
accrue as compensatory time as governed by the current MOU.






Section 4-2. Shift Trades

Two (2) employees serving in the same classification may be granted the opportunity to
exchange shifts up to a maximum of 45 such exchanges per employee in a contract year.
Shift exchanges shall not qualify an employee for premium overtime payment and cannot
be repaid in any other form of compensation. All employees seeking shift exchanges
(AWRs) must be current with all certifications and required training before being approved
for the exchange. All shift exchanges are subject to the approval of the Fire Chief or
his/her designee and shall be in conformance with regulations issued by the Fire Chief.


Section 4-3. Filling Vacancies

The Fire Chief will endeavor to permanently fill vacancies in regular positions, that are
duly authorized to be filled, expeditiously within limitations imposed on him by
administrative and operational factors, and thereafter, consistent with applicable Civil
Service Rules, based on length of service by classification when fitness and qualifications
of interested employees for the particular vacancy are deemed to be equal by the Fire
Chief. When requested, departmental management shall indicate the reason why an
employee was or was not transferred into a vacancy as part of Labor-Management
Committee proceedings. "Vacancy" hereunder is defined as a regular opening in any
position created by death, retirement, dismissal, promotion, demotion, creation of a new
regular position or transfer, provided, however, that with the filling of staff positions, all
applicants shall be considered, and the Fire Chief shall make the final determination.

A. The parties agree to a leave management ratio of thirty-three percent (33%) as the
standard benchmark for managing all leave across Operations.
B. In the event that any classification (Firefighter, Engineer, or Captain) falls below five
percent (5%) of the established thirty-three percent (33%) relief rate, employees from
other classifications may be utilized through Constant Staffing to fill temporary
vacancies as needed to maintain safe and effective operational staffing levels.
C. This provision is intended to promote balanced leave utilization, equitable workload
distribution, and continuity of service while minimizing the need for excessive callbacks,
mandatory holds, or unplanned overtime. The parties agree to review this ratio
periodically through the Labor–Management process to ensure it remains effective and
operationally appropriate.
______________________________________________________________________


Section 4-4. Vehicle Assignment for Budgeted 40-Hour Positions


A. All members assigned to true or budgeted 40-hour positions (excluding Fire




Investigators not on Day Shift) shall be provided a staff vehicle or an equivalent car
allowance, consistent with the operational needs and expectations of their assignment.
B. This provision ensures parity and recognition of the additional responsibilities
associated with full-time administrative and staff assignments. Vehicle assignment or
allowance for these positions shall not be subject to discretionary approval when the
position is formally budgeted and designated as a 40-hour assignment.
C. In cases where a staff car is unavailable, the Department shall provide a monthly car
allowance equivalent to the standard rate established by the City for comparable
administrative assignments.



Article 5. Benefits


Section 5-1. Health Insurance

A. The City and Union agree to maintain the current 80/20 split for health insurance for
both single and family coverage. If there is a rate increase or decrease in the second
year of this M.O.U., the City shall pay 80% of the new monthly contribution and the
employee will pay 20%.

B. In the event Congress or the State of Arizona passes legislation which considers the
amount the City contributes to health insurance premiums as imputed income, then
the City will consider such contribution as income to the employee.

C. The City shall provide the Basic Medical Reimbursement Plan (MERP) benefits to
MERP eligible Unit retirees and to those employees who are hired before August 1,
2007 and are eligible to retire no later than August 1, 2022 at no less than $202.00
per month. The City also contributes an additional $50 toward City retiree family
medical coverage; this credit is applied directly to the retiree’s premium deduction.
Any employee hired on or after August 1, 2007, regardless of years of service, may
qualify for a Post Employment Health Plan (PEHP) account.

D. Additional MERP amounts will be paid to eligible retirees for the following categories:

RETIREE COVERAGE – RETIREE NOT ON MEDICARE
ADDITIONAL MERP AMOUNTS
Retiree or Survivor Retiree or Survivor
Retiree or Survivor
w/family coverage – with family coverage
Only NOT on
any dependent NOT – all dependent(s)
Medicare
on Medicare ON Medicare
HMO OR PPO
$105 $325 $210
COVERAGE





RETIREE COVERAGE – RETIREE ON MEDICARE
ADDITIONAL MERP AMOUNTS
Retiree or Survivor Retiree or Survivor
Retiree or Survivor w/family coverage – with family coverage
Only - ON Medicare any dependent NOT – all dependent(s)
on Medicare ON Medicare
HMO OR PPO
$90 $195 $185
COVERAGE

These MERP amounts are what the City agrees to pay. It is solely at the discretion
of the City Manager to increase these amounts in the future.
1) additional MERP amounts shall be paid to Non-Medicare
retirees who obtain single or family health coverage.
2) The City will continue to provide a Medicare Supplement Plan
for Medicare eligible retirees and dependents as well as
survivors and will continue the additional MERP amounts as
specified above.

E. No more than one time per calendar year, the City will provide Unit 5 mutually agreed
upon healthcare data within a reasonable time, once requested. Local 493 Consultant
required data will be furnished within a reasonable time with secure data transmission
provisions in place.

F. Saver’s Choice and PPO deductibles that are met in the last quarter of a calendar
year for a high cost claim will be carried over to the following calendar year.

G. HSA Seed Money for individual and family health care coverage will be deposited in
full to the member’s HSA accounts in January as is the policy now.


H. Proposed Formulary changes shall be discussed with Local 493 Member Benefits
prior to implementation.



Section 5-2. Dental Insurance

A. At a minimum, the dental insurance plan shall include a PPO option that consists of
100% payment of reasonable and customary charges covered for preventive and
preventive-related diagnostic services, and 80% payment of reasonable and
customary covered charges for basic services and major services. At least one plan
shall also include an orthodontia benefit providing for 80% payment of reasonable
and customary charges up to a maximum lifetime benefit of $4,000.00 per person.
Dental plans may be subject to deductibles and limitations contained in the contract
between the dental insurance carrier and the City of Phoenix. For the PPO and HMO
dental plans, the City shall continue to pay 100% of the premium costs for single




employees for employees enrolled in the base dental HMO or PPO plan (employee
only coverage), and 75% of the premium costs for employees and their qualified
dependents (family coverage). Enrollment in prior City of Phoenix Dental Plans
counts towards major services time limit exclusions.

B. In the event Congress or the State of Arizona passes legislation that considers the
amount the City contributes to health insurance premiums as imputed income, then
the City will consider such contribution as income to the employee.


Section 5-3. Life Insurance

A. The City will continue the existing off the job and on-the job life and dismemberment
insurance coverage. The policy shall provide a benefit for each employee equal to
the member’s base annual salary. In addition, the City will continue the existing death
in the line of duty insurance of $75,000.00. Additionally, the City will provide to each
employee a $200,000.00 death benefit covering the employee’s commutation to and
from his City work location. This policy will cover the employee’s commute for up to
2 hours before his shift begins, and 2 hours after his shift concludes.

B. In the event of the death of an employee while commuting to or from his work location,
for a period of 2 hours each way, the City will continue to pay the full monthly health
insurance premium for the spouse and all eligible dependents. This policy will be
consistent with the payment of a supplementary commutation life insurance policy for
each employee.


Section 5-4. Long Term Disability Insurance

The City will offer a long-term disability benefit for all full-time, regular unit
members/employees pursuant to A.R. 2.323 as may be amended (providing that such
amendments shall not be in conflict with the MOU). Employees who have been
continuously employed and working on a full-time basis for twelve consecutive months
are eligible to apply for long term disability coverage. After an established 90 calendar
day qualifying period, the plan will provide up to 66 2/3% of the employee's basic monthly
salary at the time disability occurs and continue up to age 75 for employees who have
been employed full-time for 36 months and one day. This benefit will be coordinated with
leave payments, industrial insurance payments, unemployment compensation, social
security benefits and disability provisions of the retirement plan.

Employees who have been employed full-time with the City of Phoenix for 36 months or
less, will be eligible to receive a long term disability benefit for no more than 30 months.


Section 5-5. Holidays, Vacations, and Donated Vacation Leave




A. Bank of Donated Leave

1. Each unit member/employee may complete a form to voluntarily donate vacation
leave time for a specified number of hours, not to exceed the maximum number
of hours as noted in Section 5-5, Subsection A, 3. These forms will be processed
on July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1. The voluntary donation will continue
each subsequent year on the second paycheck in July, unless revoked by the
unit member/employee. This donated time is to be used by union officers and
representatives for Union-related activities as determined by the Unit 5 Union
President and Executive Board. It is recognized that all hours negotiated in lieu
of additional pay and benefits have been donated by the members of Unit 5 from
their bank of vacation leave. By filling out and submitting a voluntary donation
form, each unit member/employee is clearly and affirmatively consenting to the
donation of the stated number of hours from their bank of vacation leave.

2. The total hours donated by the members of Unit 5 will be considered the
maximum number of hours available for donated hours under Article 5, Section
5-5.

3. The maximum number of hours that may be donated by any Unit member is 100
hours per fiscal year.

4. Only members of Unit 5 may donate hours to the Unit 5 bank of hours; Unit 5
may only accept donated hours from Unit 5 members.

5. No union member may use more than 120 hours of donated time during any one
pay period.

6. Donated time does count towards hours worked for overtime purposes.

7. Examples of work performed by representatives on member donated release in
support of the City include ensuring representation during administrative
investigations and grievance/disciplinary appeal meetings with management;
assisting unit members/employees in understanding and following work rules;
administering the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding; organizing
and participating in charity functions within the greater Phoenix area to aid our
communities. Member donated release is also used for authorized
representatives to attend Union conferences, meetings, seminars, training
classes, and workshops so that representatives better understand issues such
as City policies and practices, conflict resolution, labor-management
partnerships, and methods of effective representation, or any other purpose
authorized by the President or Executive Board.

B. The City agrees to incorporate into the Memorandum the benefits provided under




Administrative Regulation 2.11 as amended, indicating the following holidays:

1. New Year's Day
2. Martin Luther King's Birthday
3. President's Day
4. Cesar Chavez Birthday (March 31)
5. Memorial Day
6. Juneteenth Day
7. Independence Day
8. Labor Day
9. Indigenous Peoples’ Day
10. Veteran's Day
11. Thanksgiving Day
12. Friday after Thanksgiving
13. Christmas Eve Day (6 hours for 56-hour employees and 4 hours for 40-hour
employees).
14. Christmas Day

Employees working a 56 hour or 2912 (493 days included) per year schedule shall
receive 12 hours pay or compensatory time each holiday.

Unit employees assigned to a 4/10 work schedule shall not be required to modify
their schedule or submit documentation to account for the two (2) hours of paid leave
associated with City holidays.

C. Employees will continue to receive holiday pay while on industrial leave.

D. The parties recognize the importance of maintaining adequate vacation
availability to support member wellness, morale, and operational efficiency. In
recognition of the recent budget authorization to hire additional sworn
Firefighters, the City agrees that the number of available vacation slots shall
increase proportionally with overall sworn staffing levels.
E. Specifically, for every twenty-five (25) newly authorized sworn Firefighter
positions added to the Department, one (1) additional vacation slot shall be
created and allocated to the vacation leave management system.
F. This provision ensures that the ratio of available vacation leave to total sworn
personnel remains balanced as the Department grows, preventing the erosion of
negotiated benefits and supporting the continued health, safety, and retention of
all members.

G. Effective January 1, 1987, vacation accrual for employees with less than 5 years shall
be increased to 11.2 hours per month, or the 40 hour equivalent. Vacation accrual
for all other employees shall remain the same as currently authorized.





H. Employees covered by this M.O.U. shall be permitted to sell back up to 80 hours total
per M.O.U. year of accrued vacation leave to the City at the employee's regular
straight-time hourly rate. This benefit shall not exceed a total of 80 hours and may
be used as follows: 40 hours on the last pay period in November and/or May of each
M.O.U. year. Employees will only be permitted to sell back an amount of accrued
vacation hours that would not result in their total bank of hours to drop below 150 or
210 hours, depending upon the work schedule.

I. Effective July 1, 2014, and thereafter, an employee who has accrued at least 312
hours, or 223 hours for 40-hour employees, may elect to have 252 hours of vacation
for a 56 hour unit member/employee or 180 hours of vacation for a 40 hour unit
member/employee paid out in a lump sum or converted into their comp bank. Any
unit member/employee may only elect to exercise this benefit 4 times in their career,
and not more than one time in a fiscal year. This payment is not considered Final
Average Salary for purposes of pension calculations. Eligible employees may elect
to buy back their hours between July 1 and the last pay period in January each fiscal
year.

J. Employees may donate accrued vacation leave to other City employees who are on
medical leave and who have exhausted all of their paid leave based on guidelines
contained in A.R. 2.144, with the understanding that no employee shall receive more
than 12 months of donated time.

K. Employees who have less than 40 hours vacation may buy up to 120 hours personal
leave. The cost of the personal leave shall be 110% of the employee’s base hourly
rate. Such personal leave use and purchase shall not impact positively or negatively
on the employee’s pension or any other benefits.

L. On the second paycheck in July of every year, every unit member/employee will
receive 8.5 hours of vacation time, in addition to their other accruals, added to their
vacation leave. This benefit will continue in perpetuity until otherwise agreed upon in
good faith, by Unit 5 and the City, through the Meet and Confer process.

M. Military Leave

Pursuant to ARS 26-168, ARS 38-610, and A.R. 2.39, employees who are
members of the Arizona National Guard or the Reserves of the United States
Armed Forces, will be entitled to a leave of absence from their duties for a period
not to exceed 30 days in two consecutive years when they are engaged in ordered
annual training or to attend camps, maneuvers, formations, or armory drills under
orders of any branch, including the reserve or auxiliary. A day is defined as a shift
of work.

N. Local 493 Days for Industrial Injuries





Unit 5 members who sustain an approved industrial injury arising out of and in
the course of their employment shall continue to receive four (4) Local 493 Days
per calendar year in recognition of their service and the nature of their injury. This
entitlement shall apply provided the member returns to active duty prior to the
end of the calendar year. Local 493 Days granted under this provision shall not
carry over into the following year and must be used within the calendar year in
which the member returns. This provision acknowledges that Local 493 Days
were secured through prior contract negotiations in lieu of additional pay and
benefits and reflects the parties’ shared commitment to honor members injured in
the performance of their duties.

O. Military Service Time Reinstatement

PSPRS Non- Credited Service to be changed to Credited Service with employer
contributions transmitted to PSPRS within 30 days of returning to PFD service
following return from a military call up, deployment or required service.

Section 5-6. Uniforms

A. In lieu of the $135.00 per employee per year amount which was previously paid by
the City to the Fire Department for additional uniform items, employees will now
receive an equivalent annual uniform allowance amount of $129.75. Payment of this
uniform allowance will be made on or about August 1 of each MOU year. Such
payment will be made to cover the cost of uniforms, maintenance, and cleaning of
such uniforms.

B. New employees will receive the entire annual uniform allowance within 30 days of
the time they are directed to wear and maintain a uniform. The second uniform
allowance, received at the start of the next fiscal year, will be equal to 1/12 of the
annual uniform allowance for each month of the preceding fiscal period, starting with
the first month the employee was directed to wear and maintain a uniform, to the start
of the new fiscal year.

Prior to entering the Fire Academy, the Fire Department will furnish all new Firefighter
Recruits with the following:

• 3 long sleeve red shirts
• 3 short sleeve red shirts
(Recruits can select any combination of the long and short sleeve shirts noted
above – not to exceed a total of six red shirts)
• 3 pair of blue fatigue pants
• 5 blue physical training (PT) shorts
• 1 pair of blue sweatpants




• 1 red sweatshirt (seasonally dependent)
• 1 belt
• 1 pair of OSHA/ANSI approved work boots; and,
• All necessary PPE’s required to participate in Fire Academy functions.

The Fire Department will provide a full Class A dress uniform upon successful
completion of the Fire Academy and promotion to Firefighter to include the following:

• 1 approved Class A dress jacket complete with patches and full fitment
• 1 approved Class A dress shirt complete with patches and full fitment
• 1 pair of approved Class A dress pants
• 1 approved Class A dress hat
• 1 approved Class A dress tie
• 1 approved Class A belt
• 1 approved Class A pair of shoes
• All approved hardware required (badges/pins etc.) to complete the approved
Class A dress uniform; and,
• All necessary PPE’s required to participate in field functions.

Additionally, any Captain RTO (Recruit Training Officer) or Firefighter Mentor
(Firefighter or Engineer) assigned to the Recruit Training Academy will be provided
a full Class A uniform (one time purchase) if the member has not already purchased
one.

Upon promotion to Fire Engineer or Fire Captain, the Fire Department will provide a
full Class A uniform to include the following:

• 1 approved Class A dress jacket complete with patches and full fitment
• 1 approved Class A dress shirt complete with patches and full fitment
• 1 pair of approved Class A dress pants
• 1 approved Class A dress hat
• 1 approved Class A dress tie; and,
• All approved hardware required (badges/pins etc.) to complete the approved
Class A dress uniform.

The Fire Department will provide a Class A uniform to the Unit 5 member as a “one
time only” purchase based upon whichever qualifying criteria previously listed is
initially met. Until all Unit 5 members have been provided a Class A dress uniform
by the Fire Department, no additional Class A dress uniforms will be issued to
members who have already received the benefit. Labor and Management will
continue to discuss funding options for additional Class A dress uniforms and the
implementation plan for the new uniform language outlined above.

Labor and Management will meet to discuss an implementation plan for the new




uniform language outlined above.

C. Employees who leave Department employment shall repay to the City the uniform
allowance equal to 1/12 of the annual allowance per month for each month remaining
in the fiscal year after the last day of the month in which the separation occurs.
Provided, however, that employees who retire after August 31 will not be requested
to repay any uniform allowance.

D. An employee who has been on extended leave (paid or unpaid) of 2 months or longer
shall have the next annual uniform allowance reduced by 1/12 of the annual
allowance for each month of extended leave.


Section 5-7. Tuition Reimbursement and Professional Development

A. Employees who participate in the Tuition Assistance Program shall be eligible for
tuition reimbursement pursuant to the following provisions:

1. The maximum sum reimbursable to employees each fiscal year shall be $6,500.

2. To be eligible for any reimbursement, employees must have successfully
completed academic or training courses approved in advance by the Fire Chief
and the Human Resources Director and meet the requirements of A.R. 2.51 as
may be amended, provided such amendments are not in conflict with the M.O.U.

3. Unit members shall be allowed to use up to $2000 of their reimbursement benefit
for job-related seminars, workshops, and professional memberships each fiscal
year.
B. Members shall receive up to 40 paid hours per year for professional certification,
training or fire service career advancement courses.


Section 5-8. Wellness, Health and Fitness

A. For each employee, the City of Phoenix shall contribute $2.00 per month to a fitness
fund to maintain and purchase fitness equipment for fire stations which has been
charged against Unit 5’s contract. The Fire Department will also contribute $2.00
each month per member to the fitness fund. The fund will be maintained by the City
and Fire Administration. The Health and Fitness labor management committee shall
oversee the funds and purchase equipment after reviewing input from all Fire
Department personnel.

B. The Phoenix Fire Department Honor Guard is a professional organization that
represents the Fire Department at official events, memorial services, and fire fighter’s
funerals. Through the work of the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association, a




registered 501c-3 non-profit association (ID#866053047), the Honor Guard provides
public education and community service. In order to help pay for the expenses
incurred by the Honor Guard members in the performance of their duties, the City will
contribute twenty-five thousand dollars $50,000 into a fund for each M.O.U. year. The
President of the Union or his designee will manage this fund. The City Auditor
Department may conduct annual audits of this fund. Any payments not adequately
supported by the documentation of expenses will be returned to the fund by the Fire
Union.


Section 5-9. Worker’s Compensation

A. Employees who agree to participate in the Fire Department's health centers
consultation and rehabilitation programs shall continue to receive 100% of their
current rate of pay while off-duty due to an industrial injury based on current practice
which is a maximum of 1 year per injury, thereafter the rate becomes 66-2/3%. This
shall apply to catastrophic injury, line-of-duty cancer, cardiac incidents, and other
occupational diseases.
i.

B. If there is a disagreement in treatment between the Fire Department physician and
the employee's physician, the (2 physicians shall agree on a third physician whose
decision shall be the final authority. Employees who refuse to adhere to the above
conditions shall only receive 66-2/3% based on current state law and the current
maximum monthly rate allowed. If an employee receives 66-2/3%, he/she may use
sick leave, vacation, or compensatory time to make up the difference between 66-
2/3% and 100%.

C. Should the Union believe that a dispute in jurisdiction is unduly delaying a Worker’s
Compensation claim, or if the Union believes the City needs to provides greater
assistance to an employee trying to reopen an old claim, the Union may request a
meeting with City Worker’s Compensation staff (provided the involved employee
signs a release to do so) and such meeting will be scheduled within 14 calendar days.

D. The City will first attempt to use physicians from specialty lists created by City of
Phoenix Pension Boards for Independent Medical Examinations for employees in
Unit 5 (represented by Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local 493).

E. Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave shall not run concurrent with leave paid
as industrial injury/illness (e.g. Workers’ Compensation).

F. Members who have applied for Public Safety Retirement System Disability Benefits
will be provided with TWA assignments until the disposition of their case with the
Phoenix Local Fire Pension Board.





G. Members on Industrial Injury Full Pay status shall continue to accrue biweekly
Compensatory Time if requested by the member.

H. In the event of a decision by an Industrial Commission of Arizona Administrative Law
Judge awarding benefits in an Industrial Injury Claim that had been previously denied,
all personal leave time used by the member will be reinstated to the appropriate
personal leave banks within 30 days.

I. For those members who are required by a City of Phoenix approved Independent
Medical Examiner to have any type of invasive procedure, a policy shall be developed
on care and treatment and responsibility in the event of complications or adverse
reactions that develop from such a procedure.




Section 5-10. Employee Benefit Trust Fund

A. Effective July 1, 2023, the existence of the Employee Benefit Trust Fund is continued
for the term of this Memorandum of Understanding. The City will contribute $68 per
employee, per month, ($31.385 per pay period) into the Fund for the purpose of
providing a monthly stipend to retirees to apply to the costs of their health and/or
dental insurance, a funeral expense benefit for employees and retirees, and such
other benefits as may be lawfully provided, as determined in the discretion of the
Trustees. The City's contribution will be matched by a $29 per pay period to the same
fund made by each employee.

B. The Trust Fund shall be managed and administered by a Board of five (5) Trustees
selected as follows:

1. Two (2) Trustees shall be appointed by the City Manager;
2. Two (2) Trustees shall be appointed by the Phoenix Fire Fighters Association,
Local 493; and
3. One (1) Trustee, who shall serve as Chairperson, shall be selected by the four (4)
appointed Trustees specified above.

C. The Trust Fund shall be invested in prudent, protected investments in compliance
with applicable law. The Trustees may seek such outside, independent advice and
consultation as they shall deem appropriate.

D. The Fund Trustees may adopt such rules and regulations for their Plan of Benefits
as they deem appropriate and are authorized to secure a formal trust instrument. The
trust instrument and any amendments thereto, must be specifically approved by the
City Manager and the Union before they can become effective.




E. Sums contributed to the Trust Fund shall be tracked with each employee being
assigned a notional account which records the contributions made by such employee.
All amounts in the Fund, together with any earnings thereon, shall be available for
distribution as specified in the rules and regulations of the Plan of Benefits adopted
by the Trustees. The Trustees shall have authority, consistent with their duties as
Trustees, to amend the Plan of Benefits from time to time, including the authority to
reduce or suspend benefit levels if required by the level of funding available. In no
event will any benefit specified at any time in the Plan of Benefits be considered non-
forfeitable. Benefits may be insured by a contract of insurance, but there is no liability
upon the City, the Union or the Board of Trustees or its constituent members to
provide benefit payments over and beyond the amounts in the Fund collected and
available for such purpose.

F. Any Fund participant who separates from the bargaining Unit prior to retirement, or
who promotes out of the Unit shall receive an amount equal to all of his or her or her
contributions to the Fund, plus interest based on the average annual interest earned
by the Fund, but shall receive no other benefits and have no other claim on the Fund.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Trustees may: (1) permit participants who promote
out of the Unit to continue participation until retirement; and (2) permit participants
who have severed employment to be reinstated in the Fund; either upon such terms
and conditions as the Trustees may require.

G. Upon the death of any employee or retiree, the Fund will provide a benefit to assist
with funeral expenses in an amount to be determined by the Trustees. The Fund
Trustees may determine to provide to a surviving spouse of a deceased employee or
retiree a monthly stipend for application to the cost of their health/dental insurance.

H. The Trustees shall prepare a booklet describing the Plan of Benefits for circulation to
employees and retirees, and shall prepare and circulate, in like manner, a summary
of any modifications made to the Plan of Benefits during the term of this Memorandum
of Understanding.

I. If the Trust Fund is terminated for any reason, undistributed funds shall be distributed
to those individuals (whether active or retired) who contributed to the Fund. Such
distribution shall be pro rata based on the amount of the contribution of such
individuals to the Fund less any disbursements they have received under the Plan of
Benefits.

J. Payments to retirees from the Trust Fund shall be in addition to current City
contributions to retiree health insurance premiums.

Section 5-11. Housing Incentive for City Residency
A. In recognition of the value of having sworn Fire Department personnel residing




within the City of Phoenix, the City agrees to establish a Housing Incentive
Program designed to encourage and support Unit 5 employees who choose to
make their primary residence within City limits.
B. Eligible employees who purchase a primary residence within the City of Phoenix
shall receive a one-time housing incentive payment of three thousand
dollars ($3,000) to assist with closing costs or other housing-related expenses
associated with establishing residency.
C. This incentive shall be available to employees who have completed their
probationary period and who agree to maintain their primary residence within
City limits for a minimum of five (5) years following receipt of the incentive.
D. The intent of this program is to strengthen community ties, enhance emergency
response readiness, and contribute to local economic vitality, while supporting
firefighter recruitment and long-term retention.
E. This incentive shall apply prospectively only and shall not be retroactive to
employees who purchased or established residency within the City prior to the
effective date of program implementation.
F. The parties agree to collaborate through the Labor–Management process to
finalize program administration, eligibility verification, and fiscal alignment.

Section 5-11. Fatigue, Safety, and Behavioral Health


A. Creation of a Labor-Management Fatigue Study Committee. This committee
will review and make recommendations for shift length, rest, and mandatory
overtime practices.

B. Establish a joint Labor/Management wellness committee. This committee will
provide peer-support and employer funded counceling due to the looming
sunsetting of the Craig Tiger act. All peer support shall be confidential.



Article 6. Miscellaneous

Section 6-1. Saving Clause

A. If any Article or Section of this Memorandum should be held invalid by operation of
law or by a final judgment of any tribunal of competent jurisdiction, or if compliance
with or enforcement of any Article or Section should be restrained by such tribunal,
the remainder of this Memorandum shall not be affected thereby. In the event the
decision of the court in Cheatham, et al v. Gordon, is stayed, reversed, vacated or
otherwise not given effect in whole or in part, by any court, then the City agrees to
meet and confer within 30 days of said ruling with Unit 5 to resolve any additional




issues resulting from the ruling of the court. The basis for negotiations will be the
document dated April 13, 2014, Proposed Unit 5 Addendum.

B. It is recognized by the parties that the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act are
currently applicable to certain of the wage and premium pay provisions of this M.O.U.,
and that this M.O.U. shall be administered in compliance with the FLSA for so long
as the Act is applicable.

C. Nothing contained in the Memorandum shall preclude the parties from being in
compliance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.


Section 6-2. Printing of M.O.U.

Printing vendors secured by the Union shall comply with Ordinance G-1372 (Affirmative
Action Supplier's Ordinance), as may be amended, and Ordinance G-1901 (Affirmative
Action Employment by Contractors, Subcontractors, and Suppliers), as may be amended.
Printing of the M.O.U. shall be done by a Union printer only.


Section 6-3. Fire Watch

A. Whenever a Fire Department employee is required by the Fire Marshal or requested
by a private party, to perform a fire watch, standby, or other associated duties for Fire
Code compliance, such opportunities shall first be offered to Unit
members/employees. Such work shall be offered to those members that are suitably
qualified and who volunteer for such duty during their off-duty hours within a rotation
system approved by the Fire Chief after consultation with the Union. In the event that
no employee accepts such work, or in case of emergency, such work shall be offered
to qualified non-Unit employees. It is understood that the rate of payment shall be at
1 ½ times the employee’s base 40 hour rate, except in cases where non-Unit
employees are utilized in which case payment shall be at 1 ½ times the non-Unit
employee’s base 40 hour rate. For purposes of Section 6-3, Article 6 only, the terms
"qualified" is defined as follows:

1. "Qualified" shall mean any employee of the Fire Department who is familiar with
the Fire Code and has successfully completed the Fire Watch training program
provided by the Department.

2. “Emergency” shall mean any fire watch situation that cannot be pre-scheduled.

Section 6-4. Term and Effect of Memorandum

A. This Memorandum shall remain in full force and effect commencing with the
beginning of the first regular pay period in July 2026, up to the beginning of the first




regular pay period commencing in July 2028.

B. Except as expressly provided in this Memorandum, the City shall not be required to
meet and confer concerning any matter, whether covered or not covered herein to
take effect during the term or extensions thereof.

C. This Memorandum constitutes the total and entire agreements between the parties
and no past written or verbal statement/agreements shall supersede any of its
provisions. Throughout the term of this Memorandum, the City and the union may
jointly decide to participate in Labor-Management meetings to discuss items of
mutual interest on an as-needed basis.

D. It is intended by the parties hereto that the provisions of this Memorandum shall be
in harmony with the rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities which by law
devolve upon the City Council, City Manager, Fire Chief, and other City boards and
officials, and these provisions shall be interpreted and applied in such manner.

E. The Union recognizes the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Fire Chief as set
forth in the Charter and Ordinances and that pursuant thereto the Fire Chief has the
authority to establish rules and regulations applicable to the operation of the Fire
Department and to the conduct of the employees and officers employed therein,
subject to the express provisions of this Memorandum.

F. The lawful provisions of this Memorandum are binding upon the parties for the term
thereof. The Union having had an opportunity to raise all matters in connection with
the Meet and Confer proceedings resulting in the Memorandum is precluded from
initiating any further meeting and conferring for the term thereof relative to matters
under the control of the Fire Chief, the City Council or the City Manager.








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands this



_________________________________________________________________
Bryan Willingham, President, Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local 493


_________________________________________________________________
Jason Perkiser, Assistant Human Resources Director


_________________________________________________________________
Jeffrey Barton, City Manager, City of Phoenix


ATTEST:


_________________________________________________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk, City of Phoenix


APPROVED AS TO FORM:


_________________________________________________________________
City Attorney, City of Phoenix



Local 493 Team: City of Phoenix Team:
Bryan Willingham, President Jason Perkiser, Assistant HR Director
Ben Lindquist Tim Gammage Sr., Assistant Fire Chief
Tim West Raymond Ochoa, Assistant Fire Chief
Tim Gammage Jr. Paul Moore, Battalion Chief
Mike Brannan Keith Slattery, Deputy Chief
Scott Crowley Julie Taylor, Human Resources Supervisor
Patrick Cardenas Brianna Aceves, Admin. Assistant II (Coordinator)
Scott Porter Jennifer Flaherty, Secretary, (Scribe)
Brian Mike Saylor
Brian Moore
Gabe Orosco
Elliott Simmons
Matt Shaughnessy




ATTACHMENT A
HOURLY PAY RATES



HOURLY PAY RATES
Effective July 8, 2024


FIREFIGHTER
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 545 GRADE 549

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
11 $19.636 11 $30.31
12 $20.614 12 $31.82
13 $21.650 13 $33.41
14 $22.729 14 $35.08
15 $23.864 15 $36.84
16 $25.057 16 $38.68
17 $26.314 17 $40.61


FIREFIGHTER/SO
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 547 GRADE 551

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
11 $20.614 11 $31.82
12 $21.650 12 $33.41
13 $22.729 13 $35.08
14 $23.864 14 $36.84
15 $25.057 15 $38.68
16 $26.314 16 $40.61
17 $27.629 17 $42.64








FIREFIGHTER HMT & TRT
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 549 GRADE 553

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
11 $21.650 11 $33.41
12 $22.729 12 $35.08
13 $23.864 13 $36.84
14 $25.057 14 $38.68
15 $26.314 15 $40.61
16 $27.629 16 $42.64
17 $29.007 17 $44.77


FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 549 GRADE 553

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $22.729 12 $35.08
13 $23.864 13 $36.84
14 $25.057 14 $38.68
15 $26.314 15 $40.61
16 $27.629 16 $42.64
17 $29.007 17 $44.77


FIREFIGHTER SO/PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 551 GRADE 555

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $23.864 12 $36.84
13 $25.057 13 $38.68
14 $26.314 14 $40.61
15 $27.629 15 $42.64
16 $29.007 16 $44.77
17 $30.457 17 $47.01


FIREFIGHTER HMT & TRT/PARAMEDIC




56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 553 GRADE 557

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $25.057 12 $38.68
13 $26.314 13 $40.61
14 $27.629 14 $42.64
15 $29.007 15 $44.77
16 $30.457 16 $47.01
17 $31.979 17 $49.36


ENGINEER
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 555 GRADE 559

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $26.314 12 $40.61
13 $27.629 13 $42.64
14 $29.007 14 $44.77
15 $30.457 15 $47.01
16 $31.979 16 $49.36
17 $33.579 17 $51.83


ENGINEER SO
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 557 GRADE 561

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $27.629 12 $42.64
13 $29.007 13 $44.77
14 $30.457 14 $47.01
15 $31.979 15 $49.36
16 $33.579 16 $51.83
17 $35.257 17 $54.42




ENGINEER HMT & TRT





56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 559 GRADE 563

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $29.007 12 $44.77
13 $30.457 13 $47.01
14 $31.979 14 $49.36
15 $33.579 15 $51.83
16 $35.257 16 $54.42
17 $37.021 17 $57.15


ENGINEER PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 559 GRADE 563

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $29.007 12 $44.77
13 $30.457 13 $47.01
14 $31.979 14 $49.36
15 $33.579 15 $51.83
16 $35.257 16 $54.42
17 $37.021 17 $57.15

ENGINEER SO/PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 561 GRADE 565

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $30.457 12 $47.01
13 $31.979 13 $49.36
14 $33.579 14 $51.83
15 $35.257 15 $54.42
16 $37.021 16 $57.15
17 $38.871 17 $60.00




ENGINEER HMT & TRT/PARAMEDIC





56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 563 GRADE 567

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
12 $31.979 12 $49.36
13 $33.579 13 $51.83
14 $35.257 14 $54.42
15 $37.021 15 $57.15
16 $38.871 16 $60.00
17 $40.821 17 $63.00


CAPTAIN
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 559 GRADE 563

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $33.579 15 $51.83
16 $35.257 16 $54.42
17 $37.021 17 $57.15


CAPTAIN SO
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 561 GRADE 565

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $35.257 15 $54.42
16 $37.021 16 $57.15
17 $38.871 17 $60.00


CAPTAIN HMT & TRT
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 563 GRADE 567

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $37.021 15 $57.15
16 $38.871 16 $60.00
17 $40.821 17 $63.00


CAPTAIN PARAMEDIC





56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 563 GRADE 567

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $37.021 15 $57.15
16 $38.871 16 $60.00
17 $40.821 17 $63.00


CAPTAIN SO/PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 565 GRADE 569

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $38.871 15 $60.00
16 $40.821 16 $63.00
17 $42.857 17 $66.15

CAPTAIN HMT & TRT/PARAMEDIC
56-HOUR 40-HOUR
GRADE 567 GRADE 571

STEP HOURLY RATE STEP HOURLY RATE
15 $40.821 15 $63.00
16 $42.857 16 $66.15
17 $45.000 17 $69.46



Progression through these steps shall be in accordance with established regulations and
the City's Pay Ordinance. It is understood that any time a member is promoted to another
classification or assigned as a firefighter paramedic and is within a pay classification
range, the member will proceed to the next higher step upon promotion or assignment.








ATTACHMENT B
VACATION CARRYOVER

With the reinstatement of vacation buy back in FY 2021-2022, vacation carryover will be
the established maximum plus 240 hours (or the 56-hour equivalent). In FY 2022-2023,
the vacation carryover will be the established maximum plus 160 hours (or the 56-hour
equivalent). In FY 2026-2028, the vacation carryover will be the established maximum
plus 160 hours (or the 56-hour equivalent). Any hours over that limit will be paid out to
that member on the last check of December.











Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Intergovernmental Agreement with the Town of Cave Creek for Equipment
Placement at Radio Site (Ordinance S-52481) - District 1

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Town of Cave Creek for the Town of Cave
Creek to place its equipment at a City-owned radio site. There is no costs associated
with the IGA and no financial impact to the City of Phoenix.

Summary
This IGA will allow the Town of Cave Creek to place a piece of free-standing, solar-
powered equipment at the Mt. Gillan radio site located at 701 W. Carefree Highway,
Phoenix, AZ 85085. The equipment will not require connection to power or
communication facilities. The Town of Cave Creek will have limited access to the site
for equipment maintenance, generally no more than once per month.

Contract Term
This IGA will commence on or about December 3, 2025 for an initial term of three
years and thereafter will be automatically renewed each year for a successive one-
year term.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City of Phoenix.

Location
701 W. Carefree Highway, Phoenix, AZ (Mt. Gillan)
Council District: 1

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Information Technology
Services Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Transfer of Retirement Funds to Arizona State Retirement System (Ordinance S-
52453) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to transfer retirement funds for
Michael Frieh in the amount of $9,701.74 to the Arizona State Retirement System.
Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse the funds.

Summary
Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 38-730 and 38-322, retirement service
credits for former members of the City of Phoenix Employees' Retirement System
(COPERS) may be transferred to the Arizona State Retirement System upon approval
by the City Council. The following former City of Phoenix employee has requested
transfer of the balance of his credited service:

· Frieh, Michael: $9,701.74

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This item was approved by the COPERS Board at the November 6, 2025 meeting.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager David Mathews and the Retirement
Office.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Transfer of Retirement Funds to Arizona State Retirement System (Ordinance S-
52478) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to transfer retirement funds for
Stephanie Bond in the amount of $281,884.07 to the Arizona State Retirement
System. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse the funds.

Summary
Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 38-730 and 38-322, retirement service
credits for former members of the City of Phoenix Employees' Retirement System
(COPERS) may be transferred to the Arizona State Retirement System upon approval
by the City Council. The following former City of Phoenix employee has requested
transfer of the balance of her credited service:

· Bond, Stephanie: $281,884.07

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
This item was approved by the COPERS Board at the October 2, 2025 meeting.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager David Mathews and the Retirement
Office.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Cost Estimating On-Call Services Contracts - RFQu FY26-086-02 - Request for
Award (Ordinance S-52465) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into contracts with
Abacus PM LLC, Rider Levett Bucknall LTD, and Vanir Construction Management, Inc.
to provide cost estimating on-call services for the Housing Department. Further
request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
aggregate value of the contracts will not exceed $500,000.

Summary
These contracts will provide reviews and cost validation for new buildings,
rehabilitation, and change orders for various Housing Department projects.

Procurement Information
A Request for Qualifications procurement was processed in accordance with
Administrative Regulation 3.10 to establish a Qualified Vendor List.

Nine offerors submitted qualifications and were deemed to be responsive and
responsible. An evaluation committee of City staff evaluated those offers based on the
following minimum qualifications:

1. Method of Approach
2. Qualifications and Experience
3. Price Schedule

After reaching consensus, the evaluation committee recommends award to the
following offerors:

Abacus PM LLC
Rider Levett Bucknall LTD
Vanir Construction Management, Inc.

Contract Term
The contracts will begin on or about January 1, 2026, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.




Financial Impact
The aggregate contracts’ value will not exceed $500,000. The contracts are funded
with United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and/or other
Housing Department funds. There is no impact to the General Fund.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the Housing
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Home Inspection Services Single-Family Home Contract - RFP FY26-086-03 -
Request for Award (Ordinance S-52467) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Assured Quality Inspections L.L.C. to provide single-family home inspections for the
Housing Department's scattered sites properties. Further request to authorize the City
Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The total value of the contract will
not exceed $25,000.

Summary
This contract provides inspection services for single-family residences designated as
Public Housing. Pursuant to the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s approval of the City’s Section 18 and Section 32 plans, these
properties may be disposed of in accordance with applicable federal guidelines.
Inspections will adhere to the Standards of Professional Practice for Arizona Home
Inspectors, as set forth by the Arizona Board of Technical Registration.

Procurement Information
A Request for Proposal procurement was processed in accordance with City of
Phoenix Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Three vendors submitted proposals deemed responsive and responsible. An
evaluation committee of City staff evaluated those offers based on the following criteria
with a maximum possible point total of 1,000:

Method of Approach 350 points
Qualification and Experience 350 points
Pricing 200 points
References 100 points

After reaching consensus, the evaluation committee recommends award to the
following vendor:

Assured Quality Inspections L.L.C.




Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about January 1, 2026, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The total contract value will not exceed $25,000. The contract is funded with U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development funds. There is no impact to the
General Fund.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the Housing
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend Ordinance to Add Federal HOME-ARP Funding for the Salvation Army to
Expand Family Emergency Shelter Services (Ordinance S-52469) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to amend Ordinance S-49878
to add up to $2 million in federal United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan (HOME-
ARP) Program funds with the Salvation Army, or a City-approved nominee, to expand
family emergency shelter services. Additionally, request to take all actions and execute
all documents to complete the loan. Authorization is also requested for the City
Controller to disburse the funds for the life of the contract. There is no impact to the
General Fund.

Summary
The Salvation Army currently operates a family emergency non-congregate shelter
which houses families experiencing homelessness for up to 120 days. The shelter
provides housing, meals, case management, vocational counseling, crisis counseling,
life skills classes, and other activities for 24 families.

The Salvation Army proposes to add an additional residential building to the Salvation
Army emergency family shelter campus. The new building would expand the capacity
of the shelter by 12 rooms, with beds for as many as 60 individuals, increasing the
total number of families served at any one time to 36. It is expected that the additional
rooms, over the course of a year, will serve approximately 173 families, including an
estimated 267 children.

The Housing Department is seeking approval for an additional allocation of up to $2
million in HOME-ARP funding, bringing the total City commitment of HOME-ARP
funding to $8 million. The Salvation Army requested additional funding to address an
increase in development, construction, and labor costs. The total project cost is $10
million.

Contract Term
The term of the contract will begin around January 2026 and run for a minimum of 15
years after expansion completion.




Financial Impact
There is no impact to the General Fund. HOME-ARP is a federally funded program.
Funding is budgeted in the Housing Department’s Capital Improvement Program
budget. Loan execution is anticipated for Fiscal Year 2025-26 and the loan will be paid
to the developer during the construction period.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
· City Council approved Ordinance S-49186 on November 16, 2022, to enter into an
agreement for $6 million with the Salvation Army to expand the family emergency
shelter utilizing HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
· City Council approved Ordinance S-49878 on June 14, 2023, to enter into an
agreement for up to $6 million replacing federal CDBG funding with federal HOME-
ARP Program funding.

Location
2707 E. Van Buren Street
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the Housing
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend Ordinance to Add Federal HOME-ARP Funding for the St. Catherine
Manor Affordable Housing Development Project (Ordinance S-52470) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to amend Ordinance S-51499
to add up to $375,000 in federal United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan (HOME-ARP)
Program funds with Housing for Hope, LLC, or a City-approved nominee, for the St.
Catherine Manor affordable housing development project. Additionally, request to take
all actions and execute all documents to complete the loan. Authorization is also
requested for the City Controller to disburse the funds for the life of the contract. There
is no impact to the General Fund.

Summary
On June 6, 2024, the Housing Department issued a HOME-ARP Notice of Funding
Opportunity for Non-Congregate Shelter and Rental Housing acquisition, rehabilitation
and/or new construction projects to reduce homelessness and increase housing
stability. St. Catherine Manor was one of the projects recommended for funding. This
project includes 11 units dedicated to serving seniors experiencing homelessness with
Area Median Income (AMI) levels of less than 60 percent with food, clothing, health
care, and other community program referral supportive services. Eight of the 11 units
will serve seniors at 30 percent AMI or below.

On December 4, 2024, City Council approved Ordinance S-51499 to enter into an
Affordable Housing Loan Program agreement for up to $3,038,203 in federal HOME-
ARP Program funds with Housing for Hope, LLC, or a City-approved nominee, for the
St. Catherine Manor affordable housing development project.

The Housing Department is seeking approval for an additional allocation of up to
$375,000 in HOME-ARP funding, bringing the total City commitment of HOME-ARP
funding to $3,413,203. Housing for Hope, LLC/Catholic Charities requested funding to
cover additional project costs for required utility, infrastructure, and street
improvements to 14th Way. The total project cost is $3,413,203.






Contract Term
The term of the contract will begin around January 2026 and run for a minimum of 15
years after project completion.

Financial Impact
There is no impact to the General Fund. HOME-ARP is a federally funded program.
Funding is budgeted in the Housing Department’s Capital Improvement Program
budget. Loan execution is anticipated for Fiscal Year 2025-26 and the loan will be paid
to the developer during the construction period.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
agreement for $3,038,203 in HOME-ARP funds with Housing for Hope, LLC for the St.
Catherine Manor affordable housing development project.

Location
1431 E. Southern Avenue
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the Housing
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
HVAC Maintenance, Repair, and Replacement Contract - PKS-IFB-26-0052 -
Request for Award (Ordinance S-52441) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into contracts with
Artic Air Heating & Cooling, Inc., HACI Service LLC, and VG423G dba AC Medics to
provide HVAC Maintenance, Repair, and Replacement Services for the Parks and
Recreation Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. The total value of the contracts will not exceed $4 million.

Summary
This contract will provide services necessary for HVAC systems and equipment in
Parks and Recreation Department (Parks) facilities, including recreation centers and
the Japanese Friendship Garden. Many facilities have aged units or new technology
that City staff is unable to maintain. The services will be used for preventive
maintenance, equipment repairs, installations, and part replacements as needed.
These services are essential to ensure the health and safety of employees, residents
and the public within Parks facilities.

Procurement Information
An Invitation for Bid procurement was processed in accordance with City of Phoenix
Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Ten vendors submitted bids deemed to be responsive to posted specifications and
responsible to provide the required goods and services. Following an evaluation based
on price, the procurement officer recommends award to the following vendors:

Selected Bidders
Artic Air Heating & Cooling Inc.: $390
HACI Service LLC: $400
VG423G dba AC Medics: $400

Contract Term
The contracts will begin on or about November 5, 2025, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.




Financial Impact
The aggregate contracts value will not exceed $4 million.

Funding is available in the Parks and Recreation Department's budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager David Mathews and the Parks and
Recreation Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Mountain Preserve Trail Maintenance Services - PKS-RFP-25-0744 - Request for
Award (Ordinance S-52460) - Districts 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 & 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Arizona Trail Builders LLC to provide Mountain Preserve Trail Maintenance Services
for the Parks and Recreation Department. Further request to authorize the City
Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The total value of the contract will
not exceed $2.5 million.

Summary
The City's mountain preserve trails are beautiful open spaces for nature, recreation
and fitness opportunities. This contract will provide mountain preserve trails
maintenance services for the Parks and Recreation Department, supporting more than
200 miles of wild desert areas with rocky terrain and natural hazards that require
regular and specialized maintenance services. Arizona Trail Builders LLC specializes
in general maintenance and the removal of non-designated trails through reshaping
and seeding methods to return the land back to its natural state. These services are
essential to preserving the integrity, accessibility and natural beauty of the City's
mountain preserve trails.

Procurement Information
A Request for Proposal was processed in accordance with City of Phoenix
Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Three vendors submitted proposals deemed responsive and responsible. An
evaluation committee of City staff evaluated those offers based on the following
criteria, with a maximum possible point total of 1,000:

Qualification and Experience (0-400 points)
Method of Approach (0-300 points)
Key Personnel (0-200 points)
Price (0-100 points)

After reaching a consensus, the evaluation committee recommends award to the
following vendor:




Arizona Trail Builders LLC

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about January 1, 2026, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $2.5 million for the five-year aggregate
term. Funding is available in the Parks and Recreation Department's budget.

Location
Council Districts: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager David Mathews and the Parks and
Recreation Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Stagehand Services Contract - IFB PCC 26-0010 - Request for Award (Ordinance
S-52443) - Districts 7 & 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
UTP Productions, Inc. to provide stagehand services for the Phoenix Convention
Center Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. The total value of the contract will not exceed $750,000.

Summary
This contract will provide the Phoenix Convention Center Department with skilled
stagehand and technical personnel to support the technical infrastructure needed for
conventions, concerts, theatrical productions, trade shows and civic gatherings. These
services are necessary to ensure the venues operate smoothly, remain event-ready
year-round and continue to meet professional production standards.

Stagehand and technical personnel perform critical functions such as installing,
operating and maintaining equipment; assisting with troubleshooting; and supporting
ongoing maintenance and equipment upgrades. Their expertise ensures that events
are executed safely and effectively while protecting the City’s technical assets.

The contract also specifies that all stagehands meet required qualifications and are
deployed in accordance with labor regulations and union agreements.

Procurement Information
An Invitation for Bid procurement was processed in accordance with City of Phoenix
Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Three vendors submitted bids deemed to be responsive to posted specifications and
responsible to provide the required goods and services. Following an evaluation based
on price, the procurement officer recommends award to the following vendor:

Selected Bidder
UTP Productions, Inc.





Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about March 1, 2026, for a five-year term with no options
to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $750,000.

Funding is available in the Phoenix Convention Center Department's Operating
budget.

Locations
Phoenix Convention Center - 100 N. Third Street
Symphony Hall - 75 N. Second Street
Herberger Theater Center - 222 E. Monroe Street
Orpheum Theatre - 203 W. Adams Street
Council Districts: 7 and 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Phoenix
Convention Center Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Temporary Event Staffing Services Contract - RFQu QVL PCC 22-001 -
Amendment (Ordinance S-52464) - Districts 7 & 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under contracts with Legacy Professional Solutions LLC (158222),
Marathon Staffing Group Inc. (158192) and S4 Global Solutions LLC (158221) to
provide temporary event staffing services for the Phoenix Convention Center
Department (PCCD). Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. The additional expenditures will not exceed $1,600,000.

Summary
These contracts provide temporary labor to support event activities for PCCD clients.
The adjustment to these contracts is essential to sustain service levels and meet rising
client expectations amid growth in event activity.

Since the contracts' inception, PCCD has seen a measurable shift in business
demand. Event bookings have increased by 12 percent, and the number of dark days
between events has declined. This compressed schedule requires additional labor to
maintain operational continuity, expedite room turnovers, and meet contractually
guaranteed timelines.

Client expectations have also evolved. Convention clients now request enhanced
services such as midday room resets, expanded cleaning during live events and
customized general session designs. These enhancements not only elevate the client
experience but also generate additional billable services. The resulting revenue offsets
City investment through increased sales tax, hotel bed tax, and repeat bookings.

To further elevate service delivery, PCCD launched its Client Service Level program,
offering premium support to high-value clients. This initiative aligns with the
department’s mission to enhance the community’s economic vitality and its vision of
being a premier convention center.

Approval of this spending authority will enable PCCD to meet client needs, honor
contractual obligations and uphold the City’s reputation as a leading convention
destination. Without this adjustment, the department risks service disruptions, financial



penalties and reduced competitiveness in attracting major conventions.

Contract Term
The contract terms remain unchanged, ending on April 30, 2028.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $1,600,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contracts will not exceed $2,900,000. Funds are available in the Phoenix Convention
Center Department’s operating budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council previously reviewed this request:
· Temporary Event Staffing Services Contracts 158222, 158192 and 158221
(Ordinance S-49544) on April 5, 2023.

Location
Phoenix Convention Center, 100 N. 3rd Street
Orpheum Theatre, 203 W. Adams Street
Symphony Hall, 75 W. 2nd Street
Council Districts: 7 and 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Phoenix
Convention Center Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Authorization to Amend Lease Agreement 123630 with Horseheads Industrial
Capital II, LLC (Ordinance S-52439) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to amend Lease Agreement
123630 with Horseheads Industrial Capital II, LLC to extend the term for seven years
commencing on April 1, 2026, and provide for two additional five-year options to
extend. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to
this item.

Summary
The Police Department currently leases 23,565 square feet of industrial warehouse
space for the Public Records and Services Bureau under Lease Agreement 123630
through March 31, 2026. The Police Department does not require continued
occupancy beyond the end of the term as these operations will be relocated to 100 W.
Washington Street. The Fire Department wishes to assume occupancy April 1, 2026,
for administration and operational needs and requests authorization to extend the term
for continued tenancy.

Base rent beginning April 1, 2026, will be $16 per square foot per year, plus applicable
taxes, which is within the range of market rents as determined by the Real Estate
Division. Base rent will increase two percent annually during the extended term. The
Fire Department will also be responsible to pay common area operating expenses for
its pro rata share of all operating and maintenance expenses related to the site and
improvements; including utilities, janitorial service, common area insurance, taxes,
HVAC equipment maintenance, and building maintenance costs.

Contract Term
Upon approval, the extended term of the lease agreement will be seven years
commencing April 1, 2026, with two five-year options to extend.

Financial Impact
Rent during the first year of the extension, beginning April 1, 2026, will be $31,420 per
month, or $377,040 for the year, plus applicable taxes. Base rent will increase two
percent annually thereafter. Common area operating expenses, janitorial services and
utilities are estimated to be $15,219.06 per month, plus applicable taxes, and may be



adjusted annually depending on need. Funds are available in the Fire Department's
operating budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
Contract 123630 was authorized by Ordinance S-34929 on March 8, 2008.
Contract 123630-001 was authorized by Ordinance S-44648 on June 6, 2018.

Location
1717 E. Grant Street, Suite 100
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Fire and Finance
departments.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amendment of Ordinance S-52312 for Adashi Fire Incident Management System
Contract - RFA 25-0770 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52477) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or City Manager's designee, to amend
Ordinance S-52312 to include a request for exceptions to the indemnity and
assumption of liability provisions of Phoenix City Code Section 42-18. The original
request was to enter into a contract with Versaterm Public Safety US, Inc. to provide
an Adashi Fire Incident Management System platform specifically designed for public
safety to improve emergency scene awareness, safety, span of control, response,
management, and reporting of critical incidents for the Phoenix Fire Department.
Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this
item. No additional funds are needed; request to continue using Ordinance S-52312.

Summary
On October 15, 2025, the City Council approved the contract with Versaterm Public
Safety US, Inc. to provide an Adashi Fire Incident Management System platform. The
negotiated contract includes indemnity and assumption of liability provisions that
require an exception to Phoenix City Code Section 42-18. Upon approval, Ordinance S
-52312 will be amended to include an exception to the indemnity and assumption of
liability provisions of Phoenix City Code Section 42-18.

This contract will provide a robust, end-to-end incident and resource management
platform to support emergency response. Versaterm's Adashi Fire Incident
Management System's core suite of products includes solutions for operational
resource management, mobile notifications, incident mapping, situational awareness,
automatic vehicle location, command and control, personnel accountability and
reporting. These solutions are offered in a software as a service (SaaS) managed
service model, focusing on ease of use, robust integration and real-time collaboration
with continuous improvements.

The Phoenix Fire Department's commitment to public safety includes incorporating
innovative technology. This revolutionary new software tool enhances station
notifications for incoming incidents, boosting turnout and response times. It provides
command officers and firefighters with access to critical data and facilitates the
creation of a common operating picture across the entire agency, offering street view



maps, weather radar and other customizable features. The implementation of this
software tool will allow the Department to transition from the current process
performed on paper to an electronic, integrated and real-time unified emergency scene
management tool.

This report has been reviewed and approved by the Information Technology Services
Department.

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about December 15, 2025, for a three-year term with two
one-year options to extend the term.

Financial Impact
The aggregate value of the contract will not exceed $1,678,382, and no additional
funds are needed.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council previously reviewed this request:
· Adashi Fire Incident Management System - RFA 25-0770 - Request for Award,
(Ordinance S-52312) on October 15, 2025.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Fire Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Comprehensive Community Vulnerability Assessment Consultant Contract -
RFP-25-0441 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52438) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Integrated Solutions Consulting, Corporation to provide Comprehensive Community
Vulnerability Assessment Consultant Services for the Fire Department. Further request
to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The total value
of the contract will not exceed $160,000.

Summary
This contract will provide design, facilitation and production of a Comprehensive
Community Risk Vulnerability Assessment (CRA). This CRA will address current and
anticipated community risks and needs over the next five to ten years. The goal is to
identify potential hazards within communities, analyze their potential impacts and
prioritize mitigation efforts. This process will inform the development and
implementation of programs to mitigate, respond to and recover from disasters,
emphasizing preemptively addressing gaps before major lifelines are impacted.

Procurement Information
A Request for Proposal procurement was processed in accordance with City of
Phoenix Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Two vendors submitted proposals deemed responsive and responsible. An evaluation
committee of City staff evaluated those offers based on the following criteria with a
maximum possible point total of 1,000:
· Capacity (0-400 points)
· Experience and Expertise (0-300 points)
· Method of Approach (0-200 points)
· Pricing (0-100 points)

After reaching consensus, the evaluation committee recommends award to the
following vendor:
· Integrated Solutions Consulting, Corporation




Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about December 8, 2025, for a one-year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $160,000. The project will be funded by
Urban Area Security Initiative grant funds.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Fire Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
LeadsOnline Contract - RFA-25-0708 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52459) -
Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
LeadsOnline, LLC to provide the Real Time Crime Investigation System for the
Phoenix Police Department. Further request an exception to the indemnity and
assumption of liability provisions of Phoenix City Code Section 42-18. Further request
to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The total value
of the contract will not exceed $1,740,000.

Summary
This contract will provide a technological service utilized to track and collect
transaction fees from pawnshops and second-hand dealers. The software's data
collection and reporting applications assist with new and on-going investigations. The
Phoenix Police Department's Pawnshop Detail utilizes the service to assist in
numerous investigations and recover hundreds of thousands of dollars in stolen
property for victims each year.

In addition to tracking and collecting transaction fees, the Pawnshop Detail receives
monthly regulatory fees that result in approximately $850,000 revenue dollars each
year from dealer transactions.

This item has been reviewed and approved by the Information Technology Services
Department.

Procurement Information
In accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10, standard competition was waived
as a result of an approved Determination Memo based on the following reason:
Special Circumstances Without Competition. The Phoenix Police Department's
Pawnshop Detail utilizes the LeadsOnline web-based service to collect and manage
transactional reporting from pawnshops and second-hand dealers, which in turn is
transmitted to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) as required by Arizona
Revised Statute 44-1625 and City Ordinance 19-40.






Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about February 1, 2026, for a five-year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $1,740,000 for the five-year aggregate
term. Funding is available in the Phoenix Police Department's operating budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Police Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Retroactive Authorization to Apply for the Community Based Violence
Intervention and Prevention Initiative Grant Program (Ordinance S-52462) -
Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow the Police
Department to retroactively apply for, accept, and enter into an agreement with the
Bureau of Justice Assistance for the Community Based Violence Intervention and
Prevention Initiative grant program in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000. Further
request authorization for the City Treasurer to accept, and for the City Controller to
disburse, all funds related to this item.

Summary
The purpose of this program is to reduce violent crime by supporting jurisdictions in
implementing targeted enforcement, prevention, and intervention strategies. It
emphasizes the use of data-driven, cross-sector approaches to identify and address
key drivers of violence. Through enhanced coordination, intelligence gathering, and
strategic resource deployment, the program aims to disrupt violent crime patterns and
improve public safety outcomes. These efforts are designed to strengthen law
enforcement capabilities and ensure a focused, effective response to violent crime.

The requested funding will be used to support the Police Department's development of
the Maryvale Precinct's Real-Time Operations Center (RTOC), enhancing the ability to
combat violent crime through data-driven strategies and real-time intelligence. The
project will deploy connected technologies, such as video and license plate cameras,
at high-impact locations to support intelligence gathering and provide officers with
immediate, actionable information. By improving coordination and strategic resource
deployment, the RTOC will help disrupt violent crime patterns and strengthen public
safety outcomes.

The grant application was due on November 3, 2025. If authorization is denied, the
grant application will be rescinded.

Contract Term
The contract term will be for five years from the date of the approved award.





Financial Impact
No matching funds are required.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Police Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amendment of Ordinance S-52319 for Annual Maintenance for X-Ray Machines
Contract - RFA 24-0367 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52473) - Citywide

Request the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, to amend Ordinance S-
52319 to include a request for exceptions to the indemnity and assumption of liability
provisions of Phoenix City Code Section 42-18. The original request was to enter into
a contract with Smiths Detection Inc. to provide annual x-ray machine maintenance for
the Phoenix Police Department. Further request to authorize the City Controller to
disburse all funds related to this item. No additional funds are needed; request to
continue using Ordinance S-52319.

Summary
On October 15, 2025, the City Council approved the contract with Smiths Detection
Inc., to provide annual x-ray machine maintenance. The negotiated contract includes
indemnity and assumption of liability provisions that require an exception to Phoenix
City Code Section 42-18.

The contract will provide annual x-ray machine maintenance, including priority 24-hour
on-site response for any necessary repairs to ensure optimal functionality. The
Phoenix Police Department is responsible for on-site security for several critical
infrastructure buildings located in downtown Phoenix. The x-ray machines are used to
screen those entering City buildings. The coverage is provided by Smiths Detection
Inc., and this agreement guarantees immediate maintenance response.

Upon approval, Ordinance S-52319 will be amended to include an exception to the
indemnity and assumption of liability provisions of Phoenix City Code Section 42-18.

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about December 3, 2025, for a five-year term with no
options to extend the term.

Financial Impact
The aggregate value of the contract will not exceed $162,266, and no additional funds
are needed.




Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council previously reviewed this request:
· Annual Maintenance for X-Ray Machines Contract - RFA 24-0367 - Request for
Award (Ordinance S-52319) on October 15, 2025.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Police Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 2025) - Versaterm CommunityConnect and
Call Triage Software Licenses Contract - RFA 25-0570 - Request for Award
(Ordinance S-52406) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a contract with
Versaterm Public Safety US, Inc. to provide Versaterm CommunityConnect and Call
Triage Software Licenses for the Police Department. Further request to authorize the
City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. Further request an exception to
the indemnification and assumption of liability provisions of Phoenix City Code Section
42-18. The total value of the contract will not exceed $7,001,967.

Summary
This contract will provide software licenses for the CommunityConnect and Call Triage
services. The CommunityConnect service is used by the Police Department to provide
automated communication and follow-up with crime victims and reporting parties from
initial incident reporting through incarceration. The City is required to provide a victim
notification system in compliance with House Bill 2482, which is now part of State
statute, and the CommunityConnect service meets those requirements. This service is
critical to Police Department operations as it enables efficient management of victim
notifications and will improve communication with the community.

The Call Triage service is an automated resolution emergency call system. The Police
Department Communications Bureau will use this system to triage incoming non-
emergency calls and provide automated resolution to a portion of requests without the
need for staff to engage with the caller on non-emergency phone lines. This service
provides a solution to the staffing needs of the Communications Bureau and will help
ensure that national standard call answering metrics are met by the Department.

These items have been reviewed and approved by the Information Technology
Services Department.

Procurement Information
In accordance with Administrative Regulation 3.10, standard competition was waived
as a result of an approved Determination Memo based on the following reason:
Special Circumstances Without Competition. Versaterm Public Safety US, Inc. is the



exclusive provider of the CommunityConnect and Call Triage software licenses which
are utilized by the Police Department.

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about July 1, 2026, for a three-year term with two one-
year options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $7,001,967 for the five-year aggregate
term. Funding is available in the Police Department's operating budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Assistant City Manager Lori Bays and the Police Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend Terminal Facility License Agreement 162794 with AGI Ground Inc.
(Ordinance S-52471) - District 8

Request authorization for the City Manager, or his designee, to amend Facility License
Agreement 162794 (License) with AGI Ground Inc. (AGI) to add approximately 414
square feet of exclusive space in Terminal 4 at Phoenix Sky Harbor International
Airport.

Summary
AGI currently leases approximately 638 square feet of exclusive-use space in Terminal
3 to support its operations in Terminal 3. To further support its expanded operations in
Terminal 4, AGI is requesting to lease an additional approximately 414 square feet of
exclusive-use space in Terminal 4, to be used primarily for office space. This
amendment would bring AGI's total exclusive space to approximately 1,052 square
feet.

Further request authorization for the Aviation Director to make future additions,
subtractions, and changes to AGI's exclusive space, not to exceed a total of 3,000
square feet, as the Aviation Director deems necessary or appropriate to attain the
highest and best use of Aviation Department resources, as well as to accommodate
future AGI business needs for the duration of the License.

Contract Term
The term of the License remains on a month-to-month basis.

Financial Impact
AGI will pay the current terminal rental rate of $197.88 per square foot per year for the
additional 414 square feet, resulting in an estimated monthly revenue of $6,826.86 to
the City. The terminal rental rate will be adjusted annually on July 1 in accordance with
the Rates and Charges provision of Article IX of Chapter 4 of the Phoenix City Code.

Location
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, 2485 E. Buckeye Road
Council District: 8




Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Aviation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
New Cargo Facility Lease Agreement with AGI Ground, Inc. at Phoenix Sky
Harbor International Airport (Ordinance S-52475) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into a new cargo
facility lease agreement (Lease) with AGI Ground, Inc. (AGI) to lease not more than
5,760 square feet of space in Building A of the West Air Cargo complex at Phoenix Sky
Harbor International Airport (PHX).

Summary
AGI currently provides ground handling support services to AeroMéxico and WestJet
airlines under Commercial Use Permit 529-26. AGI recently expanded its services
agreement with AeroMéxico to include cargo handling operations. To support its cargo
handling operation and to provide covered storage for its ground handling equipment,
AGI requests to lease two cargo bays with a total area of 3,840 square feet in Building
A of the West Air Cargo complex at PHX. The Lease will include an option for AGI to
lease one additional cargo bay with a total area of 1,920 square feet, contingent upon
AGI securing additional cargo handling contracts with other airlines at PHX. AGI will
also be required to complete tenant improvements to separate its leased cargo bay
space in Building A from adjacent non-leased cargo bay areas with additional airlines
requiring cargo support services.

AGI will be required to complete tenant improvements within six months following the
effective date of the Lease. The improvements are necessary to make the leased
space suitable for AGI's cargo operations.

Contract Term
The term of the Lease will be three years, with three one-year options to extend the
term at the sole discretion of the Aviation Director.

Financial Impact
AGI will pay the rental rate per square foot per year for the West Air Cargo and West
Air Cargo GSE facilities as established by the Airport Rates and Charges program
authorized under Phoenix City Code Section 4-173(B). Rent for the first year of the
Lease will be approximately $69,120. The cargo facilities rental rate will be adjusted
annually according to the Rates and Charges provision of Article IX, Chapter 4, of the



Phoenix City Code.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board, Business and Development Subcommittee
approved this item on October 3, 2025, by a vote of 3-0.
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board approved this item on October 16, 2025, by a
vote of 6-0.
The Transportation, Infrastructure and Planning Subcommittee approved this item on
November 19, 2025, by a vote of 4-0.

Location
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, 2485 E. Buckeye Road
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Aviation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Designated Aviation Channeling Services Contract - AVN RFP 25-0498 - Request
for Award (Ordinance S-52447) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a contract with
Telos Identity Management Solutions LLC to provide designated aviation channeling
services (DAC) for the Aviation Department. Further request to authorize the City
Controller to disburse funds related to this item.

Summary
Federal regulations require Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (Airport) to
conduct background checks on all Airport workers before issuing a badge that
authorizes unescorted access to restricted areas of the Airport. The Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) requires that airports use a TSA-certified and approved
Designated Aviation Channeler (DAC) service provider that will: (1) receive, validate,
and aggregate biographic and biometric data from the Airport and transmit the data to
the TSA for airport worker screening, (2) automate the transmission of the biographic
and biometric data from the Airport to the TSA and from the TSA to the Airport, (3)
provide a web-based portal for the Airport to obtain transmitted airport worker
screening information, and (4) integrate with the Airport's identity management system
and existing fingerprint equipment.

The Airport provides security credentials requiring the services of a DAC to over
23,000 airport employees.

This item has been reviewed and approved by the Information Technology Services
Department.

Procurement Information
A Request for Proposal procurement was processed in accordance with City of
Phoenix Administrative Regulation 3.10.

Two vendors submitted proposals deemed responsive and responsible. An evaluation
committee evaluated those offers based on the following criteria:





Method of Approach
Fee Schedule
Qualifications and Experience of the Firm
Customer Service/Ongoing Support

After reaching a consensus, the evaluation committee recommended award to the
following vendor:

Telos Identity Management Solutions LLC

Contract Term
The term of the contract is proposed to begin on or about January 1, 2026, for an initial
three-year term with two one-year options to extend the term for an aggregate five-
year term.

Financial Impact
The total cost of the contract will not exceed $3 million over the aggregate five-year
term.

Funding is available in the Aviation Department's Operating budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board, Business and Development Subcommittee
approved this item on October 3, 2025, by a vote of 3-0.
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board approved this item on October 16, 2025 by a
vote of 6-0.

Location
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport: 2485 E. Buckeye Road
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Aviation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Access Agreement with Honeywell International, Inc. for Groundwater and Soil
Vapor Well Monitoring at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (Ordinance S-
52474) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an access
agreement with Honeywell International, Inc. (Honeywell) for access to Aviation
Department-owned land located on and north of Phoenix Sky Harbor International
Airport for the purpose of installing and monitoring groundwater and soil vapor wells.

Summary
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and the City of Phoenix required
Honeywell to install wells on Aviation Department-owned land located within the
existing Super Fund Site known as "Motorola 52nd Street Super Fund Site" to monitor
and remediate releases of petroleum hydrocarbon products from underground storage
tanks at a Honeywell facility that have migrated onto Aviation Department-owned land.
The Aviation Department and Honeywell previously entered into similar access
agreements, which have expired, to install and monitor wells on Aviation Department-
owned land. Honeywell's access to the land is authorized under Section V, Subsection
(g) of Remediation Agreement 124536 between the City and Honeywell. Upon
approval of the access agreement, access authorization provided by Section V,
Subsection (g) will be replaced by the new access agreement.

Contract Term
The term of the access agreement will be month-to-month and will expire on the date
the City determines that Honeywell has completed decommissioning all wells on
Aviation Department-owned land.

Financial Impact
No rent or fees are due to the Aviation Department under the access agreement.
Honeywell is conducting all remediation activities at its own expense.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board, Business and Development Subcommittee
approved this item on October 3, 2025, by a vote of 3-0.
The Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board approved this item on October 16, 2025, by a



vote of 6-0.
The Transportation, Infrastructure and Planning Subcommittee approved this item on
November 19, 2025, by a vote of 4-0.

Location
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, 2485 E. Buckeye Road
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Amber Williamson and the Aviation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Phoenix Deer Valley Airport Relocate Taxiway B and Construct Connectors B6
and B9 - Construction Manager at Risk Services Amendment - AV31000092 FAA /
ADOT (Ordinance S-52457) - District 1

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an amendment to
Agreement 158539 (Agreement) with J. Banicki Construction, Inc. to provide additional
Construction Manager at Risk construction services for the Phoenix Deer Valley Airport
Relocate Taxiway B and Construct Connectors B6 and B9 project. Further request to
authorize execution of amendments to the Agreement as necessary and within the City
Council-approved expenditure authority as provided below, and for the City Controller
to disburse all funds related to this item. The additional fee for services included in the
amendment will not exceed $13.5 million.

Summary
The purpose of the project is to meet updated design standards required by Federal
Aviation Administration Advisory Circulars, which define separation between runway
and adjacent taxiways.

The amendment is necessary for the removal and relocation of 81,000 square yards of
crushed aggregate slope protection and the installation of five inches of P-401 asphalt
on eight inches of P-209 crushed aggregate base course over one foot of P-155 lime-
treated subgrade. The amendment will provide additional funds to the Agreement
according to grant funding phases.

Contract Term
The term of the Agreement is unchanged from issuance of the original construction
services Notice to Proceed. Work scope identified and incorporated into the
Agreement prior to the end of the term may be agreed to by the parties, and work may
extend past the termination of the Agreement. No additional changes may be executed
after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
· The Agreement for Construction Manager at Risk Construction Services was
approved for an amount not to exceed $12.1 million, including all subcontractor and
reimbursable costs.


· The amendment will increase the cost of the Agreement by an additional $13.5
million, for a new total amount not to exceed $25.6 million, including all
subcontractor and reimbursable costs.

The Aviation Department anticipates grant funding for the project. Funding for the
amendment is available in the Aviation Department's Capital Improvement Program.
The Budget and Research Department will separately review and approve funding
availability prior to the execution of any amendments. Payments may be made up to
Agreement limits for all rendered Agreement services, which may extend past
termination of the Agreement.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved:
· Engineering Services Agreement 150110 (Ordinance S-45685) on June 5, 2019;
· Construction Manager at Risk Preconstruction Services Agreement 152002
(Ordinance S-49299) on January 4, 2023; and
· Construction Manager at Risk Construction Services Agreement 158539 (Ordinance
S-49712) on May 31, 2023.

Location
702 W. Deer Valley Road
Council District: 1

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Amber
Williamson, the Aviation Department and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport Terminal 4 Infrastructure North
Concourse 4 Passenger Boarding Bridges Replacement - 2-Step Construction
Manager at Risk Services - Rescind and Award - AV21000112 (Ordinance S-
52468) - District 8

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to rescind the award to
Clayco, Inc., and to accept M. A. Mortenson Company as the next responsive
proposer, and to execute an agreement with M. A. Mortenson Company to provide
Construction Manager at Risk Preconstruction and Construction Services for the
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport Terminal 4 Infrastructure North Concourse 4
Passenger Boarding Bridges Replacement project. Further request to authorize the
execution of amendments to the agreement as necessary within the Council-approved
expenditure authority as provided below, and for the City Controller to disburse all
funds related to this item. The fee for services will not exceed $15 million.

Summary
The purpose of the project is to replace six City-owned Passenger Boarding Bridges
(PBBs) at Gates B23, B24, B25, B26, B27 and B28 of Phoenix Sky Harbor
International Airport Terminal 4 North Concourse 4 (T4N4) with modern jet bridges that
operate more efficiently, safely, and improve the passenger experience.

M. A. Mortenson Company will begin in an agency support role for Construction
Manager at Risk Preconstruction Services. M. A. Mortenson Company will assume the
risk of delivering the project through a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) agreement.

M. A. Mortenson Company’s preconstruction services include: project site survey and
inventory of existing conditions; validate site constraints, site investigations and utility
locations; attend all project meetings as necessary to maintain the project objectives;
coordinate work with Owner and Design Team to secure all permits and approvals
from various agencies and federal, state, county, and local utility authorities; identify
GMP packaging strategy and present alternate strategies to optimize the sequence of
construction; provide detailed cost estimating and reconciliation with third party
estimator for each design phase; provide value engineering and cost reduction efforts
to optimize project budget; provide for construction phasing and scheduling; evaluate
sequencing based on stakeholder feedback and minimize interruption to City



operations; and participate with the City in a process to establish a Small Business
Enterprise (SBE) goal for the project.

M. A. Mortenson Company’s initial construction services will include preparing a GMP
proposal provided under the agreement. M. A. Mortenson Company will be responsible
for construction means and methods related to the project and fulfilling the SBE
program requirements. M. A. Mortenson Company will be required to solicit bids from
pre-qualified subcontractors and to perform the work using the City’s subcontractor
selection process. M. A. Mortenson Company may also compete to self-perform limited
amounts of work.

M. A. Mortenson Company’s additional construction services include: demolishing and
removing six PBBs and installing new bridges located at T4N4; providing the necessary
associated infrastructure required to support the new bridges; demolishing and
removing the glycol plant after installing the six new bridges; providing the necessary
associated electrical infrastructure to support the preconditioned air units on each
bridge; providing additional distribution panel in support of the new bridge installation
(s); providing necessary security access and ACAMS door controls for new bridges;
preparing a subcontractor selection plan; preparing a GMP proposal that meets the
City's approval; arranging for the procurement of materials and equipment; developing
as needed time-scaled logic construction schedule and manage site operations;
developing bid package instructions to bidders and solicit subcontractor bid proposals;
maintaining a safe work site for all project participants; maintaining all project records in
electronic format; and other work as required for a complete project.

Procurement Information
The selection was made using a two-step qualifications and price-based selection
process set forth in Section 34-603 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In
accordance with A.R.S. Section 34-603(H), the City may not publicly release
information on proposals received, including the scoring results, until an agreement is
awarded. Two firms submitted proposals and are listed below.

Selected Firm
Rank 1: Clayco, Inc.

Additional Proposer
Rank 2: M. A. Mortenson Company

After discussion with Clayco, Inc., the City has terminated negotiations and intends to
execute a contract with the second ranked firm M. A. Mortenson Company for this
project.



Contract Term
The term of the agreement is five years from issuance of the Notice to Proceed. Work
scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term may
be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for M. A. Mortenson Company will not exceed $15 million,
including all subcontractor and reimbursable costs.

Funding is available in the Aviation Department's Capital Improvement Program
budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and approve
funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be made up
to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past
termination of the agreement.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved Engineering Services Agreement 159048 (Ordinance S-
50049) on July 3, 2023, and Construction Manager at Risk Preconstruction and
Construction Services Agreement 160479 (Ordinance S-50791) on May 1, 2024.

Location
2485 E. Buckeye Road
Council District: 8

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Amber
Williamson, the Aviation Department and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Phoenix Goodyear Airport Infield Paving Phase II - Design-Bid-Build Services -
AV41000079 (Ordinance S-52476) - Out of City

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to accept J. Banicki
Construction, Inc. as the lowest-priced, responsive, and responsible bidder and to
execute an agreement with J. Banicki Construction, Inc. for Design-Bid-Build Services
for the Phoenix Goodyear Airport Infield Paving Phase II project. Further request to
authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The fee for
services will not exceed $3,320,698.30.

Summary
The purpose of the project is to grade seven infields between Taxiways A1 and A2,
between A4 and A5, between Taxiways A5 and A6, between Taxiways A6 and A7,
between Taxiways A7 and A8, between Taxiways A9 and A10, and install two-inch thick
asphalt paving at the Phoenix Goodyear Airport.

J. Banicki Construction, Inc.’s services include all grading and paving, adjustment to
new grades of certain appurtenances within those infields, including catch basins and
inlets, some concrete storm drain piping, monitoring wells, electrical duct bank and
conduits, and associated manholes, handholes, lights, and signs.

The selection was made using an Invitation for Bids procurement process set forth in
Section 34-201 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. Four bids were received on October
15, 2025, and were sent to the Equal Opportunity Department for review to determine
subcontractor eligibility and contractor responsiveness in demonstrating
responsiveness to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program requirements.

The Opinion of Probable Cost and the three lowest responsive, responsible bidders
are listed below:

Opinion of Probable Cost: $3,556,937.20
J. Banicki Construction, Inc.: $3,320,698.30
Combs Construction Company, Inc.: $3,627,577.15
Kiewit Infrastructure West Co.: $4,866,000.00




Due to volatile material costs and increased labor prices in the construction industry, a
10 percent contingency is being requested to allow for project uncertainties. The initial
agreement will be executed at the bid amount of $3,320,698.30. Use of the 10 percent
contingency above that amount will not be allowed without the prior written approval of
the Aviation Department Director and the City Engineer.

Contract Term
The term of the agreement is five years from issuance of the Notice to Proceed. Work
scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term may
be agreed to by the parties and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for J. Banicki Construction, Inc. will not exceed $3,320,698.30,
including all subcontractor and reimbursable costs.

The project will use federal funds and is subject to the requirements of 49 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 26 and the U.S. Department of Transportation DBE program.
Funding is available in the Aviation Department's Capital Improvement Program
budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and approve
funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be made up
to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past the
agreement termination.

Location
1658 S. Litchfield Road, Goodyear, AZ
Council District: Out of City

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Amber
Williamson, the Aviation Department and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Goodyear Airport Infield Paving - Phase II - Engineering Services Amendment -
AV41000079 (Ordinance S-52479) - Out of City

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an amendment to
Agreement 160280 with TRACE Consulting, LLC to provide additional engineering
services for the Goodyear Airport Infield Paving Phase II project. Further request to
authorize the execution of amendments to the Agreement as necessary within the City
Council-approved expenditure authority as provided below, and for the City Controller
to disburse all funds related to this item. The additional fee for services included in this
amendment will not exceed $220,108.

Summary
The purpose of this project is to implement one of the recommendations of the 2018
Master Plan Update to improve infield areas between Runway 3/21 and Taxiway A at
Goodyear (GYR) Airport. The seven infield areas to be improved for Phase II of this
project are located north of Taxiway A1, between Taxiways A1 and A2, between
Taxiways A4 and A5, between Taxiways A5 and A6, between Taxiways A6 and A7,
between Taxiways A7 and A8, and between Taxiways A9 and A10. The goals of this
project include infield grading requirements according to Federal Aviation
Administration standards, infield paving as a safety improvement to mitigate the
dangers of jet blast and propwashing blowing around foreign object debris and to
improve ease of maintenance in the infields, and utility vault adjustments to be
consistent with the new grading and paving. Phase I of the GYR Infield Paving Project
previously completed design for three infields.

The amendment is necessary to provide construction administration and inspection
services for the remaining seven infields between Runway 3-21 and Taxiway Alpha
that are being updated from gravel or asphalt millings to asphalt paving. The
amendment will provide additional funds to the Agreement.

Contract Term
The term of the Agreement remains unchanged from the issuance of the Notice to
Proceed. Work scope identified and incorporated into the Agreement prior to the end of
the term may be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of
the Agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.




Financial Impact
The initial Agreement for engineering services was approved for an amount not to
exceed $735,000, including all subconsultant and reimbursable costs. The amendment
will increase the Agreement by an additional $220,108, for a new total amount not to
exceed $955,108, including all subconsultant and reimbursable costs.

Funding for the amendment is available in the Aviation Department's Capital
Improvement Program using state grants. The Budget and Research Department will
separately review and approve funding availability prior to the execution of any
amendments. Payments may be made up to Agreement limits for all rendered
Agreement services, which may extend past termination of the Agreement.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved:
· Engineering Services Agreement 155730 (Ordinance S-48220) on January 5, 2022.
· Engineering Services Agreement 160280 (Ordinance S-50724) on April 3, 2024.

Location
1658 S. Litchfield Road, Goodyear, AZ
Council District: Out of City

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Amber
Williamson, the Aviation Department and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Concrete Services - IFB 26-FMD-017 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52440) -
Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into contracts with
Degan Construction, LLC, Harcon Concrete, Inc., and Viasun Corporation to provide
concrete services for the Public Works Department on an as-needed basis. Further
request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
total aggregate amount of the contracts will not exceed $3,200,000.

Summary
The Public Works Department is responsible for concrete projects and services. These
projects include the maintenance and repair of concrete foundations, driveways,
parking lots, walkways, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ramps, curbing, light-
pole bases, parking wheel stops, vertical walls, and other specialized concrete repairs
across citywide facilities. Contractors will be responsible for larger projects that require
the use of a concrete truck, extensive site preparation, and demolition. These services
will support multiple City departments, including Police and Fire, and provide the
capability to support General Obligation Bond ADA work requirements.

Procurement Information
An Invitation for Bid (IFB) was conducted in accordance with Administrative Regulation
3.10. A total of 18 bidders submitted proposals; one was deemed non-responsive.
Three bids were determined to be responsive to the posted specifications and
responsible for providing the required services.

Following evaluation based on labor rates, the Procurement Officer recommends
award to the following bidders identified in Attachment A:
· Degan Construction, LLC
· Harcon Concrete, Inc.
· Viasun Corporation

Contract Term
The contracts will begin on or about January 1, 2026, for a three-year term, with a two-
year option to extend.




Financial Impact
The total aggregate contract value will not exceed $3,200,000. Funding is available in
the Public Works Department’s Operating and Capital Improvement Program budget.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Ginger Spencer and the Public Works
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, Intrastate and Interstate
Services License with CenturyLink Communications, LLC (Ordinance S-52454) -
Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a non-exclusive,
revocable license with CenturyLink Communications, LLC to construct, install, operate,
maintain, and use the Public Highways and public utility easements in the City of
Phoenix to provide telecommunication facilities in, under, over, and across public rights
-of-way in the City, subject to the terms and conditions contained in the license and
Phoenix City Code. Further request to authorize the City Treasurer to accept all funds
related to this item.

Summary
CenturyLink Communications, LLC desires to install facilities in City of Phoenix rights-
of-way and public utility easements to provide telecommunications-based services to
the public. The license will be for a period of five years with an option for a one-time
five-year renewal, contain appropriate insurance and indemnification provisions,
require a performance bond and a security fund, provide for terms of transfer and
revocation, and provide compensation for the commercial use of public rights-of-way
while permitting the City to manage the rights-of-way.

Contract Term
The request is for a five-year Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, and
Intrastate and Interstate Services License with an option for one-time five-year
renewal.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City. Licensee will pay an annual fee based on a
formula using linear footage and the Consumer Price Index.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Street Transportation
Department.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, and Intrastate Services
License with Level 3 Telecom of Arizona, LLC (Ordinance S-52455) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a non-exclusive,
revocable license with Level 3 Telecom of Arizona, LLC to construct, install, operate,
maintain, and use the Public Highways and public utility easements in the City of
Phoenix to provide telecommunication facilities in, under, over, and across public rights
-of-way in the City, subject to the terms and conditions contained in the license and
Phoenix City Code. Further request to authorize the City Treasurer to accept all funds
related to this item.

Summary
Level 3 Telecom of Arizona, LLC desires to install facilities in City of Phoenix rights-of-
way and public utility easements to provide telecommunications-based services to the
public. The license will be for a period of five years with an option for a one-time five-
year renewal, contain appropriate insurance and indemnification provisions, require a
performance bond and a security fund, provide for terms of transfer and revocation,
and provide compensation for the commercial use of public rights-of-way while
permitting the City to manage the rights-of-way.

Contract Term
The request is for a five-year Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, and
Intrastate Services License with an option for one-time five-year renewal.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City. Licensee will pay an annual fee based on a
formula using linear footage and the Consumer Price Index.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Street Transportation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, and Interstate Services
License with Level 3 Communications, LLC (Ordinance S-52456) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a non-exclusive,
revocable license with Level 3 Communications, LLC to construct, install, operate,
maintain, and use the public highways and public utility easements in the City of
Phoenix to provide telecommunication facilities in, under, over, and across public rights
-of-way in the City, subject to the terms and conditions contained in the license and
Phoenix City Code. Further request to authorize the City Treasurer to accept all funds
related to this item.

Summary
Level 3 Communications, LLC desires to install facilities in City of Phoenix rights-of-
way and public utility easements to provide telecommunications-based services to the
public. The license will be for a period of five years with an option for a one-time five-
year renewal, contain appropriate insurance and indemnification provisions, require a
performance bond and a security fund, provide for terms of transfer and revocation,
and provide compensation for the commercial use of public rights-of-way while
permitting the City to manage the rights-of-way.

Contract Term
The request is for a five-year Telecommunications Services, Private Line Services, and
Interstate Services License with an option for one-time five-year renewal.

Financial Impact
There is no financial impact to the City. Licensee will pay an annual fee based on a
formula using linear footage and the Consumer Price Index.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Street Transportation
Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Request Authorization to Accept Funding and Enter Into an Intergovernmental
Agreement with Flood Control District of Maricopa County and City of
Scottsdale for Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Improvement Program - Deer Valley
Channel Hazard Mitigation Project (Ordinance S-52480) - District 2

Request authorization for the City Manager, or their designee, to accept funding and
enter into an agreement with the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC)
and City of Scottsdale for the Fiscal Year 2026 Capital Improvement Program related
to the Deer Valley Hazard Mitigation Project. Additionally, request authorization for the
City Treasurer to accept, and for the City Controller to disburse, all funds associated
with this project. The City's contribution to this project is anticipated to not exceed
$950,000.

Summary
As the design of the Paradise Ridge Drainage Improvements Project progressed, it
became clear that additional improvements were needed on the east side of
Scottsdale Road. These enhancements are essential to capture flows from the Deer
Valley Wash and convey them effectively to the Paradise Ridge Improvements project
channel. This additional scope aims to further reduce the existing floodplain west of
Scottsdale Road with the City of Phoenix.

The work at Scottsdale Road will require this Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA)
between the FCDMC, the City of Phoenix, and the City of Scottsdale to outline the
roles and responsibilities of the project partners with respect to the design,
construction, cost sharing and other activities associated with a box culvert crossing
Scottsdale Road.

This project aims to address flooding issues affecting residents and businesses south
of Loop 101, ultimately reducing the risk of flooding in the area.

Financial Impact
The estimated cost for these additional improvements is $3.8 million based on the best
available information at the time of this agreement. The actual expenses will be shared
as follows: FCDMC will cover 50 percent with each city contributing 25 percent as
project partners.




The City's contribution is not anticipated to exceed $950,000. This amount will be
funded through a combination of sources: the Local Drainage Solutions Program, the
Arizona State Land Department (ASLD) Paradise Ridge IGA (Ordinance S-46461),
and the Mortenson Development Agreement (Ordinance S-52226).

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
· The City Council approved an IGA with ASLD regarding the reimbursement
procedure for the cost of the Paradise Ridge Drainage Improvements Project
(Ordinance S-46461) on June 18, 2020.
· The City Council approved a Development Agreement with Mortenson Development
regarding a contribution to the cost of the Paradise Ridge Drainage Improvements
Project (Ordinance S-52226) on June 20, 2025.

Location
Deer Valley and Scottsdale Road
Council District: 2

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
24th Street Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation 2025 - Construction Manager at
Risk Services - WS85290033 (Ordinance S-52442) - District 6

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with PCL Construction, Inc. to provide Construction Manager at Risk Preconstruction
and Construction Services for the 24th Street Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation
2025 project. Further request to authorize execution of amendments to the agreement
as necessary within the City Council-approved expenditure authority as provided
below, and for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The fee for
services will not exceed $88,930,000.

Summary
The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate and/or replace the various treatment
systems at the 24th Street Water Treatment Plant due to age and usage.

PCL Construction, Inc. will begin in an agency support role for Construction Manager
at Risk Preconstruction Services. PCL Construction, Inc. will assume the risk of
delivering the project through a Guaranteed Maximum Price agreement.

PCL Construction, Inc.’s Preconstruction Services include, but are not limited to:
provide detailed cost estimating and knowledge of marketplace conditions; provide
project planning and scheduling; provide for construction phasing and scheduling that
will minimize interruption to City operations; provide alternate system evaluation and
constructability studies; advise City on ways to gain efficiencies in project delivery;
provide long-lead procurement studies and initiate procurement of long-lead items;
assist in the permitting processes; protect the City's sensitivity to quality, safety, and
environmental factors; and participating with the City in a process to establish a Small
Business Enterprise (SBE) goal for the project.

PCL Construction, Inc.’s initial Construction Services will include preparation of a
Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal provided under the agreement. PCL
Construction, Inc. will be responsible for construction means and methods related to
the project and fulfilling the SBE program requirements. PCL Construction, Inc. will be
required to solicit bids from prequalified subcontractors and to perform the work using
the City’s subcontractor selection process. PCL Construction, Inc. may also compete



to self-perform limited amounts of work.

PCL Construction, Inc.’s additional Construction Services include: construct and
rehabilitate the treatment systems as described in Section 1; select
subcontractors/suppliers for this project; prepare a Guaranteed Maximum Price
proposal that meets the approval of the City; coordinate with various City of Phoenix
departments, other agencies, utility companies; arrange for procurement of materials
and equipment; schedule and manage site operations; bid, award, and manage all
construction related contracts while meeting City bid requirements including the local
and SBE participation goal; provide quality controls; bond and insure the construction;
and maintain a safe work site for all project participants.

Procurement Information
The selection was made using a qualifications-based selection process set forth in
Section 34-603 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In accordance with A.R.S.
Section 34-603(H), the City may not publicly release information on proposals received
or the scoring results until an agreement is awarded. Two firms submitted proposals
and are listed below:

Selected Firm
Rank 1: PCL Construction, Inc.

Additional Proposer
Rank 2: Filanc

Contract Term
The term of the agreement is five years from issuance of the Notice to Proceed. Work
scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term may
be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for PCL Construction, Inc. will not exceed $88,930,000 including
all subcontractor and reimbursable costs.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department's Capital Improvement Program
budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and approve
funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be made up
to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past the
agreement termination.



Location
24th Street Water Treatment Plant
Council District: 6

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Ginger
Spencer, the Water Services Department, and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Transition Ramps - City of Phoenix Standard Details - Engineering Services -
ST87220004 (Ordinance S-52466) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with Toole Design Group, LLC to provide Engineering Services that include project
management and design for the Transition Ramps-City of Phoenix Standard Details
project. Further request to authorize execution of amendments to the agreement as
necessary within the Council-approved expenditure authority as provided below, and
for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The fee for services will
not exceed $50,000.

Additionally, request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all action
as may be necessary or appropriate and to execute all design and construction
agreements, licenses, permits, and requests for utility services related to the
development, design, and construction of the project. Such utility services include, but
are not limited to: electrical, water, sewer, natural gas, telecommunication, cable
television, railroads and other modes of transportation. Further request the City
Council to grant an exception to Phoenix City Code 42-20 to authorize inclusion in the
documents pertaining to this transaction of indemnification and assumption of liability
provisions that otherwise should be prohibited by Phoenix City Code 42-18. This
authorization excludes any transaction involving an interest in real property.

Summary
The purpose of this project is to identify a design approach for Phoenix to create
standard details and associated construction specifications for transition (bike) ramps
that allow bicyclists to transition from the street to a shared use path or other
recreational facility. On May 8, 2024, Toole Design Group, LLC was contracted to
perform design services for the Transition Ramps-City of Phoenix Standard Details
project under the Engineering/Consulting 2023-24 On-Call Services contract.
Additional scope of work is needed to complete this project. Toole Design Group, LLC
is not on the City's Engineering/Consulting 2025-27 On-Call contract, therefore, it is
requested to direct select them for this service.

Toole Design Group, LLC's services include, but are not limited to: completion of
project work to develop standard details and associated construction specifications,



additional project management services, and additional stakeholder outreach services.

Procurement Information
Toole Design Group, LLC was chosen for the project using a Direct Select process set
forth in the Arizona Revised Statutes Section 34-103. The Direct Select process will
ensure project design specifications are met.

Contract Term
The term of the agreement is one year from the issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
Work scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term
may be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for Toole Design Group, LLC will not exceed $50,000, including
all subconsultant and reimbursable costs.

Funding is available in the Street Transportation Department's Capital Improvement
Program budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and
approve funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be
made up to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend
past the agreement termination.

Previous Council Action
The City Council approved Citywide Engineering On-Call Services Agreement 157236
(Ordinance S-49068) on October 12, 2022.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Office of the City
Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Environmental / Natural-Cultural Resources / National Environmental Policy Act
On-Call Services for Calendar Years 2026-28 (Ordinance S-52472) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into separate
agreements with the 12 consultants listed in Attachment A, to provide Environmental /
Natural-Cultural Resources / National Environmental Policy Act On-Call services
citywide for Calendar Years 2026 to 2028. Further request to authorize execution of
amendments to the agreements as necessary within the Council-approved expenditure
authority as provided below, and for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to
this item. The total fee for all services will not exceed $30 million.

Additionally, request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all action
as may be necessary or appropriate and to execute all design and construction
agreements, licenses, permits, and requests for utility services relating to the
development, design, and construction of the project. Such utility services include, but
are not limited to: electrical, water, sewer, natural gas, telecommunications, cable
television, railroads and other modes of transportation. Further request the City
Council to grant an exception pursuant to Phoenix City Code 42-20 to authorize
inclusion in the documents pertaining to this transaction of indemnification and
assumption of liability provisions that otherwise should be prohibited by Phoenix City
Code 42-18. This authorization excludes any transaction involving an interest in real
property.

Summary
The On-Call consultants will be responsible for providing On-Call Environmental /
Natural-Cultural Resources / National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) services that
include, but are not limited to: NEPA documentation and related supporting technical
analysis and reports, cultural resources, biology and natural resources, Rivers and
Harbors Act, Clean Water Act, air quality and noise, green infrastructure, and
evaluation.

Procurement Information
The selections were made using a qualifications-based selection process set forth in
Section 34-604 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In accordance with A.R.S.
Section 34-604(H), the City may not publicly release information on proposals received



or the scoring results until an agreement is awarded. Twenty-seven firms submitted
proposals and are listed in Attachment A.

Contract Term
The term of each agreement is up to three years, or up to $2.5 million, whichever
occurs first. Work scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end
of the term may be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination
of the agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for each of the On-Call consultants will not exceed $2.5 million,
including all subconsultant and reimbursable costs. The total fee for all services will not
exceed $30 million.

Funding is available in the Capital Improvement Program and Operating budgets of the
various City departments that will utilize these agreements. The agreements will be
managed by Office of the City Engineer's Environmental Services Division.The Budget
and Research Department will review and approve funding availability prior to
issuance of any On-Call task order of $100,000 or more. Payments may be made up
to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past the
agreement termination.

Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the City Engineer.





ATTACHMENT A


Selected Firms
Rank 1: TYPSA, Inc.
Rank 2: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.
Rank 3: HDR Engineering, Inc.
Rank 4: SWCA, Incorporated
Rank 5: Logan Simpson Design, Inc.
Rank 6: WSP USA, Inc.
Rank 7: Westland Resources, Inc. dba Westland Engineering and
Environmental Services
Rank 8: Desert Archaeology, Inc
Rank 9: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Rank 10: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
Rank 11: Wilson & Company, Inc.
Rank 12: Pinyon Environmental, Inc.


Additional Proposers
Rank 13: Terracon Consultants. Inc.
Rank 14: Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc
Rank 15: Colliers Engineering & Design, Inc.
Rank 16: Tetra Tech, Inc.
Rank 17: Eastern Research Group, Inc.
Rank 18: Avenue Consultants, Inc.
Rank 19: Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape
Architecture PC
Rank 20: HR Green. Inc.
Rank 21: Broadbent & Associates, Inc.
Rank 22: NV5, Inc.
Rank 23: Paleo West, LLC dba Headway Environmental
Rank 24: Dudek
Rank 25: Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd.
Rank 26: Bio Logical, LLC
Rank 27: Alta Survey, LLC DBA Alta Environmental and Infrastructure







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Water Service Line Replacement - Engineering Services - WS85504000
(Ordinance S-52450) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with Tristar Engineering and Management, Inc. to provide Engineering Services that
include minor design and construction administration and inspection services for the
Water Service Line Replacement project. Further request to authorize execution of
amendments to the agreement as necessary within the Council-approved expenditure
authority as provided below, and for the City Controller to disburse all funds related to
this item. The fee for services will not exceed $16 million.

Additionally, request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all action
as may be necessary or appropriate and to execute all design and construction
agreements, licenses, permits, and requests for utility services related to the
development, design and construction of the project. Such utility services include, but
are not limited to: electrical, water, sewer, natural gas, telecommunication, cable
television, railroads and other modes of transportation. Further request the City
Council to grant an exception to Phoenix City Code 42-20 to authorize inclusion in the
documents pertaining to this transaction of indemnification and assumption of liability
provisions that otherwise should be prohibited by Phoenix City Code 42-18. This
authorization excludes any transaction involving an interest in real property.

Summary
The purpose of this project is to provide minor design and construction administration
and inspection services on an as needed basis for Water Service Department's Water
Service Line Repair and Replacement Job Order Contract (JOC) program.

Tristar Engineering and Management, Inc.'s services include, but are not limited to:
general project administration; construction inspections and service inspections;
citywide inspections of four different JOCs replacing or repairing the City of Phoenix
water service leaks; provide onsite inspector for each contractor crew; resident
engineering services during construction; daily interaction with contractors to clarify job
requirements; administration of contractor’s contract; decision making in the field
regarding technical project issues; monitoring job progress; review and certification of
progress payments and job orders; preparation of record of service repairs and/or



record of drawings; public information and public relations services, and coordination
with other City departments, governmental agencies and operations staff; daily update
on the City of Phoenix web-based portal on work activity for the JOC; in daily
communication with Water Engineering Project Manager; and some minor water main
or water service design may be required.

Procurement Information
The selection was made using a qualifications-based selection process set forth in
Section 34-603 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.). In accordance with A.R.S.
Section 34-603(H), the City may not publicly release information on proposals received
or the scoring results until an agreement is awarded. Six firms submitted proposals
and are listed below:

Selected Firm
Rank 1: Tristar Engineering and Management, Inc.

Additional Proposers
Rank 2: Entellus, Inc.
Rank 3: Brown and Caldwell, Inc.
Rank 4: Wilson Engineers, LLC
Rank 5: Sunrise Engineering, LLC
Rank 6: Olsson, Inc.

Contract Term
The term of the agreement is five years from the issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
Work scope identified and incorporated into the agreement prior to the end of the term
may be agreed to by the parties, and work may extend past the termination of the
agreement. No additional changes may be executed after the end of the term.

Financial Impact
The agreement value for Tristar Engineering and Management, Inc. will not exceed
$16 million, including all subconsultants and reimbursables.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department's Capital Improvement Program
budget. The Budget and Research Department will separately review and approve
funding availability prior to execution of any amendments. Payments may be made up
to agreement limits for all rendered agreement services, which may extend past the
agreement termination.







Responsible Department
This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher, Deputy City Manager Ginger
Spencer, the Water Services Department, and the City Engineer.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Horizontal Lifeline and Vertical Fall Protection System Inspection and Repair -
IFB-26-0008 - Request for Award (Ordinance S-52444) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into an agreement
with P3 Safety Solutions, LLC to provide Horizontal Lifeline and Vertical Fall Protection
System Inspection and Repair for the Water Services Department (WSD). Further
request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
total value of the agreement will not exceed $800,000.

Summary
This contract will provide Water Services with the ability to conduct annual inspections
and repair services (as needed) for horizontal lifeline and vertical fall protection
systems. The Horizontal Lifelines and Vertical Fall Protection Systems are used for a
variety of reasons and are vital to the daily operations within the Water Services
Department operations. The equipment ensures the safety of the WSD employees and
assists them in performing their job functions.

Procurement Information
An Invitation for Bid procurement was processed in accordance with City of Phoenix
Administrative Regulation 3.10.

One vendor submitted a bid and is listed below. Following an evaluation based on
price, the procurement officer recommends award to the following vendor:

Selected Bidder:
P3 Safety Solutions, LLC

Contract Term
The contract will begin on or about November 1, 2025 for a five year term with no
options to extend.

Financial Impact
The aggregate contract value will not exceed $800,000.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department Operating budget.




Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Ginger Spencer and the Water
Services Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Manhole Pest Control Services for Roach Treatment - Amendment (Ordinance S-
52445) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to allow additional
expenditures under Agreement 155162 with Proficient Pest Specialists LLC to provide
treatment of sanitary sewer structures with insecticide paint to control roaches. Further
request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds related to this item. The
additional expenditures will not exceed $500,000.

Summary
The purpose of this amendment is to request additional funds for labor, certifications,
materials, equipment, insecticides, plastics, tarps, caution tape, barricades, and traffic
control devices required to treat sanitary sewer manholes and cleanouts located within
the City.

The contractor is expected to treat one-half of the manholes and one-half of the sewer
cleanouts each year. Manholes are located throughout the City's more than 540
square mile service area.

Contract Term
The agreement term remains unchanged, ending September 30, 2026.

Financial Impact
Upon approval of $500,000 in additional funds, the revised aggregate value of the
contract will not exceed $2,500,000.

Funding is available in the Water Services Department's Operating budget.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved:
· Manhole Pest Control Services for Roach Treatment Contract 155162 (Ordinance S
-47849) on August 25, 2021.







Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Ginger Spencer and the Water
Services Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Sewer Rods for Water Services Department - Amendment (Ordinance S-52458) -
Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an amendment to
Agreement 153756 with AZ Wastewater Industries, Inc., to provide additional funding
to the agreement. Further request to authorize the City Controller to disburse all funds
related to this item. The additional expenditures included in this amendment will not
exceed $60,900.

Summary
The purpose of this amendment is to request additional funds to conduct preventative
maintenance of the sanitary system using various processes like mechanical rodding.
Mechanical rodding clears and removes debris from the wastewater collection system,
which utilizes sewer rods to operate. The mechanical rodding vehicle and equipment
uses the sewer rods to push and pull various tools through the sanitary sewer mains to
clear accumulated debris, grease, or roots.

Consistent cleaning is an integral component to preventative maintenance of the
sanitary sewer system required by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality's
Capacity, Management, Operations, and Maintenance permit.

Contract Term
The agreement term remains unchanged, ending on February 28, 2026.

Financial Impact
· The initial authorization for sewer rods was for an expenditure not-to-exceed
$38,813.
· This amendment will increase the authorization of the agreement by an additional
$22,000 for a new total not-to-exceed value of $60,813.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
The City Council approved:
· Sewer Rods Agreement 153756 (Ordinance S-47279) on February 3, 2021.






Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Ginger Spencer and the Water
Services Department.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Customer Information System Managed Services Contract - Amendment
(Ordinance S-52452) - Citywide

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute an amendment to
the Customer Information System Managed Services Contract 163045 with Ernst &
Young LLP. This amendment also seeks an exception to Phoenix City Code Section 42
-18 to authorize inclusion of indemnification and assumption of liability provisions in the
agreement that would otherwise be prohibited.

Summary
This contract and amendment enables the Water Services and Public Works
departments to receive managed services, including continuous 24/7 operation,
maintenance, and enhancement of the Customer Information System. This
amendment also seeks approval for an exception under Phoenix City Code Section 42
-20. This exception would permit the inclusion of a limitation of liability clause in this
contract, which is otherwise prohibited under Section 42-18. The proposed clause
would cap the contractor's total liability at the greater of:

1. Five times the fees paid for services in the past 12 months or;
2. Eleven million dollars.

This liability cap does not apply in situations involving fraud, intentional misconduct, or
when the law or professional standards do not allow such a limit.

Contract Term
The contract term remains unchanged.

Financial Impact
There is no requested change to the existing spending authorization for this contract
as part of this amendment.

Concurrence/Previous Council Action
Contract 163045 (Ordinance S-51939) on May 21, 2025.




Responsible Department
This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Ginger Spencer and the Water
Services and Public Works departments.








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Application PHO-1-25--Z-20-17-2 -
Approximately 1,420 Feet West of the Northwest Corner of North Valley Parkway
and Bronco Butte Trail (Ordinance G-7452) - District 2

Request to authorize the City Manager, or the City Manager's designee, to approve the
Planning Commission's recommendation without further hearing by the City Council on
matters heard by the Planning Hearing Officer on August 20, 2025, and the Planning
Commission on November 6, 2025.

Summary
Application: PHO-1-25--Z-20-17-2
Existing Zoning: C-2 M-R NBCOD
Acreage: 0.04

Applicant / Representative: Declan Murphy on behalf of TWC
Owner: Robert Jr. and Sabrina Eaton

Proposal:
1. Request to delete Stipulation 1 regarding detached sidewalks.
2. Request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding street improvements.
3. Request to delete Stipulation 4 regarding east and west pedestrian connections
along Paseo del Pardo.
4. Request to delete Stipulation 5 regarding pedestrian pathways.
5. Request to delete Stipulation 6 regarding the use of artificial turf.
6. Request to delete Stipulation 7 regarding turf being used in active retention basins.
7. Request to delete Stipulation 9 regarding the hotel development.
8. Request to delete Stipulation 10 regarding color and material palette for the
buildings.
9. Request to delete Stipulation 11 regarding the glazing on all building windows.
10. Request to delete Stipulation 12 regarding screening of service areas.
11. Request to delete Stipulation 13 regarding a minimum landscape setback along
property lines adjacent to public right-of-way.
12. Request to delete Stipulation 14 regarding the Bronco Butte Water Tank
preservation.
13. Request to delete Stipulation 15 regarding view corridors of Bronco Butte, Pyramid



Peak, Union Hills, and No Name Mountain.
14. Request to delete Stipulation 16 regarding maximum building height.
15. Request to delete Stipulation 17 regarding sufficient right-of-way for a collector
street.
16. Request to delete Stipulation 18 regarding sewer force main construction.
17. Request to delete Stipulation 19 regarding approval of offsite paving plans.
18. Request to delete Stipulation 20 regarding updating the Sonoran Foothills PCD
Street Master Plan.

VPC Action: The North Gateway Village Planning Committee heard this item on August
14, 2025, and recommended approval, with a modification, by a vote of 8-0.
PHO Action: The Planning Hearing Officer (PHO) heard this item on August 20, 2025
and took the item under advisement. On September 16, 2025, the PHO took this item
out from under advisement and recommended denial as filed, approval with
modifications.
Appeal: The item was appealed by the applicant/representative on September 23,
2025, therefore the item was scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission.
Staff Recommendation: Denial as filed, approval with modifications, per the PHO
recommendation.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended denial as filed, approval per the PHO recommendation, with
modifications, by a vote of 6-2.

Location
Approximately 1,420 feet west of the northwest corner of North Valley Parkway and
Bronco Butte Trail
Council District: 2
Parcel Address: 2747 W. Bronco Butte Trail

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





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 STIPULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO REZONING APPLICATION Z-20-17-2
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY ORDINANCE G-6484.

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning stipulations applicable to the site located at

approximately 1,420 feet west of the northwest corner of North Valley Parkway and

Bronco Butte Trail in a portion of Section 14, Township 5 North, Range 2 East, as

described more specifically in Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B, are hereby

modified to read as set forth below.

STIPULATIONS:

1. All sidewalks shall be detached with a minimum five-foot wide landscaped
strip located between the sidewalk and back of curb and shall include
minimum two-inch caliper shade trees planted a minimum of 20 feet on
center or equivalent groupings along both sides of the sidewalk, ADJACENT
TO APN 204-12-980, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department. The landscape strip shall be installed by the developer and
maintained by property owner. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO
THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE SITE.

2. The developer shall construct all streets within and adjacent to APN 204-12-




980 the development 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. THIS STIPULATION SHALL
ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE.

3. 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.

4. The east and west pedestrian connection (Paseo del Prado) shall be
provided in accordance with the North Gateway Core Plan, as modified by
the following stipulations and approved by the Planning and Development
Department (THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD
OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SITE):

a. The Paseo del Prado shall align with the Bronco Butte Tank and
continue through the site to the west.

b. A pedestrian access easement of 20 feet shall be dedicated for the
pedestrian connection (Paseo del Prado). of the 20 feet, 12 feet shall
remain completely free of any pedestrian impediments, including
benches. The remaining 8 feet may be used for pedestrian friendly
uses such as restaurant seating, vendor stalls, artist displays, etc.

c. A minimum of 50% of the 20-foot pedestrian access easement for the
Paseo del Prado shall be shaded by a structure, landscaping or a
combination of the two.

d. The site shall be designed in such a manner that the building
placement creates an alignment and synergy for the Paseo del Prado.
This can be achieved by placing active uses such as outdoor seating,
restaurants and retail along the pedestrian path.

5. All pedestrian pathways, including those that intersect vehicular traffic lanes,
shall be constructed with decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or
another material other than those used to pave the parking surfaces and
drive aisles, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. THIS
STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE
SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
SITE.




6. The use of artificial turf is prohibited in areas visible from public right-of-way
or parking lots, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.
THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF
THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
SITE.

7. Turf shall only be used in active retention basins, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY
APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE.

8. All retention areas shall be natural and organic in shape, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

9. The hotel development shall be in general conformance with the elevations
date stamped April18, 2018, with specific regard to the massing, articulation,
window placement and building entry, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE
FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE SITE.

10. The color and material palette for the buildings shall be determined at site
plan review and shall comply with the North Black Canyon Overlay District,
with specific regard to colors being muted and blend with, rather than
contrast strongly, with the surrounding desert environment, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY
APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE.

11. The glazing on all building windows shall have a maximum reflectivity of 20%,
as approved by the Planning and Development Department. THIS
STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE
AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
SITE.

12. All service areas must be screened to conceal trash containers, recycling
containers, loading docks, transformers, backflow preventers and other
mechanical and or electrical equipment from eye level adjacent to all public
streets and private drives, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD
OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SITE.




13. A minimum landscape setback of 10 feet shall be required along property
lines that are not adjacent to public right-of-way and planted in accordance
with C-2 planting size and spacing standards, as approved by the Planning
and Development Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO
THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE SITE.

14. The Bronco Butte Water Tank shall be fully preserved, in place, as it naturally
occurs and shall be identified on all site plan documents through permitting to
ensure preservation. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL
BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SITE.

15. View corridors of Bronco Butte, Pyramid Peak, Union Hills and No Name
Mountain, as shown on Exhibit B in the North Gateway Core Plan, shall be
retained through building placement and step backs, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY
APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE.

16. Maximum building height shall be limited to 60 feet. The maximum square
footage of the sports arena shall be 180,000 square feet and the maximum
square footage of the hotel shall be 60,000 square feet. Any request to
increase building height or building square footage beyond the stipulated
height and square footages shall not be approved unless all of the following
occur (THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT
OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
SITE):

a. A water report is submitted to and approved by the Water Services
Department which demonstrates that sufficient water capacity exists or
is being provided by the developer of this parcel;

b. A wastewater report is submitted to and approved by the Water
Services Department which demonstrates that sufficient wastewater
capacity exists or is being provided by the developer of this parcel; and

c. A traffic study is submitted to and approved by the Street
Transportation Department which demonstrates that street
improvements (existing and/or proposed) are sufficient to serve the
site.

17. Sufficient right-of-way for a collector shall be dedicated ADJACENT TO APN
204-12-980 for the extension of Bronco Butte Trail as necessary to establish
an alignment to tie into the current terminus at the Bronco Tank and transition


to a half-street where the alignment is able to assume an alignment at the
north property line for the extension of Bronco Butte Trail west to the 29th
Avenue alignment, unless an alternative route is approved or modified by the
Street Transportation Department and the Planning and Development
Department. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD
OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SITE.

18. Any construction of a sewer force main, intended as a temporary sewer
solution for the subject property, must be designed and constructed in a
manner that minimizes the impacts to truck circulation (as necessary to
maintain traffic flow to and from the W.L. Gore campus at the Bronco Butte
driveway for a WB-67 vehicle). THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY APPLY TO
THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE SITE.

19. Prior to the approval of the offsite paving plans for the project, the developer
shall update the restriping plan for the intersection of North Valley Parkway
and Bronco Butte Trail. The restriping plan shall be in general conformance
to the restriping plan date stamped June 28, 2018, as approved by the Street
Transportation Department and the Planning and Development Department.
The developer shall be responsible for all improvements. The developer shall
provide documentation that the restriping plan was submitted to W.L. Gore
prior to submittal of off-site paving plan. THIS STIPULATION SHALL ONLY
APPLY TO THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE SITE AND NOT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE.

20. Prior to final site plan approval, the developer shall work with the adjacent
property owners to update the Sonoran Foothills PCD Street Master Plan to
address the following for the intersection of North Valley Parkway and Bronco
Butte Trail, as approved or modified by the Street Transportation Director and
the Planning and Development Director as outlined in a forthcoming letter
addressing the following:

a. Planned roadway and striping improvements

b. Identify existing contributions to the traffic signal infrastructure

c. Clarify responsibilities for future traffic infrastructure

21. The developer shall notify the following individuals by mail 15 days prior to
20. any preapplication or preliminary site plan review meetings with the
Planning and Development Department. The notice shall include the date,
time and location of the meeting.

a Brent Roberts


W.L. Gore
32470 N. North Valley Parkway
Phoenix, AZ 85085

b. Heidi Kimball
Sunbelt Holdings
6720 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 250
Scottsdale, AZ. 85253

22. The developer shall notify the following individuals by mail 10 days prior to
21. the submittal of the final site plan for approval by the Planning and
Development Department.

a. Brent Roberts
W.L. Gore
32470 N. North Valley Parkway
Phoenix, AZ 85085

b. Heidi Kimball
Sunbelt Holdings
6720 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 250
Scottsdale, AZ 85253

SECTION 2. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district granted pursuant to Ordinance G-6484, this portion of the rezoning is now

subject to the stipulations approved pursuant to Ordinance G-6484 and as modified in

Section 1 of this Ordinance. Any violation of the stipulation is a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. Building permits shall not be issued for the subject site

until all the stipulations have been met.

SECTION 3. 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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR
________________________________
Date

ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager


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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PHO-1-25--Z-20-17-2

The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Maricopa, State of
Arizona, and is described as follows:

PARENT PARCEL LEGAL DESCRIPTION

THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14,
TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND
MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA.

AND BEING THE SAME PROPERTY CONVEYED TO SABRINA A. EATON AND
ROBERT L. EATON JR. FROM GREATER MARICOPA INVESTORS 1986 LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, AN ARIZONA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BY SPECIAL WARRANTY
DEED DATED JANUARY 2, 2018 AND RECORDED JANUARY 5, 2018 IN
INSTRUMENT NO. 20180011630.

TAX PARCEL NO. 204-12-980

LEASE AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION

A PORTION OF LOT 2 OF THE PLAT MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1482, PAGE 2 OF
MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDS, STATE OF ARIZONA, RECORDED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SAID COUNTY ON SEPTEMBER 5, 2019, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2, FROM WHICH
THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 2
EAST BEARS N89°39'44"E, 265.69 FEET, THENCE NORTH 89°39'44" EAST
ALONG NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 93.88 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING;

THENCE NORTH 90°00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 45.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 00°00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 90°00'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 45.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 00°00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.

CONTAINING 1575 SQUARE FEET OR 0.036 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-107-25-3 -
Northwest Corner of 7th Avenue and Bell Road (Ordinance G-7455) - District 3

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
from C-O/G-O (Commercial Office District, General Office Option) to C-2 (Intermediate
Commercial) to allow a gas station, convenience store, and restaurant/coffee shop.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-O/G-O
Proposed Zoning: C-2
Acreage: 5.13 acres
Proposal: Gas station, convenience store, and restaurant/coffee shop

Owner: 710 West Bell Road, LLC
Applicant: George Willett, LASCO Development Corporation
Representative: Adam Baugh, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Deer Valley Village Planning Committee heard this item on October
21, 2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the staff memo dated October 30, 2025, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Northwest corner of 7th Avenue and Bell Road
Council District: 3
Parcel Address: 17140 and 17160 N. 7th Avenue; and 710 and 712 W. Bell Road

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





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-107-25-3) FROM C-O/G-O (COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT, GENERAL OFFICE OPTION) TO C-2
(INTERMEDIATE COMMERICAL).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 5.13-acre site located at the northwest

corner of 7th Avenue and Bell Road in a portion of Section 31, Township 4 North,

Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A,” is hereby changed from “C-

O/G-O” (Commercial Office District, General Office Option) to “C-2” (Intermediate

Commercial).

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.”

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. All building elevations shall contain architectural embellishments and detailing
such as textural changes, pilasters, offsets, recesses, variation in window size
and location, and/or overhang canopies, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

2. A minimum 90-foot landscape setback shall be provided adjacent to the north
property line of the rezoning site.

3. The existing bus pad on westbound Bell Road, west of 7th Avenue, shall be
retained.

4. Where pedestrian walkways cross a vehicular path, the pathway shall be
constructed of decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or other
pavement treatments that visually contrast parking and drive aisle surfaces, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. All mitigation improvements shall be constructed and/or funded as identified in
the accepted Traffic Impact Analysis dated October 2025.

6. All existing electrical utilities within the public right-of-way shall be
undergrounded, adjacent to the development. The developer shall coordinate
with the affected utility companies for their review and permitting.

7. Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Also, replace any
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA
guidelines.

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

9. Natural turf shall only be utilized for required retention areas (at the bottom of
the basin, and only allowed on slopes if required for slope stabilization), and
functional turf areas, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

10. A minimum of two green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for
stormwater management shall be implemented, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development and/or Street Transportation departments. This




includes but is not limited to stormwater harvesting basins, bioswales,
permeable pavement, etc., per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green Infrastructure
and Low Impact Development Details for Alternative Stormwater Management.

11. Prior to final site plan approval, documentation shall be provided that
demonstrates a commitment to participate in the Phoenix Water Efficiency
Checkup Program for a minimum of 10 years, or as approved by the Planning
and Development Department.

12. All pedestrian pathways, including internal walkways and public sidewalks
adjacent to the site, shall be shaded by a structure or landscaping, or a
combination of the two to achieve a minimum of 75% shade, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

13. A minimum of 25% of the surface parking areas shall be shaded, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department. Shade may be achieved by
structures or by minimum 2-inch caliper, drought tolerant, shade trees, or a
combination thereof.

14. A minimum of four bicycle parking spaces shall be provided for each building
through Inverted U and/or artistic racks located near the building entrance and
installed per the requirements of Section 1307.H of the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. Artistic
racks shall adhere to the City of Phoenix Preferred Designs in Appendix K of
the Comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan.

15. A bicycle repair station (“fix it station”) shall be provided on the site. The station
shall include but not be limited to: standard repair tools affixed to the station; a
tire gauge and pump; and a bicycle repair stand which allows pedals and
wheels to spin freely while making adjustments to the bike, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

16. Standard electrical receptacles shall be installed for a minimum of 10% of the
required bicycle parking spaces for electric bicycle charging capabilities.

17. A minimum of 5% of the required parking spaces shall be EV Ready.

18. This parcel is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) called Zone AE-
Floodway, on panels 04013C 1290M of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM)
with an effective date of September 18, 2020. The following requirements shall
apply, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

a. The project engineer is required to delineate the floodplain boundary on
the Grading and Drainage Plan and ensure that potential impacts to the
proposed facilities are adequately addressed, in compliance with the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations (44 CFR




Paragraph 60.3). This includes adhering to the provisions outlined in the
latest version of the Floodplain Ordinance of the Phoenix City Code.

b. The Grading and Drainage Plan must be submitted to the Floodplain
Management section of the Office of the City Engineer for review and
approval of floodplain requirements.

c. A FEMA-approved CLOMR must be obtained before the issuance of a
Grading and Drainage permit.

d. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) application must also be submitted to
Floodplain Management prior to the issuance of any vertical
construction permits.

e. A FEMA approved LOMR must be submitted to Floodplain Management
prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy.

19. 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.

20. Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record. This stipulation shall not be applicable if the property
is owned by the City of Phoenix.

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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________




MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-107-25-3

A CERTAIN PIECE OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF PHOENIX, COUNTY OF
MARICOPA, STATE OF ARIZONA, LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, SAID PIECE OF LAND BEING ALSO DESCRIBED BY
THE METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION TO FOLLOW:

COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE AFOREMENTIONED
SECTION 31;

THENCE SOUTH 89°49'48" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST
QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 372.35 FEET;

THENCE DEPARTING SAID SECTION LINE NORTH 00°05'28" EAST A DISTANCE
OF 75.00 FEET TO A FOUND 1/2" REBAR AND CAP STAMPED "RLS 13562"
LOCATED ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BELL ROAD (A 150 FOOT
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) MARKING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;

THENCE NORTH 00°05'28" EAST A DISTANCE OF 525.00 FEET TO A FOUND MAG-
NAIL AND WASHER STAMPED "WINCHESTER AZ 79657";

THENCE NORTH 89°48'58" EAST A DISTANCE OF 317.50 FEET TO A FOUND 1/2"
REBAR AND CAP STAMPED "RLS 13562" LOCATED ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-
WAY LINE OF NORTH 7TH AVENUE (A VARIABLE WIDTH PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-
WAY);

THENCE SOUTH 00°05'28" WEST ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE A
DISTANCE OF 525.08 FEET TO A FOUND MAG-NAIL & WASHER STAMPED
"WINCHESTER AZ 79657" LOCATED ON THE AFOREMENTIONED NORTH RIGHT-
OF-WAY LINE OF BELL ROAD;

THENCE SOUTH 89°49'48" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE A
DISTANCE OF 317.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN
AREA OF 166,698 SQUARE FEET OR 3.827 ACRES MORE OR LESS.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-83-25-4 -
Southeast Corner of 19th Avenue and Montebello Avenue (Ordinance G-7454) -
District 4

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
C-2 TOD-1 (Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One) to WU Code T5:6 SL (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:6 District, Transit Solano
Character Area) to allow mixed-use, commercial and residential uses.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-2 TOD-1
Proposed Zoning: WU Code T5:6 SL
Acreage: 12.40 acres
Proposal: Mixed use, commercial and residential uses

Owner: City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department
Applicant: City of Phoenix, Planning Commission
Representative: Jeff Stapleton, City of Phoenix, Community and Economic
Development Department

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Alhambra Village Planning Committee was scheduled to hear this
item on October 28, 2025, for recommendation; however, there was no quorum.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Southeast corner of 19th Avenue and Montebello Avenue
Council District: 4
Parcel Address: 1825 and 1835 W. Montebello Avenue; and 5537, 5645, and 5655 N.
19th Avenue






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





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-83-25-4) FROM C-2 TOD-1 (INTERMEDIATE
COMMERCIAL, INTERIM TRANSIT-ORIENTED ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE) TO WU CODE T5:6 SL (WALKABLE
URBAN CODE, TRANSECT 5:6 DISTRICT, TRANSIT SOLANO
CHARACTER AREA).

___________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 12.40-acre site located at the southeast

corner of 19th Avenue and Montebello Avenue in a portion of Section 18, 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 T5:6 SL” (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:6 District,

Transit Solano 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.”




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 site plan and elevations shall be presented for review and comment to the
Alhambra Village Planning Committee prior to preliminary site plan approval.

2. The maximum building height shall not exceed 56 feet, except that the
maximum building height may be increased to 80 feet, if a minimum of 30% of
the dwelling units are provided as Affordable Housing, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department and Housing Department.

3. The development shall contain a vertical mix of land uses such as residential
and nonresidential, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department. A minimum of 5,000 square feet of non-residential uses shall be
provided along 19th Avenue and/or Montebello Avenue (along the northside of
site, south of the transit center) and shall not include lobby, exercise, reception
areas or other similar uses intended for exclusive use by residents.

4. The development shall utilize storefront, gallery, forecourt, or arcade frontage
types, or a mix thereof, for a minimum of 50% of the provided frontage along
19th Avenue, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. The northern edge of the site, south of the transit center, shall be treated as
street frontage (secondary frontage) and building setbacks/build-to dimensions
shall be measured from the back of any easements (public utilities, public
pedestrian access, maintenance, etc.), as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

6. The northwest corner of the building, south of the transit center, shall
incorporate enhanced corner treatment, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

7. The development shall utilize storefront, gallery, or arcade frontage types, or a
mix thereof, for a minimum of 50% of the provided frontage along the northern
edge of the site, south of the transit center, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

8. The development shall include balconies for a minimum of 50% of dwelling
units along the perimeters of the building/s along 19th Avenue and Montebello
Avenue; or an alternative feature to achieve natural surveillance, such as an
amenity deck on any floor above the ground floor, as approved by the Planning




and Development Department.

9. The required pedestrian accessways designed in accordance with 1304.G and
1304.H shall be provided as described below, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

a. A pedestrian accessway shall run east-west approximately along the
Luke Avenue alignment and extend from the sidewalk on 19th Avenue to
the eastern edge of the property where it will terminate at a pedestrian
accessway along 17th Avenue street or alignment.

i. A minimum 1,000 square foot plaza shall be provided where the
accessway meets the public sidewalk at 19th Avenue to denote
and activate the entrance to the paseo with a minimum of one
artistic enhancement. This space may count toward the minimum
requirement for publicly accessible.

b. A pedestrian accessway shall run north-south along the eastern property
line and extend from the transit center on the north to the southern edge
of the site.

10. Bicycle infrastructure shall be provided, as described below and as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

a. A bicycle repair station (“fix-it station”) shall be provided maintained
within or near secure bicycle parking areas and separated from vehicular
maneuvering areas, where applicable.

b. All required bicycle parking for multifamily use, per Section 1307.H.6.d of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, shall be secured parking.

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

d. A minimum of 10% of the provided bicycle parking spaces shall include
standard electrical receptacles for electric bicycle charging capabilities.

11. A minimum of 5% of the required parking spaces shall include EV-Installed
infrastructure.

12. A minimum of two green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for
stormwater management shall be implemented, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development and/or Street Transportation departments. This
includes but is not limited to stormwater harvesting basins, bioswales,




permeable pavement, etc., per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green Infrastructure
and Low Impact Development Details for Alternative Stormwater Management.

13. A minimum of 25% of the surface parking areas shall be shaded, as approved
by the Planning and Development Department. Shade may be achieved by
structures or by minimum 2-inch caliper, drought tolerant, shade trees, or a
combination thereof.

14. Natural turf shall only be utilized for required retention areas (bottom of basin,
and only allowed on slopes if required for slope stabilization) and functional turf
areas, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

15. Prior to final site plan approval, documentation shall be provided that
demonstrates a commitment to participate in the Water Efficiency Checkup
program for a minimum of 10 years, or as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

16. A minimum of 10% of the required shrubs shall be milkweed or other native
nectar species, and shall be planted in groups of three or more, as approved by
the Planning and Development Department.

17. The developer shall deposit a minimum $50,000.00 in escrow to the Street
Transportation Department to fund a traffic control device on Montebello
Avenue, between 15th Avenue and 19th Avenue, prior to final site plan
approval for first phase of development.

18. All mitigation improvements shall be constructed and/or funded as identified in
the forthcoming accepted Traffic Impact Analysis.

19. Existing streetscape beginning at back of curb, and median islands shall be
replenished with the approved landscaping and trees along Montebello
Avenue, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

20. Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Also, replace any
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA
guidelines.

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

22. The transit center at the north end of the property shall be retained, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.




23. 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.

24. Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record. This stipulation shall not be applicable if the property
is owned by the City of Phoenix.


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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________




REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-83-25-4

WITHIN A PORTION OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF
THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

LOT 1, OF VALLEY METRO RAIL TRANSIT CENTER AND PARK & RIDE AT
MONTEBELLO AVENUE AND 19TH AVENUE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF
RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA, RECORDED IN BOOK 908 OF MAPS, PAGE 20.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-96-25-4 -
Northwest Corner of 3rd Street and Lexington Avenue (Ordinance G-7453) -
District 4

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
C-2 TOD-1 (Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District
One) and R-5 TOD-1 (Multifamily Residence District - Restricted Commercial, Interim
Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to WU Code T5:5 MT (Walkable Urban
Code, Transect 5:5 District, Midtown Transit Character Area) to allow commercial uses
with on-site parking.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-2 TOD-1 (0.81-acres) and R-5 TOD-1 (0.84-acres)
Proposed Zoning: WU Code T5:5 MT
Acreage: 1.65 acres
Proposal: Commercial uses with on-site parking

Owner: Moosedreams Management, LLC, et al.
Applicant/Representative: George Pasquel, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Encanto Village Planning Committee was scheduled to hear this item
on October 6, 2025, for recommendation; however, there was no quorum.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Northwest corner of 3rd Street and Lexington Avenue
Council District: 4
Parcel Address: 3302, 3304, 3306, 3308, 3310, 3312, 3314, 3316, and 3318 N. 3rd
Street; 220 E. Lexington Avenue; and 3305, 3309, and 3315 N. Morris Drive







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





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-96-25-4) FROM C-2 TOD-1 (INTERMEDIATE
COMMERICIAL, INTERIM TRANSIT-ORIENTED ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE) AND R-5 TOD-1 (MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENCE DISTRICT – RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL,
INTERIM TRANSIT-ORIENTED ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT
ONE) TO WU CODE T5:5 MT (WALKABLE URBAN CODE,
TRANSECT 5:5 DISTRICT, MIDTOWN TRANSIT CHARACTER
AREA).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 1.65 acre site located at the northwest

corner of 3rd Street and Lexington Avenue in a portion of Section 29, Township 2 North,

Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A,” is hereby changed from

0.81-acres of “C-2 TOD-1” (Intermediate Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning

Overlay District One) and 0.84-acres of “R-5 TOD-1” (Multifamily Residence District -

Restricted Commercial, Interim Transit-Oriented Zoning Overlay District One) to “WU

Code T5:5 MT” (Walkable Urban Code, Transect 5:5 District, Midtown Transit 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.”

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. All uncovered surface parking lot areas shall be shaded to achieve a minimum
25% shade with either landscaping, structural shade, or a combination of the
two, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

2. Where pedestrian pathways cross a vehicular path, the pathway shall be
constructed of decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or other
pavement treatments that visually contrasts parking and drive aisle surfaces, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

3. The following bicycle infrastructure shall be provided, and as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

a. Bicycle spaces shall be provided on the site through Inverted U and/or
artistic racks located near the building entrances per the requirements of
Section 1307.H. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

b. A minimum of 10% of the provided bicycle parking spaces shall include
standard electrical receptacles for electric bicycle charging capabilities.

c. Bicycle parking spaces shall be shaded by a structure, landscaping, or a
combination of the two to provide a minimum of 75% shade.

d. A minimum of one bicycle repair stations (“fix it stations”) shall be
provided and maintained along public pedestrian accessway or 3rd
Street.

i. Standard repair tools affixed to the station;

ii. A tire gauge and pump affixed to the base of the station or the
ground;

iii. A bicycle repair stand which allows pedals and wheels to spin
freely while making adjustments to the bike.


4. A minimum of two parking spaces shall include Electric Vehicle (EV) Installed
infrastructure, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. The angled parking spaces within the 3rd Street right-of-way, adjacent to the
subject site, shall be removed.

6. A minimum 5-foot-wide detached sidewalk separated by a minimum 5-foot-wide
landscape area shall be constructed on the north side of Lexington Avenue, and
planted as follows, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

a. Minimum 2-inch caliper, single-trunk shade trees planted 20 feet on
center, or in equivalent groupings.

b. Shrubs, accents and vegetative groundcovers maintained to a maximum
height of two feet, evenly distributed throughout the landscape area to
achieve a minimum of 50% live coverage.

Where utility conflicts exist, the developer shall work with the Planning and
Development Department on alternative design solutions consistent with a
pedestrian environment for installing the required plants.

7. A minimum 6-foot-wide detached sidewalk separated by a minimum 8-foot-wide
landscape area shall be constructed on the west side of 3rd Street, and planted
as follows, as approved by the Street Transportation Department and the Office
of the City Engineer.

a. Minimum 2-inch caliper, single-trunk shade trees planted 20 feet on
center, or in equivalent groupings.

b. Shrubs, accents and vegetative groundcovers maintained to a maximum
height of two feet, evenly distributed throughout the landscape area to
achieve a minimum of 50% live coverage.

8. Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Also, replace any
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA
guidelines.

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

10. Natural turf shall only be utilized for required retention areas (at the bottom of
the basin, and only allowed on slopes if required for slope stabilization), and
functional turf areas, as approved by the Planning and Development


Department.

11. A minimum of one green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for
stormwater management shall be implemented, as approved or modified by the
Planning and Development and/or Street Transportation departments. This
includes but is not limited to stormwater harvesting basins, bioswales,
permeable pavement, etc., per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green Infrastructure
and Low Impact Development Details for Alternative Stormwater Management.

12. Prior to final site plan approval, documentation shall be provided that
demonstrates a commitment to participate in the Phoenix Water Efficiency
Program for a minimum of 10 years, or as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

13. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney.

14. 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.

15. Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition 207
waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record. This stipulation shall not be applicable if the property
is owned by the City of Phoenix.


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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________

MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-96-25-4

LOTS 1 THROUGH 8 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 5, OF BUENA VISTA PARK,
ACCORDING TO BOOK 33 OF MAPS, PAGE 41, RECORDS OF MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE GILA AND
SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COMMENCING AT A BRASS CAP FLUSH AT THE INTERSECTION OF
LEXINGTON AVENUE AND THIRD STREET, FROM WHICH A BRASS CAP IN
HANDHOLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF OSBORN ROAD AND THIRD
STREET, BEARS NORTH 00·29'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 515.50 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 89°53'00" WEST, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF
LEXINGTON AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET;

THENCE NORTH 00°29'00" WEST, DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE, A
DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT
1, BLOCK 5, AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN
DESCRIBED;

THENCE SOUTH 89°53'00" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 229.96 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID LOT 8, BLOCK 5;

THENCE NORTH 00·32' 48" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID BLOCK
5, A DISTANCE OF 211.02 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
LOT 5, BLOCK 5;

THENCE SOUTH 89°59'57" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
BLOCK 5, A DISTANCE OF 230.19 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
SAID LOT 4, BLOCK 5;

THENCE SOUTH 00·29'00" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID BLOCK
5, A DISTANCE OF 210.55 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

CONTAINING 48,495 SQUARE FEET OR 1.1133 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-86-25-7 -
Approximately 1,100 Feet South of the Southeast Corner of 69th Avenue and Van
Buren Street (Ordinance G-7458) - District 7

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
RE-43 (One-Family Residence) to A-1 (Light Industrial District) to allow truck and semi-
truck parking; and residential.

Summary
Current Zoning: RE-43
Proposed Zoning: A-1
Acreage: 1.00 acre
Proposed Use: Truck and semi-truck parking; and residential

Owner: Mario Martinez
Applicant/Representative: Shaine Alleman, Tiffany & Bosco, P.A.

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Estrella Village Planning Committee heard this item on October 21,
2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 5-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the Estrella Village Planning Committee recommendation,
by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Approximately 1,100 feet south of the southeast corner of 69th Avenue and Van Buren
Street
Council District: 7
Parcel Address: 11 N. 69th Avenue

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



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-86-25-7) FROM RE-43 (ONE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE) TO A-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 1.00 acre site located approximately 1,100

feet south of the southeast corner of 69th Avenue and Van Buren Street in a portion of

Section 12, Township 1 North, Range 1 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit

“A,” is hereby changed from “RE-43” (One-Family Residence) to “A-1” (Light Industrial

District).

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.”

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. Upon complete redevelopment or development that increases the cumulative
floor area of the building by more than 15% from that depicted on the site plan
date stamped September 23, 2025, the following shall apply:

a. A minimum of 25% of uncovered employee and customer surface
parking lot areas shall be shaded, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department. Shade may be achieved by structures or by
minimum 2-inch caliper, drought tolerant, shade trees, or a combination
thereof.

b. A minimum of two green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for
stormwater management shall be implemented, as approved or modified
by the Planning and Development and/or Street Transportation
departments. This includes but is not limited to stormwater harvesting
basins, bioswales, permeable pavement, etc., per the Greater Phoenix
Metro Green Infrastructure and Low Impact Development Details for
Alternative Stormwater Management.

c. A minimum of 10% of the required bicycle parking spaces shall include
standard electrical receptacles for electric bicycle charging capabilities.

d. A minimum of 5% of the required parking shall be EV Installed.

2. The maximum building height shall be 40 feet.

3. Bicycle parking shall be provided, consistent with Section 1307.H of the
Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

4. A minimum 5-foot wide landscape setback shall be provided along the east
perimeter, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

5. Landscape areas shall be planted with minimum 2-inch caliper, large canopy,
drought-tolerant, shade trees planted 25 feet on center, or in equivalent
groupings, as approved by the Planning and Development Department. Where
utility conflicts exist, the developer shall work with the Planning and
Development Department on alternative design solutions consistent with a
pedestrian environment.

6. Where pedestrian walkways cross a vehicular path, the pathway shall
incorporate decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, striping or other
pavement treatments that visually contrast parking and drive aisle surfaces, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.




7. A minimum 30-foot right-of-way shall be dedicated and constructed on the east
side of 69th Avenue. Construction shall include a minimum 5-foot-wide
sidewalk on the east side of 69th Avenue, adjacent to the development.

8. Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Also, replace any
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA
guidelines.

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

10. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

11. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

12. 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.

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

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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-86-25-7

APN: 104-09-022
The following described property situated in the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona:
Tract 7, WESTERN ACRES, according to the plat of record in the office of the County
Recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, recorded in Book 29 of Maps, Page 23

Except the North 183.71 feet thereof.

Section: 12
Township: 1N
Range: 1E







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-111-25-7 -
Approximately 250 Feet South of the Southeast Corner of 1st Avenue and
McKinley Street (Ordinance G-7456) - District 7

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
DTC-Downtown Gateway (Downtown Code, Gateway Character Area) to DTC-
Downtown Gateway HP (Downtown Code, Gateway Character Area, Historic
Preservation Overlay) to allow for a Historic Preservation Overlay for KPHO Building
(now First Studio).

Summary
Current Zoning: DTC-Downtown Gateway
Proposed Zoning: DTC-Downtown Gateway HP
Acreage: 0.28-acres
Proposal: Historic Preservation Overlay for KPHO Building (now First Studio)

Owner: First Studio, LLC
Applicant: City of Phoenix, Historic Preservation Commission
Representative: Kevin Weight, City of Phoenix, Planning and Development
Department, Historic Preservation Office

Staff Recommendation: Approval.
HPC Action: The Historic Preservation Commission heard this item on October 20,
2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 7-0.
VPC Action: The Central City Village Planning Committee heard this item on October
20, 2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 12-
0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the Historic Preservation Commission and the Central
City Village Planning Committee recommendations, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Approximately 250 south of the southeast corner of 1st Avenue and McKinley Street
Council District: 7



Parcel Address: 631 N. 1st Avenue

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





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-111-25-7) FROM DTC-DOWNTOWN
GATEWAY (DOWNTOWN CODE, DOWNTOWN GATEWAY
CHARACTER AREA) TO DTC-DOWNTOWN GATEWAY HP
(DOWNTOWN CODE, DOWNTOWN GATEWAY CHARACTER
AREA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 0.28-acre site at the approximately 250 feet

south of the southeast corner of 1st Avenue and McKinley Street in a portion of Section

5, Township 1 North, Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit “A,” is

hereby changed from “DTC-Downtown Gateway” (Downtown Code, Downtown

Gateway Character Area) to “DTC-Downtown Gateway HP” (Downtown Code,

Downtown Gateway Character Area, Historic Preservation Overlay).

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.”




SECTION 3. 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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-111-25-7

Within a portion of Section 5, Township 1 North, Range 3 East of the Gila and Salt River
Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, being more particularly described as
follows:

Lot 15 and the South 2.00 feet of Lot 17, Block A, Bennett Place, according to Book 2 of
Maps, Page 43, records of Maricopa County, Arizona.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-68-24-8 (Venue
on Washington PUD) - Approximately 220 Feet West of the Northwest Corner of
16th Street and Washington Street (Ordinance G-7457) - District 8

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
C-3 (General Commercial) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) for an event venue
and uses permitted in WU Code T5:5.

Summary
Current Zoning: C-3
Proposed Zoning: PUD
Acreage: 0.76
Proposal: Event venue and uses permitted in WU Code T5:5

Owner: Michael Marlowe, Klondyke Studios, LLC
Applicant/Representative: Wendy Riddell, Berry Riddell, LLC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Information Only: The Central City Village Planning Committee heard this item on
October 21, 2024, for information only.
VPC Action: The Central City Village Planning Committee heard this item on October
20, 2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, by a vote of 12-
0-1.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this case on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the Central City Village Planning Committee
recommendation, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Approximately 220 feet west of the northwest corner of 16th Street and Washington
Street
Council District: 8
Parcel Address: 1520 and 1526 E. Washington Street





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





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-68-24-8) FROM C-3 (GENERAL
COMMERCIAL) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 0.76 acre site located approximately 220 feet

west of the northwest corner of 16th Street and Washington Street in a portion of

Section 9, Township 1 North, Range 3 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit

“A,” is hereby changed from “C-3” (General Commercial) 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.”

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 Venue on Washington PUD reflecting
the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning
and Development Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this
request. The updated Development Narrative shall be consistent with the
Development Narrative date stamped October 10, 2025, as modified by the
following stipulations:

a. Front cover: Revise the submittal date information on the bottom to add the
following: Hearing draft submittal: October 10, 2025; City Council adopted:
[Add adoption date].

b. Page 14, E. Design Guidelines, Complete Streets, iv. Design for Green
Infrastructure: Move the following requirement to the end of the
Sustainability Section (Page 14, G. Sustainability):

“A minimum of two green infrastructure (GI) techniques for stormwater
management shall be implemented in The Venue on Washington PUD:
• Utilize permeable pavement to allow stormwater to drain through an
aggregate reservoir.
• Utilize stormwater harvesting basins to collect stormwater and clean
it prior to it percolating into the subsurface.”

2. All mitigation improvements shall be constructed and/or funded as identified in the
accepted Traffic Impact Analysis dated August 8, 2025.

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

4. The property owner shall record documents that disclose the existence, and
operational characteristics of the Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport to future owners or
tenants of the property. The form and content of such documents shall be
according to the templates and instructions provided which have been reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney.

5. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.




6. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

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 Archaeologist, and allow time for the
Archaeology Office to properly assess the materials.

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

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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:




_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-68-24-8

Within a portion of Section 9, Township 1 North, Range 3 East of the Gila and Salt River
Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, being more particularly described as
follows:

Lots 17, 18, and 19, Block 9, Collins Addition to the City of Phoenix, according to
Book 1 of Maps, page 11, records of Maricopa County, Arizona.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-103-25-8 -
Approximately 570 Feet West of the Northwest Corner of 27th Avenue and
Baseline Road (Ordinance G-7459) - District 8

Request to amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the
from S-1 (Ranch or Farm Residence) to C-2 (Intermediate Commercial) to allow
commercial uses - bank and restaurant.

Summary
Current Zoning: S-1
Proposed Zoning: C-2
Acreage: 1.89 acres
Proposed Use: Commercial uses - bank and restaurant

Owner: Baseline Land, LLC
Applicant: Tim Rasnake, Archicon Architecture & Interiors, LC
Representative: Mitchell Mastrin, Archicon Architecture & Interiors, LC

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
VPC Action: The Laveen Village Planning Committee heard this item on October 20,
2025, and recommended approval, per the staff recommendation, with a modification
and additional stipulations, by a vote of 10-0.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the staff memo dated October 31, 2025, by a vote of 8-0.

Location
Approximately 570 feet west of the northwest corner of 27th Avenue and Baseline
Road
Council District: 8
Parcel Address: N/A

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


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-103-25-8) FROM S-1 (RANCH OR FARM
RESIDENCE) TO C-2 (INTERMEDIATE COMMERCIAL).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 1.89-acre property located approximately

570 feet west of the northwest corner of 27th Avenue and Baseline Road in a portion of

Section 35, Township 1 North, Range 2 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit

“A,” is hereby changed from “S-1” (Ranch or Farm Residence) to “C-2” (Intermediate

Commercial).

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.”

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 development shall be in general conformance with the site plan date
stamped October 6, 2025, as modified by the following stipulations and approved
by the Planning and Development Department.

2. The development shall be in general conformance with the elevations date
stamped October 22, 2025, as modified by the following stipulations and
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

3. All perimeter street facing building elevations shall contain architectural features
that reflect modern agrarian architecture and shall consist of a minimum 25%
non-stucco accent material including, but not limited to, pitched roof elements,
variation in window size, overhang canopies and exterior accent materials such
as metal, wood, and stone, as approved by the Planning and Development
Department.

4. The landscape plan and sign plan shall be presented for review and comment to
the Laveen Village Planning Committee prior to preliminary site plan approval.

5. Where pedestrian walkways cross a vehicular path, the pathway shall be
constructed of decorative pavers, stamped or colored concrete, or other
pavement treatments that visually contrast parking and drive aisle surfaces, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department.

6. A minimum of 25% of uncovered surface parking lot areas shall be shaded, as
approved by the Planning and Development Department. Shade may be
achieved by structures or by minimum 2-inch caliper, drought tolerant, shade
trees, or a combination thereof.

7. Large canopy evergreen trees shall be planted within the north landscape
setbacks, as approved by the Planning and Development Department.

8. The east, north, and west perimeter landscape setbacks shall be planted with
minimum 2-inch caliper, large canopy, drought-tolerant, shade trees planted 20
feet on center, or in equivalent groupings, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department. Where utility conflicts exist, the developer shall work
with the Planning and Development Department on alternative design solutions
consistent with a pedestrian environment.

9. Bicycle parking shall be provided, consistent with Section 1307.H of the Phoenix
Zoning Ordinance.

10. A 30-foot-wide multi-use trail easement (MUTE) shall be dedicated along




Baseline Road and a minimum 10-foot-wide multi-use trail (MUT) shall be
constructed within the easement in accordance with the MAG supplemental detail
and as approved or modified by the Planning and Development Department.

11. A minimum of two green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) elements for stormwater
management shall be implemented, as approved or modified by the Planning and
Development and/or Street Transportation departments. This includes but is not
limited to stormwater harvesting basins, bioswales, permeable pavement, etc.,
per the Greater Phoenix Metro Green Infrastructure and Low Impact
Development Details for Alternative Stormwater Management.

12. Prior to final site plan approval, documentation shall be provided that
demonstrates a commitment to participate in the City of Phoenix Businesses
Water Efficiency Program for a minimum of 10 years, or as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.

13. A minimum of 10% of the required vehicle parking spaces shall include EV
Ready infrastructure.

14. A minimum 6-foot-wide detached sidewalk separated by a minimum 10-foot-wide
landscape area shall be constructed on the north side of Baseline Road, and
planted as follows:

a. Minimum 2-inch caliper, single-trunk, large canopy, drought-tolerant,
shade trees, planted 20 feet on center, or in equivalent groupings.

b. Drought-tolerant shrubs, accents and vegetative groundcovers
maintained to a maximum height of 24 inches to achieve a minimum of
75% live coverage.

Where utility conflicts exist, the developer shall work with the Planning and
Development Department on alternative design solutions consistent with a
pedestrian environment.

15. All mitigation improvements shall be constructed and/or funded as identified in
the accepted Traffic Impact Analysis dated May 23, 2025.

16. All existing electrical utilities within the public right-of-way shall be
undergrounded, adjacent to the development, or as otherwise approved by
the Street Transportation Department and the Planning and Development
Department. The developer shall coordinate with the affected utility
companies for their review and permitting.

17. Existing SRP facilities along Baseline Road are to be relocated outside of City
right-of-way, unless otherwise approved by the Street Transportation
Department. Relocations that require additional dedications or land transfer




require completion prior to obtaining plat and/or civil plan review approval.

18. Replace unused driveways with sidewalk, curb, and gutter. Also, replace any
broken or out-of-grade curb, gutter, sidewalk, and curb ramps on all streets and
upgrade all off-site improvements to be in compliance with current ADA
guidelines.

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

20. If determined necessary by the Phoenix Archaeology Office, the applicant shall
conduct Phase I data testing and submit an archaeological survey report of the
development area for review and approval by the City Archaeologist prior to
clearing and grubbing, landscape salvage, and/or grading approval.

21. If Phase I data testing is required, and if, upon review of the results from the
Phase I data testing, the City Archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified
archaeologist, determines such data recovery excavations are necessary, the
applicant shall conduct Phase II archaeological data recovery excavations.

22. 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.

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

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 3rd day of December,

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager



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




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-103-25-8

THE WEST 300.00 FEET OF THE EAST 870.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE
SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT
RIVER MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY ARIZONA.
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 55 FEET THEREOF







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Public Hearing - Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Administrative Design
Review - Z-TA-8-25-Y (Ordinance G-7461) - Citywide

Request to hold a public hearing on a proposed text amendment Z-TA-8-25-Y and to
request City Council approval, per the Planning Commission recommendation to
amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance Chapter 12, Section 1203 (Land Use Matrix,
Downtown Code) to allow public utility buildings and facilities to obtain administrative
approval from the City when in full compliance with all applicable development
regulations of the Downtown Code, including any specific Character Area regulations.
Under current ordinance, all public utility buildings and facilities must obtain approval
from the Design Review Committee through a public hearing process.

Summary
The intent of the proposed text amendment is to allow administrative personnel to
review and approve design review plans without a public hearing to ensure proper
compliance with the new state requirements as required by Section 9-500.49, Arizona
Revised Statutes.

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

Staff Recommendation: Approval, per the language proposed in Exhibit A, as reflected
in the staff report (Attachment B).
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended approval, per the language proposed in Exhibit A of the staff report, by
a vote of 8-0 (Attachment C).

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





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




ORDINANCE G-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF PHOENIX, ARIZONA, PART II, CHAPTER 41, THE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX BY AMENDING
SECTION 1203 (LAND USE MATRIX, DOWNTOWN CODE) TO
ADDRESS RECENT CHANGES TO STATE STATUTE REGARDING
DESIGN REVIEW BASED ON OBJECTIVE STANDARDS.

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

follows:

SECTION 1: That Chapter 12, Section 1203.D (Land Use Matrix), is amended to

read as follows:

Section 1203. Land Use Matrix

***

D. Land Use Conditions. The following shall apply to uses that are permitted with
conditions (pc) OR USE PERMIT (up) as indicated with a number that
corresponds with the Land Use Matrix in Section 1203.C:

***

28. Public utility buildings and facilities shall be fully screened and subject to
the following: MUST COMPLY WITH ALL DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED SITE AS SET
FORTH IN THIS CHAPTER, UNLESS THE APPLICANT REQUESTS
THAT THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVE A DESIGN
ALTERNATIVE APPEAL PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1224.A
AS MODIFIED IN (A) THROUGH (F) BELOW:




a. Mixed use opportunities should be prioritized for locating utility
buildings and facilities. The applicant shall submit a written analysis
to the Planning and Development Director or his/her designee of
possible mixed use opportunities to allow for an integrated
development project that minimizes the visual impact of the
proposed utility. (R*)

b. All public utility buildings and facilities AND EQUIPMENT SHALL
BE FULLY SCREENED FROM ABUTTING STREETS, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF REQUIRED UTILITY POLES subject to the
provisions of this land use condition shall be reviewed and acted
upon by the Design Review Committee as a design alternative
appeal, per the provisions of Section 1224.A. (R*)

c. The applicant must hold a public neighborhood meeting and send
written notification of the public neighborhood meeting and the DRC
hearing date to real property owners and to neighborhood
associations registered with the City pursuant to the DRC process
handout.

d. The use cannot be located on a light rail street or adjoining Hance
Park, or only separated by a street from Hance Park, unless the
mixed use opportunity outlined in Section 1203.D.28.a is satisfied.

e. For the required street frontage(s), the Design Review Committee
(DRC) may approve one of the following:

(1) A wall designed to mimic the frontage type which meets the
intent of both the applicable character area and the
streetscape standards, and that appears to be a conforming
building as viewed from street.

(2) A creative use or frontage design alternative that surrounds
the public utility building and facilities, as determined by the
DRC as appropriate for scale of the area.

(3) A micro-park, which shall include at least three of the
following elements, as indicated below, and as determined by
the DRC as appropriate for scale of the area:

A minimum of two of the following installations:




(a) Recreational amenities such as but not limited to a
single basketball hoop, swing, and/or climbing
equipment.

(b) Landscape areas designed to create outdoor rooms or
useful spaces, which may include extensive
hardscape, decorative paving and/or artificial turf.

(c) Shade trees or shade structures.

(d) Lighting and seating designed to discourage camping.

In addition, a minimum of one of the following more
significant scale installations:

(e) A local public art component and/or wall displays for
local public arts organizations.

(f) An educational component that describes the history
or setting.

(g) Facilities for pop-up retail, restaurant, farmers markets,
and/or public events, which may include programming
that changes seasonally, if permitted in the character
area.

(h) Facilities for pets, which may include water sources,
enclosures for off-leash activity, and stations for pet
washing.

f. When considering an alternative frontage proposal in accordance
with Section 1203.D.28.e, the DRC is authorized to provide relief
from other streetscape and frontage zone regulations, including
those indicated as (R). TECHNICAL APPEALS CANNOT BE
APPROVED BY THE DRC.

***




PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 3rd day of December, 2025.



________________________________
MAYOR




ATTEST:



_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:

_________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager




ATTACHMENT B




Staff Report
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
Z-TA-8-25-Y
October 22, 2025


Application No. Z-TA-8-25-Y: Amend the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance Chapter 12,
Section 1203 (Land Use Matrix, Downtown Code) to allow public utility buildings and
facilities to obtain administrative approval from the City when in full compliance with all
applicable development regulations of the Downtown Code, including any specific
Character Area regulations. Under current ordinance, all public utility buildings and
facilities must obtain approval from the Design Review Committee through a public
hearing process.

Staff recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-8-25-Y per the language
proposed in Exhibit A.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
This text amendment is a response to HB 2447 and HB 2928, both approved by the
Arizona Legislature (2024). HB 2447 revised Section 9-500.49, Arizona Revised
Statutes, to change an existing permission to a requirement: specifically, to require
municipalities to allow administrative personnel to review and approve design review
plans without a public hearing. HB 2928 modified HB 2447 to clarify that the
administrative review requirement did not apply to design review plans for properties
designated historic, which often require approval through a public hearing.

The purpose of this text amendment is to revise the zoning ordinance to comply with the
administrative design review requirements of HB 2447 and HB 2928. Staff have
concluded that only one existing review process needs to be modified, that being the
requirement for Design Review Committee to approve any public utility building or
facility (such as a substation) when zoned Downtown Code.

PROPOSAL
Staff recommends the revision of Section 1203.D.28, to introduce an option for the



Staff Report: Z-TA-8-25-Y
October 22, 2025
Page 2

public utility building to be administratively approved if designed in compliance with
development regulations of the Downtown Code applicable to any other type of building
provided on the same site. The process for Design Review Committee approval would
still remain as an option for appeal if the proposed facility cannot or will not comply with
the otherwise-applicable development regulations.

PROPOSED LANGUAGE
The proposed modified language is attached as Exhibit A.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-8-25-Y per the language proposed in Exhibit A.


Writer
C. DePerro
October 22, 2025

Team Leader
T. Gomes

Exhibits

A. Proposed Language




Staff Report: Z-TA-8-25-Y
October 22, 2025
Page 3

Exhibit A

Staff proposed language that may be modified during the public hearing process
is as follows:
Section 1203. Land Use Matrix (Downtown Code)
Amend Section 1203. Land Use Matrix (Downtown Code) to read as follows:

***

Section 1203. Land Use Matrix

***

D. Land Use Conditions. The following shall apply to uses that are permitted with
conditions (pc) OR USE PERMIT (up) as indicated with a number that corresponds
with the Land Use Matrix in Section 1203.C:

***

28. Public utility buildings and facilities shall be fully screened and subject to the
following: MUST COMPLY WITH ALL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED SITE AS SET FORTH IN THIS
CHAPTER, UNLESS THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVE A DESIGN ALTERNATIVE APPEAL
PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1224.A AS MODIFIED IN (A)
THROUGH (F) BELOW:

a. Mixed use opportunities should be prioritized for locating utility
buildings and facilities. The applicant shall submit a written analysis
to the Planning and Development Director or his/her designee of
possible mixed use opportunities to allow for an integrated
development project that minimizes the visual impact of the proposed
utility. (R*)




Staff Report: Z-TA-8-25-Y
October 22, 2025
Page 4

b. All public utility buildings and facilities AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE
FULLY SCREENED FROM ABUTTING STREETS, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF REQUIRED UTILITY POLES subject to the
provisions of this land use condition shall be reviewed and acted
upon by the Design Review Committee as a design alternative
appeal, per the provisions of Section 1224.A. (R*)

c. The applicant must hold a public neighborhood meeting and send
written notification of the public neighborhood meeting and the DRC
hearing date to real property owners and to neighborhood
associations registered with the City pursuant to the DRC process
handout.

d. The use cannot be located on a light rail street or adjoining Hance
Park, or only separated by a street from Hance Park, unless the
mixed use opportunity outlined in Section 1203.D.28.a is satisfied.

e. For the required street frontage(s), the Design Review Committee
(DRC) may approve one of the following:

(1) A wall designed to mimic the frontage type which meets the
intent of both the applicable character area and the
streetscape standards, and that appears to be a conforming
building as viewed from street.

(2) A creative use or frontage design alternative that surrounds
the public utility building and facilities, as determined by the
DRC as appropriate for scale of the area.

(3) A micro-park, which shall include at least three of the following
elements, as indicated below, and as determined by the DRC
as appropriate for scale of the area:

A minimum of two of the following installations:

(a) Recreational amenities such as but not limited to a
single basketball hoop, swing, and/or climbing
equipment.




Staff Report: Z-TA-8-25-Y
October 22, 2025
Page 5

(b) Landscape areas designed to create outdoor rooms or
useful spaces, which may include extensive hardscape,
decorative paving and/or artificial turf.

(c) Shade trees or shade structures.

(d) Lighting and seating designed to discourage camping.

In addition, a minimum of one of the following more significant
scale installations:

(e) A local public art component and/or wall displays for
local public arts organizations.

(f) An educational component that describes the history or
setting.

(g) Facilities for pop-up retail, restaurant, farmers markets,
and/or public events, which may include programming
that changes seasonally, if permitted in the character
area.

(h) Facilities for pets, which may include water sources,
enclosures for off-leash activity, and stations for pet
washing.

f. When considering an alternative frontage proposal in accordance
with Section 1203.D.28.e, the DRC is authorized to provide relief from
other streetscape and frontage zone regulations, including those
indicated as (R). TECHNICAL APPEALS CANNOT BE APPROVED
BY THE DRC.

***




ATTACHMENT C

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
November 6, 2025

ITEM NO: 3
DISTRICT NO.: Citywide
SUBJECT:

Application #: Z-TA-8-25-Y
Request: Text amendment to Section 1203 of the Zoning Ordinance to address
recent changes to state statutes regarding design review based on
objective standards (HB 2447/HB 2928).
Location: Citywide
Applicant: City of Phoenix, Planning Commission
Representative: City of Phoenix, Planning and Development Department

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, per the language proposed in Exhibit A of the Staff Report.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: N/A

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the language proposed in Exhibit A of
the Staff Report.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Vice-Chairman Boyd made a MOTION to approve Z-TA-8-25-Y, per the
language proposed in Exhibit A of the Staff Report.

Maker: Boyd
Second: James
Vote: 8-0
Absent: Gorraiz
Opposition Present: No

Findings: The proposal introduces an option for public utility buildings to be administratively
approved if designed in compliance with development regulations of the Downtown Code
applicable to any other type of building provided on the same site. The process for Design
Review Committee approval would still remain as an option for appeal if the proposed facility
cannot or will not comply with the otherwise-applicable development regulations.

Proposed Language:
Land Use Matrix (Downtown Code)
Amend Section 1203. Land Use Matrix (Downtown Code) to read as follows:

***

Section 1203. Land Use Matrix

***




D. Land Use Conditions. The following shall apply to uses that are permitted with conditions
(pc) OR USE PERMIT (up) as indicated with a number that corresponds with the Land
Use Matrix in Section 1203.C:

***

28. Public utility buildings and facilities shall be fully screened and subject to the
following: MUST COMPLY WITH ALL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED SITE AS SET FORTH IN THIS CHAPTER,
UNLESS THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE APPROVE A DESIGN ALTERNATIVE APPEAL PER THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1224.A AS MODIFIED IN (A) THROUGH (F)
BELOW:

a. Mixed use opportunities should be prioritized for locating utility buildings
and facilities. The applicant shall submit a written analysis to the Planning
and Development Director or his/her designee of possible mixed use
opportunities to allow for an integrated development project that minimizes
the visual impact of the proposed utility. (R*)

b. All public utility buildings and facilities AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE
FULLY SCREENED FROM ABUTTING STREETS, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF REQUIRED UTILITY POLES subject to the provisions of
this land use condition shall be reviewed and acted upon by the Design
Review Committee as a design alternative appeal, per the provisions of
Section 1224.A. (R*)

c. The applicant must hold a public neighborhood meeting and send written
notification of the public neighborhood meeting and the DRC hearing date
to real property owners and to neighborhood associations registered with
the City pursuant to the DRC process handout.

d. The use cannot be located on a light rail street or adjoining Hance Park, or
only separated by a street from Hance Park, unless the mixed use
opportunity outlined in Section 1203.D.28.a is satisfied.

e. For the required street frontage(s), the Design Review Committee (DRC)
may approve one of the following:

(1) A wall designed to mimic the frontage type which meets the intent
of both the applicable character area and the streetscape
standards, and that appears to be a conforming building as viewed
from street.

(2) A creative use or frontage design alternative that surrounds the
public utility building and facilities, as determined by the DRC as
appropriate for scale of the area.

(3) A micro-park, which shall include at least three of the following
elements, as indicated below, and as determined by the DRC as
appropriate for scale of the area:

A minimum of two of the following installations:

(a) Recreational amenities such as but not limited to a single
basketball hoop, swing, and/or climbing equipment.

(b) Landscape areas designed to create outdoor rooms or
useful spaces, which may include extensive hardscape,
decorative paving and/or artificial turf.

(c) Shade trees or shade structures.

(d) Lighting and seating designed to discourage camping.

In addition, a minimum of one of the following more significant
scale installations:

(e) A local public art component and/or wall displays for local
public arts organizations.

(f) An educational component that describes the history or
setting.

(g) Facilities for pop-up retail, restaurant, farmers markets,
and/or public events, which may include programming that
changes seasonally, if permitted in the character area.

(h) Facilities for pets, which may include water sources,
enclosures for off-leash activity, and stations for pet
washing.

f. When considering an alternative frontage proposal in accordance with
Section 1203.D.28.e, the DRC is authorized to provide relief from other
streetscape and frontage zone regulations, including those indicated as
(R). TECHNICAL APPEALS CANNOT BE APPROVED BY THE DRC.

***

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Saneeya Mir at 602-686-6461, saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov, TTY: Use 7-1-1.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
Public Hearing and Resolution Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025) (Resolution 22348) - Citywide

This report requests to hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution on the City's
historic preservation plan update, PreserveHistoricPHX 2025.

Summary
The City of Phoenix adopted its first comprehensive historic preservation plan,
PreserveHistoricPHX, in 2015. PreserveHistoricPHX 2025, a plan update, provides the
opportunity to celebrate the achievements made after the original plan adoption,
identify challenges, and assess new opportunities to further historic preservation in
Phoenix. PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 is intended as a more specific plan to augment
PlanPHX 2025 and to protect and promote the historic and archaeological resources of
Phoenix.

The plan update initiative began when the City hired a consultant to conduct
stakeholder meetings to identify challenges and create a series of recommendations to
advance historic preservation in Phoenix based on practices occurring across the
country. The City began a public engagement effort based on the findings of this study
with a series of public meetings and a publicly posted survey from the fall of 2023
through the summer of 2024. The City Archaeology Office also provided
recommendations to the historic preservation office because the protection of
archaeological resources is a key component of historic preservation, as reflected in
the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 8 of the Zoning Ordinance).

These engagement efforts revealed that the original five goals of the 2015 plan
continue to have relevance:

1. Protect Archaeological Resources
2. Protect Historic Resources
3. Explore Preservation Incentives
4. Develop Community Awareness
5. Promote Partnerships



PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 outlines new possible policies, actions, and tools that can
be used to achieve these goals over the next decade (Attachment A-Exhibit A).

Concurrence/Previous Action
Staff recommended approval of the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan (Attachment B).

VPC Action: 14 Village Planning Committees (VPCs) considered the request. Two
VPCs recommended approval per the staff recommendation and 12 recommended
approval per the staff recommendation, with direction, as reflected in Attachment C.

HPC Action: The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) considered the request on
July 14, 2025 and recommended approval per the staff recommendation by a vote of 8
-0.

PC Action: In response to recommendations from the VPCs and HPC, staff developed
the Addendum A Staff Report (Attachment D). Modifications to the draft plan included
additional information regarding the benefits of historic preservation, a revised
acknowledgements page, information pertaining to the possible impact of Arizona
Revised Statutes Section 9-462.13 (Middle Housing Law) to historic districts, and new
tools such as the creation of enhanced design guidelines. The Planning Commission
(PC) considered the request on September 4, 2025, and recommended approval per
the Addendum A Staff Report, by a vote of 6-0 as reflected in Attachment E.

Subcommittee considered the request on October 15, 2025, and recommended
approval per the Planning Commission recommendation by a vote of 4-0.

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





ATTACHMENT A




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




RESOLUTION


A RESOLUTION ADOPTING
PRESERVEHISTORICPHX 2025,




R
AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN FOR
PHOENIX.

____________




AF
as follows:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX



SECTION 1. That PreserveHistoricPHX 2025, an Historic




T
Preservation Plan for Phoenix, attached hereto as Attachment A, is hereby

approved and adopted.

PASSED by the Council of the City of Phoenix this 19th day of

November 2025.



MAYOR




DATTEST:



APPROVED AS TO FORM:



REVIEWED BY:
City Clerk



Acting City Attorney



City Manager




ATTACHMENT A - EXHIBIT A - SECOND DRAFT - October 23, 2025




Preserve
H S O I I T R C

PHX

Historic Preservation Plan | 2025
Preserve
H S O I
I T R C

PHX
Cover images courtesy of Larry Mischler




-2-
Acknowledgments
Mayor Historic Preservation Commission
Kate Gallego Tricia Amato, Chair
Francesca Miller, Vice Chair
District 1: Chad Gestson
Vice Mayor Ann O’Brien Dan Klocke
District 2: Christina Noble
Councilmember Jim Waring Brenda Thomson
District 3: Keely Varvel-Hartsell
Councilmember Deborah Stark
District 4: Planning & Development
Councilmember Laura Pastor Department
District 5: Joshua Bednarek, Director

Councilmember Betty Guardado
District 6: Historic Preservation Office
Councilmember Kevin Robinson Helana Ruter, Historic Preservation Officer

District 7: Kevin Weight, Principal Planner

Councilmember Anna Hernandez Jodey Elsner, Planner II

District 8: Maura Jackson, Planner II
Councilmember Kesha Hodge Washington Emma Collins, Planner I
Cletus Montoya, Planner I
City Manager’s Office Bridget Collins, Secretary III
Jeffrey Barton, City Manager
Alan Stephenson, Deputy City Manager City Archaeologist
Christopher Schwartz, Ph.D.


Editing and Layout by City Clerk
Department
Printing, Design & Mailing Services




-3-
Contents
Acknowledgments................................................................................................ 3
Contents............................................................................................................... 4
Land Acknowledgment......................................................................................... 5
Executive Summary ............................................................................................. 6
Purpose of the Plan .............................................................................................. 9
Public Benefits of Historic Preservation............................................................ 10
Legal Basis for Historic Preservation . ............................................................... 12
Preservation in Phoenix: A Timeline. ................................................................. 16
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program............................................................ 23
Plan Accomplishments and Evolution................................................................ 32
Current Preservation Planning. ......................................................................... 39
Moving Forward (Vision Statement)..................................................................48
With Connections to the Past.............................................................................50
Mission Statement ............................................................................................. 53
Goal 1: Protect Archaeological Resources . .......................................................54
Goal 2: Protect Historic Resources .................................................................... 56
Goal 3: Explore Preservation Incentives . ..........................................................58
Goal 4: Develop Community Awareness ............................................................60
Goal 5: Promote Partnerships ........................................................................... 62
Bibliography & Further Reading........................................................................64
PlaceEconomics Report (2023)..........................................................................66
Archaeological Site Etiquette Guide................................................................ 106




-4-
Land Acknowledgement



Land Acknowledgment
The City of Phoenix acknowledges that Phoenix is located within the homeland of the
O’Odham and Piipaash peoples and their ancestors, who have inhabited this landscape
from time immemorial to present day. The landscape is sacred and reflects cultural
values central to the O’Odham and Piipaash way of life and their self-definition. This
acknowledgment demonstrates our commitment to work in partnership with the
ancestral Indigenous communities to foster understanding, appreciation and respect
for this heritage. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (SRPMIC) and the
Gila River Indian Community (GRIC) claim aboriginal title (Original Indian Title) to
lands exclusively used and occupied by the Akimel O’Odham and Piipaash equaling
3,751,000 acres of South Central Arizona. Ancestral O’Odham settlements are
located throughout the entirety of present-day Phoenix. This land continues to be
spiritually connected to the O’Odham of the SRPMIC and the GRIC, both of which are
confederations of two unique cultures with their own languages, customs, cultures,
religions and histories. Both the O’Odham and the Piipaash are oral history cultures
and the song culture of these people are specifically tied to tangible places. These
places can be natural landforms like the mountains that surround our valleys, but they
also include archaeological sites because they are part of a cultural landscape
associated with specific historic, cultural and religious values. Those places are
tangible reminders to the O’Odham and Piipaash about shared attitudes, goals and
practices that characterize who they are, where they belong and how they related to
each other in the past, continuing today and into the future. The City of Phoenix has
preserved and continues to steward several Ancestral O’Odham sites and landscapes
and is committed to honor the vital meaning and intent of this land acknowledgment.




-5-
Executive Summary
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 is an update to the City’s first comprehensive historic
preservation plan, which was adopted by the Phoenix City Council in 2015. This
document builds off the framework of the existing plan while providing space for
new ideas and tools to guide the goals and objectives of the City’s historic
preservation program over the coming decade. PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 pulls
the threads from the past through to today to help us connect with our historic
and cultural resources as they play a key role in the vision of PlanPHX, the City’s
2025 General Plan update, to become A More Connected Phoenix.

PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 demonstrates the benefits of historic preservation as
they relate to PlanPHX’s five core values: create a network of vibrant cores,
centers and corridors; connect people and places; strengthen our local economy;
celebrate our diverse communities and neighborhoods; and build the most
sustainable desert city. This plan gives a summary of the legal basis for historic
preservation, a timeline of past preservation efforts in the city and a brief
overview of the City’s historic preservation program.

PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 provides a summary of accomplishments achieved in
historic preservation in Phoenix after the adoption of the 2015 plan, which set the
stage for the current planning effort. Through a study completed by the
internationally recognized historic preservation consulting firm, PlaceEconomics,
titled Tools, Strategies, Policies, Incentives for Historic Preservation in Phoenix (see
Appendix B), and a new public engagement process with Phoenix residents, it
became clear that the five goals identified in the 2015 PreserveHistoricPHX plan
are still relevant today. New opportunities to achieve these goals have emerged,
and this plan update will propose new tools to move forward to achieve the vision
of PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 over the next decade.




-6-
Executive Summary




Goals
Goals
Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5
Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5




Protect Protect Historic Explore Develop Promote
Protect
Archaeological Protect Historic
Resources Explore
Preservation Develop
Community Promote
Partnerships
Archaeological
Resources Resources Preservation
Incentives Community
Awareness Partnerships
Resources Incentives Awareness


-7-
-8-
Purpose of the Plan


Purpose of the Plan
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 is a long-term vision for the City’s historic preservation program,
identifying the goals and associated tools for shaping Phoenix’s continued growth over the next
decade. This plan is a supplement to the General Plan for the City of Phoenix, PlanPHX 2025, and
highlights how historic preservation and heritage resources, including buildings, structures,
objects, sites, traditional cultural places (TCPs) and districts, are an integral part of the vision and
core values of PlanPHX 2025.


Connections to History, Culture, Identity and the
Material past are fundamental to the city's vision
of creating A MORE CONNECTED PHOENIX.
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 pinpoints the ways in which heritage resources contribute to
economic development, the growth of small and legacy-owned business, connectivity,
neighborhood diversity, sustainability and building community and civic pride nesting into
the five core values of PlanPhx 2025 to:




Create a Network Connect People Strengthen Celebrate our Build the Most
of Vibrant Cores, & Places our Local Diverse Sustainable
Centers and Economy Communities and Desert City
Corridors Neighborhoods

What does the historic preservation plan do?
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 does the following:
Í Provides the background for historic preservation and the City’s historic preservation program.
Í Highlights the issues and concerns of residents and professionals regarding the preservation and
enhancement of cultural and historic resources.
Í Details the City’s historic preservation goals.
Í Recommends the implementation of specific actions for achieving those goals.
Í Guides future historic preservation projects and programs in the city.

1 The term Historic Preservation can be used to encompass the planning and management of cultural resources on a timeline of precontact (prehistoric
and protohistoric or ethnohistoric), and historic periods (typology developed by archaeologists). Resources from the prehistoric and protohistoric
periods are typically classified as “cultural” where those from the historic period are classified as “historic”. The term “heritage resources” is used to
refer to both cultural and historic resources.




-9-
Public Benefits of
Historic Preservation
Historic preservation offers numerous benefits to the people of Phoenix—
cultural, economic and environmental. Sustaining our cultural heritage
advances public goals including those set forth in the City’s General Plan,
PlanPHX 2025. These goals and examples of how historic preservation
contributes to them2 are noted below:




Create a Network of Vibrant Cores, Center &
Corridors
The historic neighborhoods of Phoenix are dense—1,000 people per square
mile more dense than residential neighborhoods in the rest of the city.
Commercial areas with a concentration of heritage buildings, such as the
historic Grand Avenue or Miracle Mile corridors, are magnets for small
businesses, legacy businesses, and businesses in the creative and technology
sectors.
Legacy businesses—those in business for 25 years or longer—make up 12% of
businesses in heritage commercial areas, versus 3% in the city overall.

Connect People & Places
Historic places—including buildings, landscapes, archaeological sites,
memorials and public art—honor the contributions and experiences of
previous generations and contribute to a sense of place as well as unique local
cultures and identities.
Heritage sites, parks and neighborhoods attract residents and visitors alike,
connecting people to the places that make Phoenix special.
Most of Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods and parks are located along public
transit corridors.
Residents of Phoenix’s historic districts live closer to museums, libraries and
other cultural institutions compared to the city overall.



2 The examples are key findings in Preservation Phoenix Style: A Study of the Impacts of Historic Preservation in Phoenix, prepared by PlaceEconomics for the



-10-
Public Benefits of Historic Preservation

Strengthen Our Local Economy
During the real estate crisis which accompanied the Great Recession,
foreclosure rates in historic neighborhoods were measurably lower than
the rest of the city, a pattern that has continued in every year since.
Even during recent years of a boom cycle in real estate, property values in
historic districts have outperformed the city as a whole.
Job growth rates for businesses in the creative and knowledge sectors,
which prefer to locate in heritage areas and buildings, have all been higher
over the past decade in heritage commercial areas than in the city as a whole.
Phoenix’s heritage commercial areas are home to 20% of all jobs in arts,
entertainment and recreation.

Celebrate Our Diverse Communities &
Neighborhoods
Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods are great models of diversity, not only in
architectural style or housing unit type, but also in resident demographics.
As a share of housing stock, Phoenix’s historic districts have 6% of 2-to-4-unit
structures versus 1% for the remainder of the city. A much wider range of
housing unit options yields a diversity of housing and rent prices.
Historic districts have both a slightly higher share of high income and low-
income residents as compared to the city overall reflecting economic
diversity.
With rapid population growth between 2010 and 2020; Phoenix’s historic
districts gained fewer white residents and lost fewer residents of other races
than the rest of Phoenix, maintaining levels of population diversity in these
areas.
The city’s inventory of older housing stock is providing affordable housing
largely without subsidy, likely due to its age, condition and smaller unit size.

Build the Most Sustainable Desert City
Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods are significantly more pedestrian, bike and
transit friendly than the city has a whole.
The tree cover typically found in historic areas has six times the value of air
quality benefits per acre, five times the value of water saved and sequesters
five times the carbon dioxide of the rest of the city.
Reusing existing buildings encourages adaptive reuse and diverts waste from
our landfills while also reducing carbon emissions that result from new
construction.
These are only some of the benefits that historic preservation offers to the
people of Phoenix, demonstrating the synergy between conserving our
heritage and other worthwhile goals like connectivity, economic prosperity,
diversity and sustainability.


-11-
Legal Basis for Historic Preservation
The legal basis for historic preservation is grounded in federal, state and local policy. Below is
a summary of key historic preservation laws and programs that influence the work of the



Federal
1892 Casa Grande Reservation: President Benjamin Harrison proclaimed the 480 acres around
Casa Grande (Siwañ Wa'a Ki) a prehistoric and cultural reserve – the first such designation in the
United States.




Arizona Historical Society,
J.W. Hoover Lantern Slides Collection,
Casa Grande Ruins



1906 Antiquities Act: This was one of the first pieces of federal legislation aimed at protecting
Precontact Native American sites and artifacts on federal lands in the American West. The act
authorized permits for legitimate archaeological investigations and penalties for taking or
destroying antiquities without permission. It also authorized the president to proclaim “historic
landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures and other objects of historic or scientific interest”
as national monuments.




-12-
Legal Basis for Historic Preservation
1916 National Park Service Organic Act: Congress created the National Park Service (NPS) with the
passage of this law (16 U.S.C. l 2 3, and 4). A un­­it of the D­epartment of the Interior, the NPS is the
federal agency responsible for administering and implementing the National Historic Preservation Act,
(see below). As the lead federal preservation agency, the NPS sets the standards and guidelines
for identifying and treating historic and cultural resources, and it maintains the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP) (see below). It also offers technical support and administers grant funding for state
and tribal historic preservation offices and Native Hawaiian officials.

1935 Historic Sites Act: This act (Public Law 74-292) declared that “it is a national policy to preserve for
public use historic sites, buildings and objects of national significance for the inspiration and benefit of the
people of the United States.” The law authorized the NPS to research, survey and document historic and
archaeologic sites.

1966 National Historic Preservation Act: President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) into law on October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-665). The preamble to the law
declared that the historical and cultural past of the nation should be preserved as ‘a living part’ of
community life in order to ‘give a sense of orientation to the American people.’ The NHPA established the
NRHP and led to the creation of state, county and municipal historic preservation programs nationwide.
Section 106 of the NHPA ensures historic preservation review of any development project utilizing federal
dollars, approval, or land.

1966 Department of Transportation Act: This policy intends to preserve natural and human-made sites
along highway routes. Section 4(f) of this act specifies preservation responsibilities of the Secretary of
Transportation.

1966 Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act: This act directs the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development “to assert an interest in historic preservation and reduce its Urban
Renewal activities by clearing older buildings.” It encourages existing housing to be recycled and reused
instead of demolished and replaced.

U.S. Department of the Interior: The Department of the Interior (DOI) is the federal department
responsible for establishing professional standards and providing advice on the preservation and
protection of all cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP. The Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties apply to all proposed development involving federal
funds and are intended to be applied to a wide variety of resource types, including buildings, sites,
structures, objects and districts. Many historic preservation programs across the United States base their
state and local design guidelines on these federal standards.

Certified Local Government Program: Amendments to the NHPA in 1980 broadened the federal-state
preservation partnership to include local partners (towns, cities and counties), which led to the creation of
the national Certified Local Government (CLG) program. This federal program is administered by the NPS,
while the CLG is typically a local historic preservation office or planning department. CLGs must have
established a preservation ordinance and a formalized means of identifying, registering and protecting
cultural resources within their boundaries. These certified governments perform much of the historic
property survey work in Arizona. There are 30 cities and one county (Pima) in Arizona with certified
historic preservation programs; Phoenix became a CLG in 1988.



-13-
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is an
independent federal agency that “promotes the preservation, enhancement and sustainable use of our
nation’s diverse historic resources3 , and advises the President and Congress on national historic
preservation policy.” The ACHP administers Section 106 of the NHPA, offers trainings and conducts
outreach.

State
Arizona State Museum: In 1893, the Arizona Territorial Legislature created the first and largest
anthropology museum in the Southwest—the Arizona State Museum. The museum is the state’s official
permitting agency for archaeological and paleontological projects and the official archaeological
repository. It administers the Arizona Antiquities Act and helps state and federal agencies enforce related
legislation.

Arizona Antiquities Act: In 1927 the state legislature passed an antiquities act which required that fifty
percent of archaeological artifacts or fossils recovered from sites on federal or state land be deposited in a
public museum in the state of Arizona and established the requirement for persons or corporations to
obtain a permit from the University of Arizona and the relevant county board of supervisors prior to survey
or excavation. The legislature amended the act in 1960 giving oversight to the Arizona State Museum
which was authorized to create regulations and professional standards for archaeological practice.
Further amendments were made to the law in 1973 and 1990.

Arizona State Parks Board: In 1957, preservationists were part of a coalition that successfully lobbied the
state legislature to create the Arizona State Parks Board. While the Parks Board focused primarily on
acquiring parks and establishing camping, picnicking and other recreational services, prominent Arizona
historian and Parks Board member Bert Fireman persuaded the board to include several historic sites
among the first state parks.

Arizona State Historic Preservation Office: The NHPA mandated the creation of state historic
preservation offices (SHPOs) that would work with the NPS and the ACHP to establish a list of properties
important to the nation’s history. The act also mandated state historic preservation offices to work with
federal agencies on preventing the destruction of these properties and on administering a program of
grants-in-aid to ensure the properties’ preservation. Arizona Governor Samuel Pearson Goddard, Jr.
(1965-1967), appointed Arizona State Parks Director Dennis McCarthy as the first state historic
preservation officer.

State Historic Preservation Plan: Preparation of the first statewide historic preservation plan began in
1969. The National Park Service approved Arizona’s Interim Plan for Historic Preservation in December
1970, which allowed the state to continue receiving its allocation from the Historic Preservation Fund. This
plan established a process for identifying and nominating properties within Arizona to the NRHP.

Arizona Register of Historic Places: The Arizona State Legislature established the Arizona Register of
Historic Places in 1974. This is the state’s register of historic sites, buildings, structures, objects and
districts. The list is administered by the SHPO.




-14-
Legal Basis for Historic Preservation
State Historic Property Tax Reclassification Program: This program began in 1979 and
encourages preservation in the private sector by reducing tax assessments for owner-occupied
residential and income producing properties.

State Historic Preservation Act: This act, signed in 1982, encouraged the preservation of
historic resources by state agencies and expanded the role of SHPO to include reviewing plans by
state agencies to determine whether such plans would adversely affect historic properties.

Municipal Planning: In Arizona, historic preservation is accomplished through the zoning power,
which allows local governments to regulate the use of property. State legislation [Arizona
Revised Statutes, Section 9-462.01(A)(10)] enables cities, towns and counties to pass zoning
regulations, including for the purpose of establishing districts of historical significance.


Local
Phoenix Historic Preservation Ordinance: In 1984, Mayor Terry Goddard and the City Council
created an Ad Hoc Committee on Historic Preservation, which recommended, among other
things, the adoption of a city historic preservation ordinance. Adopted in 1985, the preservation
ordinance (Chapter 8 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance) provided for the establishment of historic
preservation overlay zoning and spelled out the duties of the Historic Preservation Commission
(HPC) and Historic Preservation Office (HPO).

Historic Preservation Commission: Appointed by the City Council, the HPC is composed of nine
individuals with demonstrated special interest, knowledge or experience in historic preservation.
At least one member of the commission must fulfill each of the following roles: registered
architect, real estate professional, archaeologist, and historian.

Phoenix Historic Property Register: The ordinance also codified the criteria for listing
properties, the effects of historic-preservation zoning, the processes for reviewing projects for
Certificates of No Effect and Certificates of Appropriateness, and the steps necessary when
considering a property for demolition and/or removal from its original site.




-15-
Preservation in Phoenix: A Timeline
Phoenix’s diverse communities have preserved their history, culture and sacred places
in a multitude of ways over time, both within and outside of formal preservation
programs. The following is a timeline of key events that have shaped preservation
policy in Phoenix today. It is not a comprehensive list of all preservation activities that
have occurred within the city. 4


1924: A group of Phoenicians, with the help of U.S. Senator Carl Hayden, purchases 13,000
acres from the federal government to create what is now known as South Mountain Park and
Preserve. The park is home to thousands of petroglyphs created by the Huhugam and their
descendants, the ancestral O’Odham.




South Mountain
Park & Preserve

1924-1929: The City of Phoenix acquires a Huhugam (Hohokam era) platform mound and the
surrounding Park of Four Waters, which contains the remains of major irrigation canals built
by the Huhugam on the north side of the Salt River. Opening in 1929 as the Pueblo Grande
Museum (now S'eḏav Va'aki Museum), it is an archaeological site museum and repository open
to the public.

1938: Pioneers’ Cemetery Association (PCA) forms to preserve the seven historic cemeteries
near the State Capitol Complex. The original PCA disbanded at the onset of World War II but
was reestablished in 1983.

4 "A comprehensive history of preservation in Phoenix can be found in the 2015 PreserveHistoricPHX plan."




-16-
Preservation in Phoenix: A Timeline
1942: The City of Phoenix and Arizona State Museum initiate the preservation and
restoration of an adobe building believed to be the home of Phoenix pioneer Darrell
Duppa but was more likely a barn built by subsequent property owner John B.
Montgomery to support his farming operations there.

1954: The Camelback Improvement Association forms in opposition to construction
on Camelback Mountain.

1966: Congress passes the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Arizona SHPO
is established. Pueblo Grande (now S'eḏav Va’aki) is the first property in Phoenix to be
added to the National Register of Historic Places and is designated as a National
Historic Landmark.

1968: Camelback Mountain is donated to the City of Phoenix after a successful
campaign led by Barry Goldwater and the Save Camelback Mountain Foundation.

1972: Funding to protect urban mountains as parks is allocated through a voter-
approved bond.




Rosson House




1976: Heritage Square in downtown Phoenix is established as part of the National
Bicentennial Celebration; the Junior League of Phoenix and former Phoenix Mayor John
Driggs lead the effort. Arizona: Past & Future Foundation is created in opposition to
proposed freeway construction plans and with the purpose of preserving historic and
archaeological resources along the route.


-17-
1978: The City adopts the Special Conservation District Ordinance, which created a
mechanism for neighborhoods to have an organized voice in planning their growth.

1979: The state’s first preservation nonprofit organization, the Arizona Preservation
Foundation, is established to promote and protect Arizona’s historic resources. The
Phoenix Historic Building Survey is completed.




Encanto-Palmcroft


1983: The Roosevelt and Encanto-Palmcroft neighborhoods are listed on the National
Register, the first residential historic districts to be designated in Phoenix.

1984: Phoenix Mayor Terry Goddard assembles the Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on
Historic Preservation, which spurs the formation of Phoenix’s historic preservation
program the following year. The Junior League completes the Historic Phoenix
Commercial Properties Survey.

1985: City Council adopts a local historic preservation ordinance that establishes the
Phoenix Historic Preservation Commission and the Phoenix Historic Properties
Register. The Historic Preservation Commission is formed and holds its first meeting.
National Register.


-18-
Preservation in Phoenix: A Timeline


1986: The City’s first Historic Preservation Officer is hired. The first three historic
districts (Roosevelt, Coronado and Phoenix Union High School), as well as 15
individual properties, are listed on the Phoenix Historic Properties Register.

1989: City Council passes a provision requiring review of demolition permits for
structures older than 50 years old, although it is later removed due to concerns about
its impact on private property rights. Voters approve $15 million in bond funds for
historic preservation. The funds allow the City to hire new staff members, purchase
and stabilize Tovrea Castle and establish new programs to provide grants to owners
of historic buildings.




Tovrea Castle


1990: The Phoenix Historic Preservation Office creates the Exterior Rehabilitation
Assistance, Demonstration Project and Low-Income Historic Housing Rehabilitation
grant programs with remaining bond funds. A voter initiative creates the Arizona
State Parks Heritage Fund.

1992: The Arizona Heritage Alliance forms to protect, preserve and enhance Arizona’s
historic, cultural and natural heritage. Its focus is to protect the Arizona State Parks
Heritage Fund.


-19-
1993: Historic Homes of Phoenix: An Architectural Guide is published. It wins the 1994
Governor’s Award for Historic Preservation in the education category.

1996: The City acquires Phoenix Indian School, a Bureau of Indian Affairs-operated
school from 1891 to 1990. Three of the school’s 29 structures are spared from
demolition during the creation of a 73-acre park known as Steele Indian School Park
and are added to the National Register of Historic Places. The same year, the George
Washington Carver Museum and Cultural Center is established to honor and share
African American heritage, art, and culture in Phoenix.




Steele Indian School Park

1997: The City of Phoenix is presented with a National Preservation Honor Award for
its Bond Program, which is recognized as the “largest municipal historic preservation
fund in the nation.” The Phoenix Historic Neighborhoods Coalition forms, initially
meeting as a group of just a few historic neighborhoods and going on to obtain non-
profit status in 2013.

2000: The City Council requests that the City Manager appoint a panel of citizens to
perform a comprehensive review of the City's Historic Preservation Program, which is
now 15 years old. The Ad Hoc Historic Preservation Advisory Panel meets over the
course of a year and forwards a set of recommendations to the City Council, 11 of
which are formally adopted.

2001: Phoenix voters approve an additional $14.2 million in bond funds for the City’s
Historic Preservation Program.


-20-
Preservation in Phoenix: A Timeline
2004: City completes a survey of African American historic properties, initiated at the
urging of the Ad Hoc Historic Preservation Advisory Panel. Modern Phoenix
Neighborhood Network is founded.

2005: A coalition of advocates led by the Arizona Asian American Association fights to
save the Sun Mercantile Building, one of the last remaining historic Chinese groceries
in downtown Phoenix.

2006: The Hispanic Historic Property Survey is completed. Another round of bond
funding is approved, allocating $13.1 million to historic preservation and establishing
the Warehouse & Threatened Building grant program. Arizona voters pass
Proposition 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act, which curtailed historic
designation activities.

2007: The Historic Preservation Office completes a survey of Asian American historic
properties in Phoenix


Japanese Free Methodist/
Vietnamese United Baptist




In 1932, the Arizona Free Methodist Church for Japanese opened across the street from the
Japanese Hall on Indian School Road east of 43rd Avenue. Upon the relocation of Japanese
Americans during WWII toMayer and Poston Internment camps, the church’s congregation
was split. After the war ended, the church returned to order. In 1965, a new church was built
a block north of its original location. The congregation relocated classrooms and a social hall
from their former Indian School location to their new two-acre property at 4143 N 43rd
Avenue and constructed a new church sanctuary. The Vietnamese United Baptist Church
acquired the property in 2016.

-21-
2011: Midcentury Marvels: Commercial Architecture of Phoenix 1945-1975 is
published and wins the Governor’s Heritage Preservation Grand Honor Award.

2012: Preserve PHX is formed partly due to the urgency created by the threatened
demolition of the David and Gladys Wright House. The organization is a grassroots
network of advocates for the protection of historic places throughout Phoenix.
Members of Modern Phoenix create the Postwar Architecture Task Force of Greater
Phoenix.

2015: City Council approves Phoenix’s first comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan.

2016: City of Phoenix enacts a citywide 30-day demolition hold for commercial
properties 50 years of age or older and for properties previously determined eligible
for the Phoenix Register of Historic Places. It is later amended with the 2018 building
code adoption to include all properties over 50 years in the Downtown Code Area.

2021: City Council adopts the PlaceEconomics Report Preservation Phoenix Style
which documents the historic preservation efforts of the City and the positive
impacts that historic preservation has had on the community. City Council also
appropriates $200,000 from the General Fund to renew the Exterior Rehabilitation
Grant Program.

2022: City Council appropriates $500,000 from the General Fund to renew the
Threatened Building Grant Program (renamed the Phil Gordon Threatened Building
Grant program in 2023). Rehabilitation begins on Santa Rita Hall, the site of Cesar
Chavez’s 24-day fast in 1972 during which he protested new anti-union legislation in
Arizona, a policy harmful to U.S. farmworkers. The building was listed on the Phoenix
Historic Property Register in 2007.

2023: Voters approve an additional $5 million in historic preservation bond funds for
capital improvements to City-owned historic buildings and to renew the historic
preservation grant programs. Pueblo Grande Museum and Archaeological Park is
renamed S'eḏav Va'aki Museum, which means “Central Vahki” in O’Odham, referring
to the large platform mound preserved at the site. The renaming highlights the
connection that the site has with both the Ancestral Sonoran Desert People and the
native communities that currently live around the Phoenix metropolitan area,
including local O'Odham and Piipaash communities.




-22-
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program



Phoenix Historic
Preservation Program
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) works to protect and enhance historic neighborhoods,
buildings and sites in Phoenix. The HPO works closely with the Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC) to identify and designate eligible properties and districts for listing on the
Phoenix Historic Property Register (PHPR). Protection is provided to designated properties
through City review and approval of exterior alterations to buildings and demolition requests.
The HPO also administers Historic Preservation grant funds that support several financial
assistance programs for historic properties.


Historic Property Inventory, Surveys and Contexts
As of October 2024, the City of Phoenix’s inventory of historic properties consisted of 988 entries, made up
of approximately 10,000 individual resources – buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts. The inventory
includes properties listed on both the PHPR and the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It also
includes properties that have been recommended eligible for listing but have not yet been added to a historic
register. The inventory is housed in a geodatabase, which is maintained by City staff and available to the
public online through Phoenix’s My Community Map and Open Data Portal.5
New properties are added to the inventory primarily through the completion of historic property surveys.
Depending on the purpose of the survey, it may attempt to identify every eligible historic property in the
survey area, or it may focus on the eligibility of properties relating to a particular theme (such as commerce,
agriculture, or ethnic heritage). The historic context is a key component to the survey, as it provides the
basis for evaluating the significance of properties identified in the survey. Each context is based on a
specific theme and the geographical and chronological limits of that theme. Without historic contexts and
their accompanying surveys, proper identification and evaluation of historic properties could not take
place.

Phoenix Historic Property Register
Properties listed on the PHPR are rezoned with a Historic Preservation (HP) or Historic Preservation-Landmark
(HP-L) zoning overlay. The landmark designation is used to recognize exceptionally significant historic properties.
The procedures to establish an HP or HP-L overlay are described in Sections 807 and 808 of the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance. HP and HP-L rezoning applications are presented to the Historic Preservation Commission, Village
Planning Committee, Planning Commission and City Council at public hearings; the City Council makes the final
decision to designate properties and list them in the PHPR. Once rezoning is approved, the properties are
formally protected through a special permit review process administered by the HPO. These properties are also
eligible for financial incentives offered by the City of Phoenix. A total of 36 residential historic districts, 9
non-residential historic districts (4 of which are landmarks) and 232 individually listed properties (12 of which
are landmarks) have been listed in the PHPR since 1986.

5 The URL for My Community Map is https://www.phoenix.gov/pdd/mycommunitymap.
The URL for the City of Phoenix Open Data Portal is https://www.phoenixopendata.com.




-23-
Individual Historic
Properties




Non-Residential
Historic Districts




Residential Historic
Districts




-24-
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program

The HPO launched its efforts to identify and set evaluation requirements for
post-World War II resources in Phoenix by contracting for a multi-family
property historic context covering the period from 1945-1980. The context
identified factors that shaped the development of multi-family housing as well
as the prominent types of housing, duplex to high rises, and architectural styles.
The document provides an analytical framework for the identification and
evaluation of historic-age properties for eligibility for designation in the PHPR.




National Register of Historic Places
Properties are listed in the National Register through a nomination process. Information about preparing a
National Register nomination is described in the “How to Complete the National Register Registration
Form” bulletin published by the National Park Service. Nominations for properties located in the city of
Phoenix are reviewed by the City Historic Preservation Office, the State Historic Preservation Office, the
Arizona Historic Sites Review Committee, and the Keeper of the NRHP (located in Washington D.C.) The
Keeper ultimately determines whether a property is historic and should be listed in the register.
Contributors to National Register listed districts and individually listed properties are eligible for the
Arizona State Historic Property Tax Reclassification Program.




-25-
Design Review
The HPO recognizes that change is inevitable and that some alterations to historic properties can
support their viability and longevity. Design review is a critical part of protecting those elements of
historic properties and districts that make them unique and important while charting a fair process
that allows for sensitive alterations. For properties within a historic preservation overlay district, the
HPO reviews all exterior work that requires a building permit. For construction projects, there are
two types of approvals: a Certificate of No Effect and a Certificate of Appropriateness.
A Certificate of No Effect may be issued for minor work that does not materially change the historic
character of the property and is clearly within the adopted design guidelines for historic properties.
These certificates are frequently approved at the time of the initial request.
A Certificate of Appropriateness is required if the proposed work will make material changes that
may alter, diminish, eliminate or affect the historic or architectural character of the property in any
way. Larger additions and street-visible changes fall into this category. These certificates require a
pre-application meeting and a public hearing to determine whether the proposed project meets the
“General Design Guidelines for Historic Preservation” and the “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for Rehabilitation” (links in Appendix A).
The HPO also reviews Requests for Demolition as part of its design review responsibilities.

30-Day Demolition Hold
All buildings in the City’s inventory of historic properties, all commercial properties at least 50 years
old, and all buildings 50 years old or older in the Downtown Code area are subject to a 30-day hold
prior to demolition. During the 30-day hold staff conducts research as necessary to make a
recommendation of eligibility for historic designation which is circulated to the members of the HPC
and historic preservation advocacy organizations.

Technical Advice
The HPO provides information about preserving, rehabilitating and restoring historic buildings. Staff
offers technical advice on preservation projects to help identify and determine the best approach for
resolving common issues before beginning work. The HPO also publishes guides for historic-property
owners on such topics as the appropriate treatment for historic window repairs, masonry cleaning
and repointing, paint removal and wood shingle roofs. In addition, the NPS publishes Preservation
Briefs that address treatment of various traditional building materials, specific architectural features,
the reuse of different building types and broader themes such as how to understand architectural
character and make historic buildings accessible.

National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Review
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended 2004) requires federal
agencies to consider the effects on historic properties of projects they carry out, assist, permit,
license or approve (undertakings). The Phoenix HPO completes these assessments to identify and
evaluate historic properties, assess the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, and
attempt to negotiate an outcome that will balance project needs and historic preservation values. The
HPO coordinates with other City departments such as Neighborhood Services, Housing, Street
Transportation and Aviation, to complete the reviews to ensure the City’s future access to federal
funding opportunities and maintain the City’s compliance with Section 106.


-26-
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program




monies to fund this program since 2021 with 37
approved applications between 2021 and 2023. The
property owner at 1622 W Wilshire Drive was
awarded grant funds to assist with the
rehabilitation of historic steel casement windows.




-27-
Grants and Incentives
There are several financial incentive programs available to preserve and rehabilitate historic buildings and
properties:

Exterior Rehabilitation Assistance Program
This program helps residents sensitively rehabilitate the exteriors of historic homes
while promoting reinvestment in Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods. Owners of historic
homes, either in City-designated historic districts or individually listed on the Phoenix
Historic Property Register, are eligible to apply. The program reimburses owners on a
50/50 matching basis for pre-approved work up to $20,000. In exchange for receiving
financial assistance, the owner sells the City a conservation easement to protect the
building’s exteriors.

Demonstration Project Program
This program encourages the exterior rehabilitation of significant historic properties
used for multi-family residential, commercial, or institutional purposes. The program
provides funding on a reimbursement basis for exterior work that preserves and
rehabilitates historic buildings and supports adaptive use projects that keep a historic
building economically viable. The program pays 100 percent for grant-eligible work
items, provided that the property owner is funding an equal amount of work for non-
grant-eligible work items (such as plumbing, mechanical or electrical repairs). In
exchange for financial assistance, the property owner conveys to the City a
conservation easement to protect the historic character of the property’s exteriors.

Phil Gordon Threatened Building Program
This program helps property owners rehabilitate the exteriors of threatened historic
buildings and historic downtown warehouses and to return them to a viable use. Eligible
buildings are either historic commercial buildings located in the downtown warehouse
overlay district or are City-designated historic buildings located elsewhere in the city
that are threatened either by their deteriorated condition or by possible demolition.
The program pays 100 percent for grant-eligible work items and no matching funds are
required. In exchange for financial assistance, the property owner conveys to the City a
conservation easement to protect the historic character of the property's exteriors.

State, Federal and Other Incentives
The state and federal governments as well as public and private foundations have
developed incentives to assist in the restoration, maintenance, and rehabilitation of
historic resources.

Arizona State Historic Property Tax Reclassification
Program
The State of Arizona maintains a property tax reduction program for residential non-
income-producing properties listed on the NRHP and a property tax incentive program
for income-producing commercial properties listed on the National Register. The
SHPO, in conjunction with the county assessors, administers this program.

-28-
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program

Arizona Heritage Fund
Restored by the Arizona Legislature in 2020, the Historic Preservation focus of the
Arizona Heritage Fund is to provide public funding for preservation planning and
rehabilitation projects. The funds are available for resources listed in or determined
eligible for listing in the Arizona Register of Historic Places and NRHP. Funds are
available when legislatively appropriated.

Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentive
The NPS administers financial incentive programs for historic buildings in partnership
with the AZ SHPO and the Internal Revenue Service. This includes a 20 percent
rehabilitation tax credit on federal income taxes for certified historic building
rehabilitation projects. For these projects, buildings must be listed or eligible for listing
in the NRHP and comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation.

National Trust for
Historic Preservation Historic buildings are part of what
The National Trust, through its
financial assistance programs,
make neighborhoods unique, and
demonstrates that preserving our preserving these buildings can spur
heritage improves the quality of life in
economic activity as developers create
American communities. The National
Trust’s grant and loan programs have jobs to revitalize aging properties
assisted thousands of innovative
preservation projects that protect the – on Historic T ax Credit program – J.P. Morgan Chase
continuity, diversity and beauty of our
communities.

New Market Tax Credits
The New Markets Tax Credit Program is a federal government program that was
established by Congress in 2000 to encourage investments in locating businesses and
real estate projects in low-income communities. The program attracts investment
capital by permitting individual and corporate investors to receive a tax credit against
their federal income tax return in exchange for making equity investments in
specialized financial institutions called “community development entities.”




-29-
Outreach
Outreach is critical to fostering a more informed and engaged community that understands the benefits
of preservation and supports the activities and initiatives that result in the protection of our city’s
resources. HPO outreach efforts include the following:
Í Publications on topics in preservation including Í Attendance at neighborhood and preservation
books, brochures, newsletters and pamphlets. organization meetings.
Í Workshops such as proper rehabilitation Í Information on the City website.
techniques for a historic home.
Í Use of social media such as Facebook, Twitter
Í Presence at historic-home tours by staffing a and Instagram.
booth at the event.
Í Events and celebrations during National
Preservation Month.
Outreach is also achieved through collaborations with partner organizations and the 36 residential historic
districts within the city. Such organizations include the Arizona Preservation Foundation, the Phoenix
Historic Neighborhood Coalition, Modern Phoenix, the Downtown Voices Coalition, Phoenix Community
Alliance, Preserve Phoenix, and the State Historic Preservation Office.

Archaeology
Since 1929, the City of Phoenix has had a City archaeologist. The City Archaeology Office (CAO) is located
at the S'eḏav Va’aki Museum and is part of the Arts and Culture Department.
­Archaeological investigations are required for development projects in the state of Arizona whenever
there is state or federal funding, permitting or licensing involved. In addition, state law (Arizona Revised
Statutes, Sections 41-844 and 41-865) strictly regulates the removal and disposition of human remains
and funerary objects, both on private and public lands.
The City of Phoenix Zoning Ordinance (Section 802.A) acknowledges the significance of archaeological
resources within the city:

It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and
preservation of properties and areas of historical, cultural, archaeological and aesthetic
significance are in the interests of the health, prosperity and welfare of the people of the
which had substantial value to the historical and cultural heritage of the citizens of Phoenix,
and to take reasonable measures to prevent similar losses in the future.

The ordinance also states the following (Section 802.B.2):

With respect to archaeological resources:
a) To encourage identification of the location of both pre-historic and historic archaeological
resources.­
b) To assist with the preservation of these resources, within developments where
appropriate, and with recovery of the resources where applicable.
c) To encourage recognition of the fact that archaeological resources found on public land are
the property of all citizens, and are not private property. Archaeological resources found
on City-owned lands are the property of the City.


-30-
Phoenix Historic Preservation Program
Responsibilities of the CAO are as follows:
Í Monthly consultation meetings with the Gila River Í Reviewing and ensuring the appropriateness of all
Indian Community and Salt River Pima-Maricopa archaeological fieldwork and technical reports of
Indian Community Tribal Historic Preservation data recovery results within the City.
Offices to understand and address the concerns Í Managing the S'eḏav Va’aki Museum publication
of the O’Odham Tribes, who are culturally series, including Anthropological Papers,
connected to the Phoenix area. Occasional Papers and Technical Reports.
Í Assessing development projects—those that are Í Coordinating the A­rizona Site Steward Program
City-sponsored, are on City-owned land, or are for the City of Phoenix with the assistance of a
undergoing planning review (including private Cultural Resource Ranger. The stewards
development)—for potential impacts on document site vandalism, damage and other
archaeological resources. disturbances, and report it to the City
Í Coordinating the development of treatment plans Archaeologist, who then conducts a field visit and
if archaeological resource impacts are identified; takes appropriate actions to prevent further
treatment plans may involve excavations to damage.
examine and document subsurface deposits. Í Coordinating the S'eḏav Va’aki Museum Platform
Í Assisting private development projects with the Mound Stabilization Program. The S'eḏav Va’aki
archaeology process required for construction platform mound or va’aki is one of only two such
permit stipulations. remaining prehistoric structures that are
preserved in the Salt River Valley. It is subject to
Í Providing technical oversight for all City- erosion and destruction from wind and rain, and it
sponsored archaeological projects, including requires routine stabilization activities that meet
those that involve federal agencies (e.g., the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. These
Department of Housing and Urban Development, activities are conducted by a team of volunteers.
Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway
Administration and Federal Aviation Í Conducting archaeological research for public
Administration) and state agencies (e.g., Arizona exhibits and publications and interact with the
State Land Department). media. S'eḏav Va’aki Museum produces exhibits
and publications that require review, research,
Í Participating in State Historic Preservation Act and written material from the City Archaeologist.
and Section 106 consultation, providing guidance
for the treatment of archaeological resources.


The CAO works closely with descendant Tribes through monthly face to
face consultation meetings with the Gila River Indian Community and
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Tribal Historic
Preservation Offices. These meetings began with just City Archaeology
and Repatriation compliance discussions and have since expanded to
include discussions about museum programming, exhibits, and
renaming initiatives. Tribal names are being considered for new housing
developments. Several trails in the South Mountain Park and Preserve
have been given new O’Odham names to replace inaccurate or offensive
names. This collaboration also resulted in the renaming of the Pueblo
Grande Museum to S'eḏav Va’aki Museum with museum mural art
entitled “Legacy” created by Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian
Community (SRPMIC) resident and enrolled Tohono O’odham Nation
artist Thomas “Breeze” Marcus with the help of O’odham artists
Dwayne Manuel (SRPMIC) and Zachary Justin (Gila River Indian
Community).

-31-
Plan Accomplishments
and Evolution
The 2025 PreserveHistoricPHX plan is an update to the existing
historic preservation plan, the first of its kind in Phoenix, which was
adopted in 2015 and identified five program goals:




Protect Protect Explore Develop Promote
Archaeological Historic Preservation Community Partnerships
Resources Resources Incentives Awareness
The City Archaeology Office (CAO), Historic Preservation Office (HPO), Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) and community made substantial headway in achieving
aspects of these goals following plan adoption. A recent public survey revealed that the
public perceives a nearly even level of successes across the goal categories.


Protect
Promote Archaeological
Partnerships Resources
18%
19%
Develop Public Survey
Community 19% Program Goal
Awareness
Achievements
20%
24% Protect
Historic
Explore Resources
Preservation
Incentives




-32-
Plan Accomplishments and Evolution

What We've Done Together
Protection of
Archaeological
Resources
The CAO, in partnership with
local tribal cultural resource
officers, worked to facilitate a
name change for Pueblo
Grande, the large prehistoric
village site where the CAO and the Pueblo Grande
Museum are located. The name S'eḏav Va’aki (and
S'eḏav Va’aki Museum), or Central Platform Mound in
the O’Odham language, reflects the connection
between the Hohokam era occupation of the Salt
River Valley and the current O’Odham communities
and their lineal relationship. A story map on S'eḏav
Va’aki and its connections to the descendent
O’Odham Tribes has been completed and is published
online. The CAO and City HPO have retained a
consultant to develop an ethnohistory and
historiography to provide greater understanding of
the continuum of indigenous occupation in the
Phoenix basin.
CAO commissioned a Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) map of all known sites and surveys in
South Mountain Park and Preserve and has worked
to conduct surveys and cultural overviews for
Phoenix Mountain and North Mountain Preserves,
places of cultural significance to neighboring tribal
communities. CAO has also worked with a group of
volunteers to develop the Phoenix Mapping
Archaeology Project, a GIS effort to digitize all
features and excavations conducted at S'eḏav Va’aki
and other large village sites along the Salt River.
City archaeology guidelines were updated in 2020
and a new general citywide Historic Properties
Treatment Plan for Archaeology was adopted in
2024. The new Treatment Plan includes an updated
media policy, a protocol for obtaining permission to
present technical project results at conferences and
in publications, and requirements for how to provide
GIS data to CAO upon project completion.




-33-
Protection of Historic Resources
The HPO, with significant community input, worked with the Planning and
Development Department (PDD) leaders in 2016 to establish a 30-day
demolition hold for commercial properties over 50 years of age and those
properties previously identified eligible for historic designation. The code was
revised in 2018 to incorporate all buildings over 50 years of age located within
the Downtown Code zoning area. This is a public notification process which
provides staff recommendations on designation eligibility of resources to the
historic preservation commission and historic preservation advocacy organizations.
In 2018, PDD created the publicly accessible My Community Map which is a geodatabase of property-
specific information that identifies historically designated and eligible properties. This map allows
residents and real estate professionals to have real time, accurate information to facilitate planning and
engagement with the historic preservation office.
The HPO contracted for the preparation of two National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) nominations
for commercial historic districts, the Miracle Mile and Grand Avenue Commercial Historic Districts, which
provide opportunities for federal, state and local financial incentives for rehabilitation.
The historic preservation commission has prioritized survey and historic context development for post-
World War II properties. The office has contracted for the development of post-war multi-family property,
religious architecture and commercial building contexts, types of properties identified as threatened
through ongoing management of the 30-day demolition hold process.



The Grand Avenue Commercial Historic District
was listed in the National Register of Historic
Places in 2024. The district stretches along Grand
Avenue between “Five Points” and “Six Points” and
reflects commercial development in Phoenix
spanning the period between 1887 and 1975 when
commercial development waned upon completion
of the Interstate 10.




-34-
Plan Accomplishments and Evolution
Explore Preservation Incentives
The HPC advocated to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager’s Office for
the dedication of general funds to replace the former historic preservation
grant programs that had been funded through the 2006 municipal bond. The
Rehabilitation Grant Program (offering matching grants up to $20,000) in
2021 and established $500,000 for a Threatened Building Grant Program in
2022, later renamed the Phil Gordon Threatened Building Program. As a
result, 37 residential grants have been awarded for scopes of work such as foundation repair, roof
replacement and historic window rehabilitation. Phil Gordon Threatened Building grants have been
awarded to five different projects for work including masonry rehabilitation, roof replacement and
building relocation.
Phoenix citizens voted in the General Obligation Bond Fund election in November of 2023 to allocate $5
million toward a historic preservation program over the next five years to include capital improvement
projects for City-owned historic buildings as well as funds to be dedicated towards grants for the
rehabilitation of public and privately owned buildings.



The historic First Baptist Church was subject
to a massive fire in 1984 and over the next
four decades, through the tireless efforts of
Mayor Terry Goddard, the building was
slowly rehabilitated for adaptive reuse as
“The Abbey.” The property was awarded
$137,000 in Phil Gordon Threatened Building
grant funds towards the restoration of the
Rose Window and interior decorative stucco
pilasters.




-35-
The Fuller Paint Company Warehouse rehabilitation,
which included the construction of a new hotel,
demonstrates the successful partnering of the
Government Property Lease Excise Tax (GPLET)
program with historic preservation grant funding
provided through the Phil Gordon Threatened
Building Program. The historic warehouse building
was adaptively reused as a lobby and dining area
with a connecting element to a new multi-story
hotel. This project won a Governor’s Heritage Award
for historic preservation in 2024.



Develop Community Awareness
The CAO, in partnership with local tribal cultural resource officers, created a land
acknowledgement statement to strengthen preservation efforts as well as a
homeland map depicting areas of significance to the O’Odham and introducing
O’Odham place names for geographic features on the landscape.
The HPO celebrated the 30th anniversary of the first historic designations in the
Phoenix Historic Property Register in 2016 in a public event with Mayor Terry
Goddard, who facilitated the establishment of the office, as an honored speaker. The last eight years have
seen trivia nights, brown bags presentations, a historic neighborhood preservation summit and the
development of the groundbreaking Preservation Phoenix Style report prepared by PlaceEconomics,
which specifically looked at the impact of historic preservation in Phoenix. This report was adopted by the
In 2020 and 2021, staff created three ethnic heritage story maps based on the African American, Hispanic
and Asian American historic contexts originally developed between 2004 and 2007. These maps are
available online and let the public engage virtually with ethnic heritage resources.6 These maps won both
Governor’s Heritage and the Arizona Chapter of the American Planning Association awards. A video series
accompanies these maps.

6 Historic Preservation Story Maps and Videos can be found here: Planning and Development Story Maps (phoenix.gov)




-36-
Plan Accomplishments and Evolution
Promote Partnerships
The City of Phoenix HPO works in close partnership with the SHPO to further
preservation, protection, and awareness of historic properties. The City
successfully applied for a SHPO heritage fund grant for the rehabilitation of
the historically designated Seargeant-Oldaker property located in downtown
Phoenix, to be relocated and rehabilitated on site to create a restaurant.
Partner advocacy organizations such as Arizona Preservation Foundation, Preserve PHX, Phoenix Historic
Neighborhoods Coalition, Downtown Voices Coalition and Phoenix Community Alliance focus on a broad
set of issues impacting historic properties and play a vital role in the community advocating for historic
preservation issues.
Historic Preservation collaborates with different departments within the City of Phoenix. The Community
and Economic Development Department (CED) provides dedicated annual funding towards grants for the
rehabilitation of commercial properties. Work with CED has seen advancement of the GPLET for historic
preservation adaptive reuse projects which incorporate new development.
There are 36 residential historic districts, the vast majority of which have formal neighborhood
organizations. These organizations have served as partners to the HPO in maintaining the historic
character of their neighborhoods and promoting preservation and fostering connectedness through
newsletters, street festivals and community spaces.




Grand Ave Festival




-37-
-38-
Current Preservation Planning




Current Preservation
Planning
Acknowledging there is historic preservation work yet to be done in
Phoenix, the City commissioned the firm PlaceEconomics to identify
ongoing challenges as well as innovative tools and strategies to
further advance historic preservation goals in Phoenix. During focus
group interviews in Phoenix, the firm asked the question: What are
the challenges to historic preservation in Phoenix? Through the
responses, the firm identified the following themes:

Í Lack of Knowledge, Education, and
Information

Í Insufficient Community Engagement

Í Development Pressure

Í Existing Regulations

Í Inadequacy of Existing Tools

The firm then researched tools and policies used by municipal and
non-profit historic preservation organizations across the country to
develop a series of recommendations which resulted in the
aforementioned report Tools, Strategies, Policies, Incentives for
Historic Preservation in Phoenix. The recommendations varied in
complexity, cost, impact, effectiveness and likely stakeholder
acceptance.
This report served as the basis for a public participation process with
city residents that included meetings and a public survey to facilitate
the historic preservation plan update PreserveHistoricPHX 2025.




-39-
Public Participation
Meetings
The HPO kicked off the public participation component of the historic preservation plan update at the first
public meeting for the City’s 2025 General Plan update. This meeting was held on October 13, 2023, at the
George Washington Carver Museum. A standalone historic preservation plan update meeting was held in
person at Burton Barr Library on February 24, 2024, followed by a virtual meeting on March 7, 2024.
Additional presentations were given on March 9, 2024, to the Downtown Voices Coalition and on April 18,
2024, to the Phoenix Historic Neighborhoods Coalition. Additionally, a virtual “brownbag” presentation on
the historic preservation plan update for City employees was held April 9, 2024.
Participants were asked what they saw as the biggest challenges and opportunities for Historic
Preservation in Phoenix. Many of the challenges and opportunities identified in the series of public
meetings fit within the categories identified by PlaceEconomics.



Challenges Opportunities

Development Pressure Improve regulatory / preservation
“New development prioritized over tools
preservation” “Prevent buildings from being demolished in
violation of code”
Lack of public engagement “Make ability to transfer development rights
“How to create a community story about to other properties”
our historic properties”
“Overturn Proposition 207”

Existing Regulations
“Proposition 207” Improve community education,
knowledge and public engagement
Inadequacy of Existing Tools “Identify role of average citizen and benefit
“Lack of significant financial incentives” for them”
“Involve schools to promote preservation,
promote cultural awareness of communities”
Lack of education, knowledge,
and information “Communicate via social media”
“Loss of knowledgeable historic tradesmen
to maintain buildings” “Proactive meetings with developers”




-40-
Current Preservation Planning
Survey
A public survey was drafted and posted on the City of Phoenix website and promoted on social media. The
survey garnered 390 responses and began with a whimsical question about what the respondent would do
to further historic preservation in Phoenix if they had a magic wand.
Responses included:

“Set policies and change codes to make it attractive to do adaptive reuse of established
buildings.”

“Offering spaces to Local First Arizona businesses in adaptive reuse buildings.”

“Retain old store fronts and low rise / midrise buildings for adaptive reuse. Plant
more shade trees and return to desert oasis / shade awnings off buildings, no super
block buildings.”

“Preserve buildings of cultural significance regardless of their grandiose nature.
Communities of color historically did not have the resources to have the best or most
"advanced" structures, but their history/legacy is also worth saving.”

“Launch a concerted effort to highlight and celebrate the historic buildings that are
living in plain sight in our city. Education of our community on the historical buildings
is important as a start to then communicate the importance of preserving our shared
history.”




-41-
Survey respondents were then asked to identify the top three challenges or threats facing historic
preservation in Phoenix and were provided specific choices as well as a fillable blank space to include other
ideas. A breakdown of the responses is below:


Top Three Challenges/Threats to Historic
Preservation in Phoenix

253 Redevelopment

233 Historic places perceived as inefficient and expensive to maintain

230 Demolition by neglect

186 Limitations of historic preservation regulatory enforcement

91 Gentrification

Limitations of designation under Proposition 207
63 (Private Property Rights Protection Act)

45 Other


Current real estate market conditions are evident in the top four challenges selected by respondents and
for good reason. Demand for housing and increasing real estate prices have placed direct pressure on
historic resources. Arguments that existing housing is inefficient or expensive to maintain result in
proposals for demolition and redevelopment and continue to lead to the loss of historic buildings in
Phoenix. Additionally, some property owners, unaware of historic preservation requirements, or as a result
of market conditions, undertake renovation or demolition work without obtaining the necessary plan
reviews and permits. Respondents expressed concerns about limited enforcement mechanisms and the
resulting difficulty in ensuring compliance with historic preservation requirements.
A new state law, A.R.S. § 9-462.13, related to middle housing has heightened the concern of historic
district residents about the impact of market pressures on their neighborhoods. A.R.S. § 9-462.13
requires cities to allow up to four units on single-family zoned lots within one mile of a city’s downtown or
central business district. In Phoenix, while historic districts make up only 1% of the total land area of the
city, they make up 78% of the single-family zoning acreage within the one-mile area of downtown, making
them disproportionately impacted by this legislation. The law allows for this additional density, by right,
but does not prohibit historic preservation plan review. The City of Phoenix Planning and Development
Department will continue to require historic preservation plan review (demolition and/or new
construction) on all housing proposals for historically designated properties
As the long-term impacts of A.R.S. § 9-462.13 to historic districts are not yet known, city staff will monitor
and collect data on new development in historic districts related to middle housing. A report will be
prepared and presented at each annual work session of the Historic Preservation Commission.



-42-
Current Preservation Planning

Carrying Forward the Five Goals
Tools, Strategies, Policies, Incentives for Historic Preservation in Phoenix focused on identifying challenges
and opportunities for historic preservation with built environment (historic) resources. Historic
preservation staff consulted with the CAO to identify continuing challenges to cultural resource
management. The combination of the data collected by PlaceEconomics, from the CAO and public
meetings demonstrated that the original five goals identified in PreserveHistoricPHX 2015 continue to
have relevance and value today.
The recommendations from the PlaceEconomics report and the CAO served as the basis for a number of
the potential tools queried to respondents in the public survey to help direct the actions the historic
preservation office, partners and individuals can carry out to achieve the five goals.

Protection of Archaeological Resources
Respondents were asked to identify two new tools for the Protection of Archaeological Resources which
would provide the most benefit in Phoenix. Respondents prioritized the development of new
administrative regulations to facilitate the protection of archaeological resources and the formalization of
compliance guidelines. Respondents also identified tribal representation on the historic preservation
commission as a need, given the close ties between neighboring tribal communities and Phoenix. With just
one full-time position in the CAO, respondents also prioritized the creation of permanent cultural resource
review staff.


Policies/Tools for Protection of
Archaeological Resources

Formalize Policies Related to Protection of Archaeological
194 ResourcesHistoric places perceived as inefficient and expensive
to maintain

160 Tribal Representation on Historic Preservation Commission

133 Permanent Cultural Resource Review Staff

115 Zoning Ordinance Enhancement

86 Survey and Inventory of City Mountain Preserves

62 Develop Traditional Cultural Property Plan

14 Other




-43-
Protection of Historic Resources
Respondents were asked when setting new priorities for the Protection of Historic Resources which two
would provide the most benefit. Priority was given to enhancing existing regulations as they relate to
demolition and alteration. Amendment of the historic preservation zoning ordinance could include a
component to enhance enforcement for unpermitted work on designated properties.


Policies/Tools for Protection of
Historic Resources
Enhance Enforcement for Illegal Alteration/Demolition
229 of Designated Properties

Enhance Demolition Delay Practices for Historically Eligible
176 Properties

Explore Historic District Designation under Proposition 207
118 (Private Property Rights Protection Act)

94 Amend the Historic Preservation Zoning Ordinance

83 Create Formal Survey and Designation Plan

45 Enhance Demolition Notification Practices

21 Other


In public hearings on the draft plan, a primary concern expressed about the potential impact of A.R.S. §
9-462.13 to historic districts relates to the possible demolition of historic dwellings for the construction of
new multi-family dwellings on the existing parcel.
While A.R.S. § 9-462.13 grants increased rights, it does not alter the provisions of the Historic
Preservation Ordinance, including the authority to impose a one-year stay of demolition for properties
with HP overlay zoning. As part of strategies to preserve historic resources, the city may explore amending
the Historic Preservation Ordinance to allow for the extension of demolition stays beyond one year. Such a
measure could further discourage speculative redevelopment that undermines the historic character of
neighborhoods.




-44-
Current Preservation Planning
Exploring New Historic Preservation Incentives
Respondents were asked to provide their top two priorities for Exploring New Historic Preservation
Incentives. The overwhelming response was to build off the existing efforts to provide grant funding
through general and bond funds followed by a more proactive means to incorporate historic buildings into
new higher density developments.


Policies/Strategies for Historic
Preservation Incentives

Advocacy for Continued General and Municipal Bond Funding
282 for Historic Preservation Grants

Incorporate/adaptively reuse historic commercial buildings
164 as part of new development (code/zoning/cost relief)

Encourage Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Development in
143 Residential Historic Districts Through the Creation of a
Design Pattern Book for Streamlined Approval.7

Transferrable Development Rights for Historic Preservation
132 (expansion of Sustainability Bonus structure)8

35 Other




In the time since the original public outreach effort prioritized the development of a “pattern book” for
Accessory Dwelling units (ADUs) the city has begun an initiative to develop standardized accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) plans that will be preapproved and made available free to the public. Specific designs
will also be preapproved for historic districts. While noted as “ADU’s” these preapproved plans will
expedite the permitting of small, sensitively designed housing units which can add density in districts
under A.R.S. § 9-462.13




7 The City adopted an ADU ordinance (November 2023; revised December 2024) to allow for ADUs in single-family zoning.

8 The City has an existing Sustainability Bonus Credit system for properties within the Downtown Code area which allows points to be obtained for
rehabilitation or preservation of historic properties to afford things like greater height/density, reduced parking, etc. on a parcel without a historic property
(transferrable development right). This program could be expanded outside of the Downtown Code area to encompass other sending/receiving zones.




-45-
Developing Community Awareness
In setting new priorities for Developing Community Awareness for Historic Preservation, respondents
were asked for their top two selections. Responses weighed heavily toward creating a formal community
engagement plan and creating ombudsman staff to assist with rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of historic
and historic-age resources.


Strategies/Tools for Developing
Community Awareness

222 Develop a Formal Community Engagement Plan

Historic Preservation Ombudsman Staff to Educate
215 Property Owners on Opportunities for Property
Rehabilitation/Adaptive Reuse

160 Presentations at Neighborhood/Organizational Meetings

124 Website/Social Media Enhancement

33 Brown Bag Lunch/Speaker Series

22 Other




-46-
Current Preservation Planning
Promote Partnerships
The survey’s questions about partnerships centered on how internal improvements within the City can
contribute to positive preservation outcomes. Respondents were asked to provide their top two priorities
for Promoting Partnerships, and the top priorities identified were to integrate site planning into historic
preservation plan reviews and to train building inspectors to ensure that onsite work is being carried out
according to approved historic preservation plans. Broader cross training between different departments
carrying out plan review was also highlighted.


Strategies/Policies for Promoting
City Partnerships

216 Integrate Site Planning into Historic Preservation Plan Reviews

Training Building Inspectors for Review of Work at
188 Historic Buildings

Cross Training Between Different Departments Within the City
168 Responsible for Plan Review, i.e., Water Services, Street
Transportation, Fire, etc.

Cross Training Between Different Planning and Development
109 Plan Review Sections

Promote use of International Existing Building Code for
73 Plan Reviewers for Designated Properties

14 Other




Information from the public meetings and the survey served as the
basis for PreserveHistoricPHX 2025, which will guide historic
preservation program goals and objectives for the next 10 years.




-47-
MOVING



-48-
Forward

Vision Statement
Phoenix is a vibrant and dynamic place with many layers of history. Together with
PlanPHX’s central vision of a “More Connected Phoenix,” PreserveHistoricPHX 2025
envisions a city linked by an appreciation for its diverse heritage and a desire to sustain
it for the benefit of present and future generations.


-49-
Loring’s Bazaar Building Exterior, Phoenix, Arizona
1890. Courtesy McCulloch Brothers Photographs, Greater
Arizona Collection, Arizona State University Library




-50-
While recognized as a young city, the roots of 21st century Phoenix can be found dating back to
the Ancestral O’Odham occupation of the Phoenix basin beginning in the first century AD. The
Huhugam farmed and lived in, what would become known as Phoenix, for 1500 years developing
an extensive irrigation canal system. As Euro-Americans arrived in the late 1860s and capitalized
upon the former irrigation canal networks of the Ancestral O’Odham, the area was reshaped. The
half square mile Phoenix townsite was established in 1870 and Phoenix’s growth into the early
20th century was tied to its role as a business and banking hub for outlying agricultural
enterprises. Floods along the Salt River threatened homes and businesses prior to the
establishment of the Roosevelt Dam in 1911. Streetcars facilitated residential development to the
north while the railroad tracks to the south served as a functional dividing line between
communities of color and the majority white population.
World War II set the stage for new industries to develop in Phoenix resulting in rapid growth in
the postwar era, the city physically expanding to 17.1 square miles with a population of 106,818 by
1950. Advocates for racial equality made headway in breaking down color barriers in the 1950s
and 1960s which impacted where people could work, live and go to school. Inexpensive land
fueled residential developers such as John F. Long to build master planned communities on the
outskirts of the city with new shopping centers, schools, and banks to meet the needs of
suburban dwellers. The low cost of living and surging workforce also drew technology and
industry to Phoenix to capitalize on land and labor. The city now encompasses 519 square miles
with a population of 1,674,600.
Through stories and the tangible reminders of Phoenix’s past we can maintain connections that
are significant to the community as Phoenix continues to grow and change.




-51-
-52-
Phoenix works collaboratively with community partners to
identify places of historic and archaeological importance
and implements strategies for their long-term preservation
and sustainability.



The following section summarizes the goals, actions to be taken to achieve the goals, the lead(s)
responsible for carrying out the action and the anticipated timeframe for accomplishment. The
timeframes for accomplishment are defined as short term (1-3 years), medium term (4-6 years)
and long term (7-10 years) to reflect the work anticipated to be carried out before the next
major update of the Historic Preservation Plan to be completed by 2035. Recommendations are
also included for how Phoenicians can get involved in helping the City meet its goals.
The August annual work session of the Historic Preservation Commission will provide the
opportunity for staff to report on plan achievements made the prior year and discuss action
items for the coming year.




-53-
Goal 1
Protect Archaeological Resources
The Ancestral O’Odham turned the arid lands of the Salt and
Gila River valleys and other areas of southern Arizona into lush
farmlands and thriving villages by building a highly sophisticated system
of irrigation canals. Many of the canals were so well engineered that Euro and
Hispanic Americans, arriving in the area in the late 1860s, reused them for their
own farming needs. In the Salt River Valley, the Ancestral O’Odham built nearly
a thousand miles of canals that conveyed water to large villages, farmsteads and
agricultural fields. These resources, as well as petroglyphs and pictographs
from Native Americans demonstrate the continuum of human occupation from
the Ancestral O’Odham to the descendent O’Odham Tribes with the historic
Phoenix townsite reflecting the Euro, Hispanic, Asian, and African American
influences on the growth and development of the community.




How to Get Involved
Í Volunteer at S'eḏav Va’aki Museum or Í Support the City Archaeology Office at
as a site steward. city budget hearings.




Spotlight
‘Onk ‘Akimel: An Ethnohistory and Historiography of Land Use on the Lower Salt River
The City contracted with a consultant to prepare a report that documents the history of
the Ancestral O’Odham after AD 1450 to provide a greater understanding of the
continuum of indigenous occupation of the Phoenix basin following the Hohokam era.




-54-
Goal 1: Protect Archaelogical Resources




Implementation

Action Lead(s) Timeframe
Increase staffing to carry out compliance CAO, Arts and Culture, City Short term
reviews to meet existing and future Manager’s Office
workloads.
Investigate zoning ordinance HPO, PDD, Arts and Culture, Short term
enhancement to include tribal City Attorney’s Office
representation on historic preservation
commission.
Amend Historic Preservation Ordinance HPO, CAO, City Attorney’s Short term
for program and process improvements. Office, PDD, Arts and
Culture
Create an Administrative Rule for CAO, City Manager’s Office Medium term
protection of archaeological resources
and compliance guidance.
Continue survey and inventory of CAO partnering with Long term
Mountain Preserves in conjunction with consultants and tribal
park infrastructure development historic preservation
projects with interpretive signage, programs
traditional cultural inventories and
cultural overviews developed as
appropriate through tribal consultation.
Maintain inventory of archaeological CAO Long term
resources.




-55-
Goal 2
Protect Historic Resources
Historic built environment resources embody Phoenix’s past and
connect us to our shared heritage. These resources have innumerable
community benefits such as historic residential districts reflecting the most densely
populated areas with the greatest urban tree canopy and walkability to parks, libraries,
and cultural institutions. The majority of the 36 residential historic districts have
neighborhood associations that sponsor community events and have connective
elements, such as community gardens. Heritage commercial buildings provide ideal
incubator space as well as unique accommodations for new small businesses in the
creative and knowledge sectors and serve as popular locations for legacy owned
businesses. These buildings, which are often part of the downtown, support the city’s
cultural identity and create a unique character, contributing to a vibrant downtown.
Historic-age housing also plays a significant role in existing housing affordability.
Finally, the “greenest building is the one that is already built,” and retaining these
resources reduces local landfill waste and the city’s carbon footprint.


How to Get Involved
Í Patronize businesses located in historic Í Support the HPO at city budget
buildings hearings
Í Repair rather than replace historic Í Attend HPC meetings
windows and other character-defining
features


Spotlight
With the national trend of declining church membership, post-World War II historic-age
religious properties, particularly those with significant acreage, have been under
increasing development pressure. As demolition applications for religious properties
have increased, the City contracted a consultant to complete a post-war religious
architecture survey and NRHP Multiple Property Documentation Form to assist with the
identification of significant properties and facilitate designation and preservation of
significant architecture.


-56-
Goal 2: Protect Historic Resources



Implementation

Action Lead(s) Timeframe
Explore demolition delay practices for HPO, PDD Short term
properties identified as eligible for
historic designation.
Amend Historic Preservation Ordinance HPO, City Attorney’s Office, Short term
for program and process improvements. PDD
Create a survey and designation program HPO, HP Commission Short term
for ethnic heritage properties.
Complete context development and HPO partnering with Short to
surveys of post-World War II property consultants medium term
types.
Explore creation of honorific Heritage HPO, PDD Short to
Property/District classification. medium term

Strengthen enforcement for HPO, City Attorney’s Office, Medium term
unpermitted alteration and/or PDD, Neighborhood Services
demolition of designated properties. Department
Investigate ways to mitigate Proposition HPO, City Attorney’s Office, Medium term
207 concerns when designating historic PDD
districts.
Create enhanced design guidelines HPO partnering with Medium to
consultants long term




-57-
Goal 3
Explore Preservation Incentives
Financial incentives, including grant funds and tax abatement, help
rehabilitation projects move forward. Programs such as the City’s
Adaptive Reuse Program not only provide cost savings to customers but also offer
development guidance, streamlined processes and reduced turnaround times for
reviews and approvals by PDD. Opportunities exist to encourage adaptive reuse of
buildings on the PHPR as well as those listed solely on the NRHP. Incentives may include
direct financial assistance as well as the potential for additional development rights.
Exploring and encouraging programs such as these is an important way to stimulate
historic preservation, growth and sustainability in Phoenix.




How to Get Involved
Í Seek grants for preservation activities. Í Support historic preservation grant
programs at city council budget
Í Encourage owners of properties hearings.
eligible for the State Historic Property
Tax Reclassification Program to enroll. Í State Level - Advocate for state income
tax credit program for historic
Í Support future bond elections for property rehabilitation.
historic preservation funding.
Í State Level - Advocate for dedicated
funding for Arizona Heritage Fund
grant program



Spotlight
The rehabilitation of the historic Masonic Temple serves as a success story of the
utilization of the Sustainability Bonus Credit system. A developer’s investment of
$500,000 in exterior rehabilitation and the property owner’s recordation of a 30-year
conservation easement resulted in an award of 50 sustainability bonus points for the
developer to utilize at another development side downtown.



-58-
Goal 3: Explore Preservation Incentives



Implementation

Action Lead(s) Timeframe
Encourage sensitively designed ADUs in HPO, PDD Short term
residential historic districts through the
creation of standardized plans.
Explore expansion of sustainability bonus HPO, PDD Short to
credits along light rail corridors and medium term
other locations outside of Downtown
Code area.
Develop tools that encourage and HPO, PDD, HPC, City Council Medium to
facilitate the rehabilitation and adaptive long term
reuse of historic buildings and potential
heritage commercial buildings.




-59-
Goal 4
Develop Community Awareness
Developing community awareness of heritage resources serves to
connect residents to Phoenix’s past, broadens understanding of the
economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits of these resources and assists
property owners with an understanding of the requirements of owning a historic
property. Educating policy makers, property owners, architects, other City departments,
contractors, real estate professionals and others is essential when maintaining a
historic preservation program. The City of Phoenix needs to empower its residents with
the tools and information to stimulate more historic preservation projects.




How to Get Involved
Í Attend neighborhood tours and events Í Share information with the public on
at city historic parks the benefits of historic preservation to
gain support to address Proposition
Í Investigate the history of a historic 207
property or neighborhood
Í Learn about rehabilitating a historic
property




Spotlight
In honor of Historic Preservation Month, the Historic Preservation Office has hosted a
Phoenix History Trivia Night for three years. This lively and popular event engages folks
who are interested in Phoenix History and historic buildings. Some come to seriously
compete and others come to enjoy the festivities, all experience a connection with the
stories of Phoenix’s past. The 2024 trivia night took place at Memorial Hall at Steele
Indian School Park (the site of the historic Phoenix Indian School).




-60-
Goal 4: Develop Community Awareness




Implementation

Action Lead(s) Timeframe
Enhance social media presence and HPO, Public Information Short term
website content. Office (PIO)
Create an HP 101 Series to include HPO, PIO, CAO Short term
handouts and presentations for public
education.
Present on relevant HP topics at HPO Short to long
neighborhood and organization meetings term
to include Village Planning Committee
meetings
Celebrate preservation successes HPO, PDD, PIO Short to long
through events, awards and other term
recognition methods.
Develop educational tools for real estate HPO Medium term
professionals.


Partner with Office of Customer HPO, PDD Medium term
Advocacy to educate property owners on
programs for the rehabilitation/adaptive
reuse of historic and heritage
commercial buildings.
Develop a formal community HPO partnering with Medium to
engagement plan. consultants and community long term




-61-
Goal 5
Promote Partnerships
Historic preservation, when it is most effective, is the work of all
parts of the community and all divisions of government. Neighborhood
groups, historic-home owners, educators, public officials and historic preservation
professionals and advocates join together to develop priorities, list historic properties
and preserve the history of Phoenix for future generations. City of Phoenix departments
and sections work together to prioritize and facilitate the protection and adaptive reuse
of heritage resources.




How to Get Involved
Í Attend events sponsored by Í Attend the meeting of a historic
preservation organizations neighborhood association or other
historic preservation organization or
Í Volunteer at a historic park or event serve on the board




Spotlight
The leadership of the Sunnyslope Historical Society has become actively engaged in the
identification of properties within the Sunnyslope area of Phoenix that are eligible for
historic designation and working with properties owners to seek listing in the Phoenix
Historic Property Register. The Thompson (also known as Sunnyslope) Rock Garden is
one such property. Grover Cleveland Thompson acquired the property in 1954 and
began the development of this rock garden which he continued to work on over the next
two decades of his life. This unique folk-art environment includes free-form concrete
and mortar, statuary, native rock and cast concrete pieces with tile mosaics that
emulate people, places, and buildings. The property and art have continued to be cared
for by the current property owner who acquired it in 1978.



-62-
Goal 5: Promote Partnerships




Implementation

Action Lead(s) Timeframe
Integrate site plan reviews into historic HPO, PDD Short term
preservation plan reviews.
Develop cross training program between HPO, PDD Short term
building inspectors and historic
preservation planners.
Partner with tribal historic preservation CAO, THPOs Short to long
offices (THPOs) to better understand term
and promote the protection of cultural
resources.
Partner with community organizations HPO, community Short to long
and preservation professionals to better organizations term
protect historic and cultural resources.
Increase dialogue with other City HPO, PDD, Streets, Water Medium term
departments to ensure historic Services
preservation goals and objectives are
reflected in the goals and objectives of
those departments.
Explore opportunities to form a City- HPO, PDD, City Attorney’s Long term
affiliated historic preservation non- Office
profit.




-63-
Bibliography & Further Reading
Benefits of Historic Preservation
Mason, Randall. “Economics and Historic Preservation: A Guide and Review of the Literature.” A Discussion
Paper Prepared for the Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program. Washington, D.C.: The
Brookings Institution, September 2005.
National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services. Historic Preservation is Inherently a Sustainable
Practice. Sustainability - Technical Preservation Services (U.S. National Park Service). Accessed January
8, 2025.
National Trust for Historic Preservation. Why Do Old Places Matter? Economics. Why Do Old Places
Matter? Economics | National Trust for Historic Preservation. January 8, 2025.
PlaceEconomics. Measuring the Economics of Preservation: Recent Findings. Washington, D.C.: Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation. June 2011.
PlaceEconomics. Profits Through Preservation: The Economic Impact of Historic Preservation in Utah. Salt
Lake City, UT: Utah Heritage Foundation, July 2013.
PlaceEcomonics. Preservation Phoenix Style. Phoenix, AZ: City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office,
October 2021.
Rypkema, Donovan. The Economics of Preservation: A Community Leader's Guide, 2nd ed. Washington D.C.:
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2005.

History of Preservation in Phoenix
Ad Hoc/Historic Preservation Advisory Panel 2000-2002. Summary of 2002 Recommendations and
Implementation Status. Government Document, City of Phoenix, 2004.
Hernandez, Ruben, ed. “A Legacy Lost and Found: Finding our Latino Roots in the History of Phoenix.”
Phoenix: Latino Perspectives Media, 2007.
Historic Preservation Commission and Office. Ten Vital Years in the History of Phoenix. Government
Document, City of Phoenix, 1996
Johnson, Ian P. Historic Preservation in the Phoenix Metro Area: History, Current Challenges, Ongoing
Struggles. Master's Thesis, Arizona State University, Department of History, Tempe. December 2007.
Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on Historic Preservation. Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on Historic Preservation
Final Report, June 1985. Government Document, City of Phoenix, 1985.
National Historic Preservation Act as Amended, 2016, Section 106 Review
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Protecting Historic Properties: A Citizen's Guide to Section 106
Review. Government Document, Washington, D.C.: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 2010, 28.
Available at: CitizenGuideSmallSizeFinal4Web.indd. Accessed January 8, 2025.
Arizona State Parks, State Historic Preservation Office. Review and Compliance. Historic Preservation
Compliance Consult | Arizona State Parks. Accessed January 8, 2025.
Congressional Research Service. The Federal Role in Historic Preservation: An Overview. The Federal Role
in Historic Preservation: An Overview. Accessed January 8, 2025


-64-
Bibliography & Further Reading

Grants & Incentives
Arizona State Parks, State Historic Preservation Office. State Historic Property Tax Reclassification (SPT)
for Owner-Occupied Homes. State Historic Property Tax Reclassification | Arizona State Parks. Accessed
January 8, 2025.
National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services. Tax Incentives for Preserving Historic Properties.
Historic Preservation Tax Incentives (U.S. National Park Service). Accessed January 8, 2025.
U.S. Department of the Treasury. Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, New Market Tax
Credit. New Markets Tax Credit Program | Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
Accessed January 8, 2025.

Technical Advice
HistoricPreservation Publications Accessed January 8, 2025.
National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
Rehabilitation and Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. rehabilitation-
guidelines-1997.pdf. Accessed January 8, 2025.
. Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes.
Preservation Briefs 36: Protecting Cultural Landscapes. Accessed January 8, 2025.
. How to Preserve: Preservation Briefs. Preservation Briefs - Technical Preservation Services (U.S.
National Park Service). Accessed January 8, 2025.
. How to Preserve: Preservation Tech Notes. Preservation Tech Notes - Technical Preservation
Services (U.S. National Park Service). Accessed January 8, 2025.
. Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings. Preservation Brief 3: Improving Energy
Efficiency in Historic Buildings. Accessed January 8, 2025.
. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability
for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings. Accessed January 8, 2025.
PlaceEconomics. Tools, Strategies, Policies, Incentives for Historic Preservation in Phoenix. Phoenix, AZ: City
of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, December 2023.




-65-





-66-
TOOLS STRATEGIES
POLICIES
for H i s t ori c
INCENTIVES
Pr e s er v a t i on in
PHOENIX
COMPLETED BY PLACEECONOMICS FOR THE CITY OF PHOENIX | DECEMBER 2023




-67-
-68-
-69-

























-70-














-71-


















-72-


















-73-










-74-













-75-











-76-


























-77-





















-78-

















-79-





-80-
















-81-





































-82-
















-83-

















-84-


























-85-















-86-































-87-












-88-















-89-



































-90-





















-91-

















-92-

















-93-
-94-






















-95-
















-96-












-97-





-98-
-99-














-100-
-101-
-102-
-103-
-104-
TOOLS STRATEGIES
POLICIES
for Hist ori c
INCENTIVES
Pr e s er v a t i on in
PHOENIX
COMPLETED BY PLACEECONOMICS FOR THE CITY OF PHOENIX | DECEMBER 2023




-105-
Archaeological Site
Etiquette Guide
Help Preserve Archaeological Sites




Artifacts, in context (where they Walls are fragile and continually Fragile desert plants and soils
lie), tell a story. Once they are deteriorating. Climbing, sitting that are part of archaeological
moved, a piece of the past is or standing on walls can sites are destroyed when you
destroyed forever. Digging, damage them. Picking up or stray from the trail. Please stay
removing artifacts, or piling them moving rocks alters the walls on trails…they are there for your
up changes what can be learned forever. protection.
from these pieces of the past.




Fire destroys prehistoric organic Oils from even the cleanest Graffiti (drawing, painting,
materials, impairs the potential hands can cause deterioration scratching and carving) is
for chronometric dating, and of prehistoric drawings and destructive and can destroy
damages or even destroys rock destroy the dating potential rock art, as well as deface
art by covering it with soot. for future scientists trying to wood and stone buildings.
Absolutely no fires, candles, or unravel the meaning of Graffiti destroys rock art
smoking should occur at symbols painted and pecked and architecture.
archaeological sites. on stone. Please refrain from
touching rock art.




Pets can damage sites by digging, or depositing their waste
in them. Please do not bring pets into archaeological sites.

-106-
Archaeological Site Etiquette Guide

Camping and Archaeological Vandalism
Driving Protection Laws




Avoid driving or riding your All archaeological sites on federal If you see people vandalizing sites,
bicycle through sites; pitching and tribal lands in Arizona are please report it as soon as possible
your camp in a site; dismantling protected by the Archaeological by calling 1-800-VANDALS.
historic buildings for firewood Resources Protection Act and Obtain as much information about
or any other use; and camping archaeological sites on state the people without putting yourself
or making campfires in any lands are protected by the in danger. Do not confront them!
historic building. Arizona Antiquities Act. These They may be dangerous.
laws prohibit digging, removing
artifacts, damaging, and/or
defacing archaological resources
and provide for related felony and
misdemeanor prosecution with
imprisonment and fines.

By following these simple guidelines, you can help preserve
these unique and fragile remnants of our American heritage.
Thanks for your cooperation, and we hope you enjoy visiting
archaeological sites in Arizona!


Archaeological sites are non-renewable resources.
Help us preserve America’s cultural heritage!
For more information on site etiquette, becoming a site steward
and Arizona's historic places, visit Arizona State Parks
State Historic Preservation Office
[azstateparks.com/SHPO/index.html] Website.


-107-
Attachment B




Staff Report: Historic Preservation Plan – PreserveHistoricPHX2025
May 22, 2025

INTRODUCTION
The first comprehensive plan for historic preservation in the city of Phoenix was adopted
in 2015. PreserveHistoricPHX2025 provides the opportunity to assess the
achievements made after the adoption of the original plan, new challenges as well as
new opportunities to advance historic preservation in Phoenix. A copy of the draft
version of PreserveHistoricPHX2025 can be accessed here: PreserveHistoricPHX | City
of Phoenix.
STAFF REQUEST
Staff requests that the Village Planning Committees review and provide comments
regarding the draft Historic Preservation Plan, PreserveHistoricPHX2025, and
recommend its approval.
BACKGROUND
The city commissioned the preeminent historic preservation data analysis firm
PlaceEconomics to conduct stakeholder meetings to identify challenges and create a
series of recommendations to advance historic preservation in Phoenix based on
practices occurring across the country. The city began a public engagement effort
based on the findings of this PlaceEconomics study with a series of public meetings and
a publicly posted survey from fall of 2023 through summer of 2024 to evaluate the
relevancy of the original 2015 goals and to set priorities for the next decade.
The City Archaeology Office played an important role in developing recommendations
for PreserveHistoricPHX2025 because archaeology is a key component of historic
preservation. The city of Phoenix Historic Preservation Ordinance – Chapter 8 of the
Zoning Ordinance – mandates the identification and preservation of archaeological
resources and the recognition that “archaeological resources found on public land are
the property of all citizens and are not private property. Archaeological resources found
on City-owned lands are the property of the City.” (§802.B.2(c))
These engagement efforts revealed that the original five goals of the 2015 plan continue
to have relevance:
1. Protect Archaeological Resources
2. Protect Historic Resources
3. Explore Preservation Incentives
4. Develop Community Awareness



Staff Report: Historic Preservation Plan
May 22, 2025


5. Promote Partnerships
Stakeholders helped prioritize the potential tools and incentives to help achieve the five
goals for the creation of the PreserveHistoricPHX2025 draft plan. The goals and tools
can be found starting on page 54 of the draft plan.
PreserveHistoricPHX2025 is intended as a more specific plan to augment
PlanPHX2025 and to protect and promote the historic and archaeological resources of
Phoenix.
PROJECT TIMELINE
Below is the tentative timeline set for PreserveHistoricPHX2025.

DATE
Encanto Village Planning Committee 6/2/2025
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee 6/2/2025
Camelback East Village Planning Committee 6/3/2025
Desert View Village Planning Committee 6/3/2025
Central City Village Planning Committee 6/9/2025
Laveen Village Planning Committee 6/9/2025
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee 6/10/2025
South Mountain Village Planning Committee 6/10/2025
Maryvale Village Planning Committee 6/11/2025
North Gateway Village Planning Committee 6/12/2025
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee 6/17/2025
Estrella Village Planning Committee 6/17/2025
North Mountain Village Planning Committee 6/18/2025
Ahwatukee Foothills Village Planning Committee 6/23/2025
Alhambra Village Planning Committee 6/24/2025
Historic Preservation Committee Meeting 7/21/2025
Planning Commission 8/7/2025
CC Subcommittee (Transportation, Infrastructure & Planning) 9/17/2025
CONCLUSION
Staff requests that the Village Planning Committees review and provide comments
regarding the attached draft of PreserveHistoricPHX and recommend its approval.
WRITER/TEAM LEADER
Helana Ruter
5/22/2025



ATTACHMENT C
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025: Historic Preservation Plan Update
Village Planning Committee Summary Results

Recommendation
Village Recommendation Vote
Date
Ahwatukee Approval with direction
6/23/25 10-0
Foothills

Alhambra 7/22/25 No quorum -
Camelback
6/3/25 Approval with direction 17-0
East
Approval with direction
Central City 6/9/25 8-0
Approval with direction
Deer Valley 6/17/25 10-0

Desert View 6/3/25 Approval 12-0
Approval with direction
Encanto 6/2/25 14-0
Approval with direction
Estrella 6/17/25 5-0
Approval with direction
Laveen 6/9/25 10-0
Approval with direction
Maryvale 6/11/25 13-0
North Approval with direction
6/12/25 9-0
Gateway
North Approval with direction
6/18/25 9-0
Mountain
Paradise
6/2/25 Approval 14-0
Valley
Approval with direction
Rio Vista 6/10/25 5-0
South Approval with direction
7/8/25 14-0
Mountain




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Date of VPC Meeting June 23, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with
direction
VPC Vote 10-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

STAFF PRESENTATION
Helana Ruter, the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Officer, provided a
presentation regarding the draft Historic Preservation Plan update, highlighting the
public outreach, the plan goals, and next steps, and asking the Committee to provide
any final comments and make a formal recommendation.

QUESTIONS FROM COMMITTEE
Committee Member Broberg asked about archeological resources in the village.
Ms. Ruter replied with examples, including those found at South Mountain, noting
that preservation of archeological resources is required by ordinance.

Committee Member Blackman asked about the limits on development resulting from
historic designation. Ms. Ruter replied that HP designation is a zoning overlay and
requires that any exterior renovation must be reviewed by the Historic Preservation
Office for design review. Ms. Blackman followed up with a question about windows.
Ms. Ruter replied that windows only require review when the size is changed.

Committee Member Jain asked if there will be changes to address the state
legislation. Ms. Ruter replied that the City cannot supersede state law, and the task is
to figure out how to allow the mandated density while adhering to the design review.

Chair Gasparro asked about the incentives for historic preservation. Ms. Ruter noted
standardized plans for ADUs and that the City is looking to make HP compatible
ones, and highlighted the incentive program in downtown code and grant programs
funded through the recently approved bond.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 549
Ahwatukee Foothills Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary - June 23, 2025
Historic Preservation Plan Update


Committee Member Maloney asked how an HP designation starts. Ms. Ruter stated
that it needs to be community driven because of Proposition 207, noting that the City
wants at least 80% of property owners to sign waivers in order to consider HP
designation and that the City is looking at an honorific designation to avoid the
Proposition 207 concerns.

Chair Gasparro asked about tax incentives. Ms. Ruter replied that non-income
producing properties on the National Register qualify for a reduction in property taxes.

Vice Chair Mager asked about the implications and enforcement of HP designation.
Ms. Ruter replied that HP properties have a stay of demolition, but then a building
can still be demolished, noting creative solutions are achieved such as a house
downtown being moved in order to preserve it and allow development.

Committee Member Barua commended the Historic Preservation Office and the
vision they have looking to the past and to the future.

Committee Member Fisher asked about the reason behind historic designation
beyond simply looking at age, noting that a neighborhood of a certain age isn’t
necessarily interesting. Ms. Ruter stated that age is only one component and that 50-
years is a standard benchmark used around the country, reviewing the details of the
other two factors for determining designation, which are significance and integrity. Mr.
Fisher noted that a 50-year time span today is not as significant as it was in the past
and we should be looking for something unique or significant.

Vice Chair Mager commented about looking at today’s development as creating the
historic districts of the future.

Committee Member Broberg stated that the City of Phoenix owns land that could be
used for developments that are more unique, which could stand out in the future,
particularly noting that land is being used to house the un-housed population. Ms.
Blackman noted that it would require an architect who wanted to leave a legacy.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Eric Gilmore introduced himself and spoke about concerns with the recently passed
state legislation addressing missing middle housing, noting that it would significantly
impact 22 historic neighborhoods within one mile of downtown and asking the VPC to
vote to approve with direction to add an analysis of the impact of the legislation on
historic neighborhoods.

Committee Member Broberg asked about the purpose of the analysis. Mr. Gilmore
stated we cannot change the state law, but there should be analysis done of the
impact of it. Vice Chair Mager noted that it could be beneficial to at least put the
impact on the record. Mr. Fisher asked if staff has a position on the suggested
motion. Ms. Ruter stated that the City doesn’t have any concerns with adding the
language to the plan, noting that they will be doing annual reporting as well.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 550
Ahwatukee Foothills Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary - June 23, 2025
Historic Preservation Plan Update



Chair Gasparro asked if the analysis would be done in-house. Ms. Ruter replied that
it would likely be done in-house.

Committee Member Jain asked if the Historic Preservation Office will be able to
review permits for new homes built under this legislation. Ms. Ruter stated that there
would still be a design review.

Committee Member Strem asked about determining what meets the criteria for
designation. Mr. Gilmore replied that it is an analysis of the history of a building while
understanding the need for new housing.

Chair Gasparro suggested looking at the original plats for any restrictions, which
might be a practical solution to the issue.

COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
Committee Member Jain stated a concern with the proposed motion from Mr.
Gilmore, noting the cost of doing the analysis.

Committee Member Blackman stated that without the ability to control historic
preservation, the historic areas will be lost.

Committee Member Broberg stated that this could be something that happens in
Ahwatukee in the future.

MOTION
Darin Fisher made a motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation
Plan update, per the staff recommendation, with direction that staff amend the report
to include an assessment and analysis of how the Missing Middle Housing Law
(A.R.S. Section 9-462.13, HB 2721) will impact historic districts within one mile of
Phoenix’s Central Business District. Toni Broberg seconded the motion.

VOTE
10-0; motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update, per the
staff recommendation, with direction passed; Committee Members Barua, Blackman,
Broberg, Fisher, Golden, Jain, Maloney, Strem, Mager, and Gasparro in favor.


STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

Staff has no comments.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 551
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 3, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 17-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Helana Ruter, the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Officer, provided a presentation
regarding the draft Historic Preservation Plan update, highlighting the public outreach,
the plan goals, and next steps, and asking the Committee to provide any final
comments and make a formal recommendation.

Committee Member Whitesell asked if the plan has language relative to the impact of
state legislation on historic preservation, noting a concern with the House Bill to expand
the boundaries of the Central Business District. Ms. Ruter stated that the City is aware
of the issues and that the plan must be approved by the end of the year.

MOTION:
Committee Member Whitesell made a motion to recommend approval of the Historic
Preservation Plan update, per the staff recommendation, with direction that
considerations of the actions of the State Legislature be reflected in the report.
Committee Member Williams seconded the motion.

VOTE:
17-0; motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update, per the
staff recommendation, with direction passed; Committee Members Abbott, Augusta,
Beckerleg Thraen, Eichelkraut, Garcia, Langmade, McClelland, Noel, Schmieder,
Sharaby, Siegel, Swart, Todd, Whitesell, Williams, Paceley, and Fischbach in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

Staff has no comments.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 9, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with
direction
VPC Vote 8-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

One member of the public registered to speak on this item and did not indicate support
or opposition.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Helana Ruter, staff, provided a presentation regarding the Historic Preservation Plan
Update. Ms. Ruter introduced the project timeline, described the plan’s five goals,
described studies conducted on the impact and challenges of preservation, shared the
results from a public survey, and explained that her team is coordinating with the City’s
Archaeology Department. Ms. Ruter requested final comments from the Committee,
asked for a recommendation of approval, and stated that the plan will be ultimately
adopted by City Council.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Committee Member Jordan Greenman asked about mechanisms for historic
preservation similar to those available for adaptive reuse and asked whether the
Historic Preservation Office is exploring incentives beyond the existing framework. Ms.
Ruter explained that the Downtown Code includes a sustainability bonus that may be
applicable in certain situations, stated that her office is interested in expanding these
types of tools, stated that rehabilitation grants are available, and expressed a goal to
build stronger partnerships with the Office of Customer Advocacy.

Committee Member Greenman asked if there are specific areas the Historic
Preservation Office is targeting for designation. Ms. Ruter stated that there are no


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882
Central City Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 9, 2025


geographic priority areas at this time and explained that the office is supportive of
efforts such as the National Register nomination for Grand Avenue the Miracle Mile
corridor. Ms. Ruter explained that staffing and funding resources were significantly
reduced after the recession, stated that capacity is gradually returning, and explained
that the office generally responds to community-initiated requests.

Chair Cyndy Gaughan asked whether properties eligible for historic designation have
a defined path to being listed and recommended that a timeline be established to guide
those efforts. Ms. Ruter stated that her office develops a survey designation plan each
year, explained that there has been a focus in recent cycles on postwar-era properties,
and stated that updates are underway for the City’s ethnic heritage survey. Chair
Gaughan asked whether community-based resources are being leveraged to support
this work and help lighten the load. Ms. Ruter stated that this was a valuable comment.

Vice Chair Darlene Martinez asked how information about the City’s rehabilitation
programs is being shared with the public. Ms. Ruter responded that outreach is being
coordinated with the City’s Public Information Office and explained that efforts include
posts on social media, updates to the department webpage, neighborhood outreach,
and the development of online tutorial content. Chair Gaughan stated that City Council
offices distribute information regarding historic preservation programs through their
regular email newsletters.

Chair Gaughan asked about the proposal to extend the 30-day demolition hold. Ms.
Ruter stated that the current policy applies to commercial properties over 50 years old
that are either eligible for historic designation or located within areas covered by the
Downtown Code and explained that the plan proposes increasing the hold period to 60
days.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Opal Wagner introduced herself, stated that she serves on the Encanto Village
Planning Committee (VPC), and explained that the Encanto VPC considered the plan
at a recent meeting. Ms. Wagner explained the Encanto VPC voted to recommend
approval with the condition that the plan includes an analysis of the impact of the
Missing Middle Housing Bill. Ms. Wagner stated that the state legislation will allow
multifamily housing on properties currently zoned for single-family use and will enable
further subdivision of lots, expressed concern that the Bill will incentivize demolitions in
historic neighborhoods, and explained that the Bill is not addressed in the draft Historic
Preservation Plan.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 554
Central City Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 9, 2025



STAFF RESPONSE

Ms. Ruter thanked Ms. Wagner for her comments, stated that the Encanto Village has
a large number of residential historic districts, stated that similar concerns have been
raised in other villages, and confirmed that the impact of the Missing Middle Housing
Bill on historic properties will be incorporated into the Historic Preservation Plan.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: MOTION, DISCUSSION, AND VOTE

Committee Member Edward Vargas asked for clarification on the specific concern.
Ms. Ruter explained that under the new legislation the R1-6 zoning district would allow
up to four dwelling units per lot, stated there are concerns that the Bill will encourage
demolition of existing historic homes, and explained that there is a one-year demolition
stay for properties with official historic designation.

Committee Member Janey Pearl Starks asked whether the legislation limits the
number of stories that can be built. Ms. Wagner stated that the Bill allows for a
maximum height of two stories.

Motion:
Committee Member Zach Burns made a motion to recommend approval of the
Historic Preservation Plan, per the staff recommendation, with direction that staff
amend the Historic Preservation Plan to include an assessment and analysis of how
the Missing Middle Housing Law (ARS Section 9-462.13, HB2721) will impact historic
districts within one mile of Phoenix's Central Business District. Vice Chair Darlene
Martinez seconded the motion.

Vote:
8-0, motion to recommend approval the Historic Preservation Plan, per the staff
recommendation, with direction that staff amend the Historic Preservation Plan to
include an assessment and analysis of how the Missing Middle Housing Law (ARS
Section 9-462.13, HB2721) will impact historic districts within one mile of Phoenix's
Central Business District passed, with Committee Members Ban, Burns, Greenman,
Johnson, Starks, Vargas, Martinez, and Gaughan in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 555
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 17, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 10-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Kevin Weight, staff, gave a presentation regarding the update to the city’s Historic
Preservation Plan. Mr. Weight stated that the city’s first comprehensive Historic
Preservation Plan was adopted in 2015 and the current update was the result of a
collaborative effort that began with two consultant studies in 2021 and 2024, both of
which included focus groups and outreach, the results of which were incorporated into
the plan update. Mr. Weight stated the plan update supports and expands upon the
historic preservation goals outlined in the recently adopted general plan update, and
details the public benefits of historic preservation, while providing a legal and
historical background for preservation both nationally and in Phoenix. Mr. Weight
stated that the plan update includes a timeline of historic preservation activities in
Phoenix over the last 100+ years and outlines the functions of the City of Phoenix
Historic Preservation Commission, Historic Preservation Office, and City Archaeology
Office, as well as listing the city’s accomplishments since the adoption of the 2015
plan. Mr. Weight added that the plan update includes five goals, those being to protect
archaeological resources, protect historic resources, explore preservation incentives,
develop community awareness, and promote partnerships. Mr. Weight summarized
the timeline for approval stating that the Historic Preservation Office has been
presenting to the various villages with the intent of seeking a recommendation from
each village. Mr. Weight summarized the upcoming Historic Preservation Committee
meeting, Planning Commission, City Council Sub-Committee meetings, and City
Council formal sessions, with final approval to occur in October of this year and an
effective date in January 2026. Mr. Weight asked for input from the Village Planning
Committee and that the Committee recommend approval of the plan update.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 556
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Questions from the Committee:
Chair Gregory Freeman asked if there were any historic districts in the Deer Valley
Village. Mr. Weight stated there were no historic districts but there are some
individually eligible properties in addition to the Deer Valley Rock Art Center and
some early 20th Century buildings. Mr. Weight stated it is a shifting 50-year mark and
that more properties will surface over time.

Committee Member Ricardo Romero asked about community engagement. Mr.
Weight stated they had presented to the Historic Preservation Commission, which is
a nine-member body appointed by the City Council. Mr. Weight stated that the Historic
Preservation Commission has committed to being more active. Mr. Weight stated they
have had a presence at certain activities and community events and have been
working their way north into areas that have not had much activity in the past. Mr.
Weight stated they have been working to establish partnerships with non-profit
groups.

Committee Member Trilese DiLeo asked about the criteria needed to receive
Historic status. Mr. Weight stated that the city’s criteria mirrors that of the National
Park Service and the State of Arizona, which requires the site to be at least 50 years
old, with some exceptions, that the site be significant in terms of local, state or
national history, and that the site retain its integrity with respect to location, materials,
design, and workmanship.

Committee Member Gerrald Adams asked about the presence of archeological
sites. Mr. Weight stated that Historic Preservation and Archeology are separate
entities within the city and that he is not a trained archeologist but that there are
locations in the area such as the Deer Valley Rock Art Center. Mr. Weight stated
there are state laws in place that protect archeological sites and that if a site is known
to have archeological significance, then monitoring of the site would be required
during the development of the site to allow documentation of any findings. Mr. Weight
stated that such findings do not necessarily stop the development of a site but allow
the site to be managed in a way that is sensitive to the archeological resources, so
they are not lost. Mr. Weight stated that some sites might be so significant that they
are listed on the Register, which does protect the site. Mr. Weight stated that if human
remains are found, the tribes are notified and the remains preserved per tribal
customs. Committee Member Adams asked about time limits associated with the
findings of human remains. Mr. Weight referenced a project at Tovrea Castle where a
human body was discovered during clearing activities related to the caretaker’s
quarters and police were called in to investigate a crime.

Public Comments:
Tom Doescher identified himself as a member of the Encanto Village Planning
Committee. Mr. Doescher stated that a couple weeks prior, the Encanto Village
Planning Committee voted to approve the proposed Historic Preservation Plan update
with direction to require the plan to include an analysis of the effects the Missing
Middle Housing Bill would have on Historic Preservation efforts within the City of

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 557
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Phoenix. Mr. Doescher stated that the bill was passed in late 2024 with an effective
date of January 1st, 2026 and that the bill affects cities with greater than 75,000
population, allowing duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes up to two stories in height in
and within one-mile of the city’s Central Business District. Mr. Doescher stated that 22
of the 33 historic districts in Phoenix are located within that one-mile border. Mr.
Doescher stated that the bill will have devastating effects on historic neighborhoods.
Mr. Doescher stated that he resided in the Willo District, which received historic status
in 1986 under a conservation plan, prior to the Historic Preservation Ordinance having
taken effect. Mr. Doescher stated that the first house in the district was constructed in
1913. Mr. Doescher stated that under the new Bill, a developer could buy a property,
let it sit for a year, then tear it down to build affordable housing. Mr. Doescher stated
that the Willo District was designated largely as single-family homes, with two
multifamily exceptions. Mr. Doescher reiterated that the bill will have a devastating
effect on the neighborhood and will not provide affordable housing. Mr. Doescher
gave two examples of projects in the area that were constructed in a manner that was
out of character with the neighborhood. Mr. Doescher stated that the Encanto Village
Planning Committee has received a consensus among the other Village Planning
Committees to give direction that the plan update include an analysis of the effects
that House Bill 2721 would have on historic neighborhoods in Phoenix. Mr. Doescher
stated that other cities within the state that have historic neighborhoods will also be
affected by the bill and that the City of Tucson prepared a 77-page analysis on the
subject. Mr. Doescher stated that the Willo District tried to get an amendment to the
bill, but it was too late in the legislative session and that they would seek changes to
the bill during the next legislative session. Mr. Doescher reiterated his request to the
Village Planning Committee.

Committee Member James Sutphen asked what can be done if the law has already
been passed. Mr. Doescher stated that the Committee could give direction to staff to
look at what can be done to exempt historic districts from this law. Mr. Doescher
stated that he understands that this might be perceived as being against affordable
housing but also stated that the Willo District and others were supportive of the law
concerning accessory dwelling units, citing examples of garage conversions that had
taken place over time. Mr. Doescher stated they were not opposed to affordable
housing but did not believe that House Bill 2721 will have any effect on a statewide
housing shortage when applied to historic neighborhoods. Mr. Doescher stated that
the city must have an ordinance adopted by January 1, 2026.

Committee Member Sandra Hoffman asked if they had looked at placing deed
restrictions on the properties. Mr. Doescher stated that they all have restrictions and
are looking at Proposition 207.

Staff Response:
Mr. Weight stated that the other Village Planning Committees were in agreement that
the effects of House Bill 2721 present a challenge that needs to be addressed in the
plan update, and that staff is in support. Mr. Weight stated that the process of
updating the plan began prior to the passage of House Bill 2721 and that a Text

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 558
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Amendment to implement that bill is in progress. Mr. Weight stated that other
municipalities such as Tucson have already begun working on the issue.

Discussion:
Committee Member Trilese DiLeo asked who wrote the Missing Middle Housing Bill.
Chair Freeman stated that it was the State Legislature that wrote the bill. Committee
Member DiLeo asked how a building could get torn down and if there would be any
sort of rezoning process. Mr. Weight stated that if the property is listed, the Historic
Preservation Office can delay the demolition of the building for a period of one year,
during which time alternatives to the demolition of the building would be identified. Mr.
Weight stated that under the current ordinance, the owner can propose a suitable
replacement, which would be evaluated based on its density and character; however,
under the new law, that density could be dramatically different than the adjacent
neighborhood. Committee Member Dileo asked for clarification that if any home was
to be destroyed by fire, could the owner come back with a fourplex as opposed to like-
for-like as currently written in the ordinance. Mr. Weight clarified that would be the
case within the Central Business District and within a one-mile radius of that district.
Mr. Weight stated that it does not currently affect the Deer Valley Village but it does
affect about two-thirds of the historic districts, primary those that are south of Thomas
Road.

Committee Member Adams asked about rezoning the property. Mr. Kuhfuss, staff,
stated that any property owner would have the right to file a rezoning application but
that granting the rezoning request is not a foregone conclusion. Chair Freeman
summarized that the new law prevents the city from stopping this type of development
from occurring within this area. Committee Member DiLeo asked for confirmation of
the maximum number of units. Mr. Weight stated the maximum number of units is
four.

Mr. Weight stated that other recent changes to state law such as accessory dwelling
units have been implemented fairly well within the historic districts, but that House Bill
2721 allows the replacement of relatively small buildings with much more density. Mr.
Weight stated that he would appreciate the Committee’s support and that if the
Committee wanted to take into account Mr. Doescher’s request to include an analysis
on the effects of House Bill 2721, they would gladly comply.

MOTION:
Committee Member Trilese DiLeo motioned to recommend approval of the Historic
Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation,
with direction for staff to include an analysis of the effects of House Bill 2721 in the
plan update. Committee Member Ricardo Romero seconded the motion.

Additional Discussion:

Committee Member Hoffman stated that she wanted the analysis to include both the
positive and negative aspects of House Bill 2721.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 559
Deer Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)



VOTE:
10-0, motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction for staff to
include an analysis of the effects of House Bill 2721 in the plan update passes with
Committee Members Adams, Clark, Davenport, DiLeo, Herber, Hoffman, Hoover,
Romero, Sutphen and Freeman in favor and none opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 560
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)



Date of VPC Meeting June 3, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 12-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

Committee Member Michelle Santoro returned, bringing the quorum to 12 members.

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

Staff Presentation:
Kevin Weight, with the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, introduced himself
and provided an overview of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025). Mr. Weight discussed what the update includes and its
collaborative effort. Mr. Weight shared the goals and the vision statement of the
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan. Mr. Weight concluded with the public hearing schedule
and stated that staff recommends the Village Planning Committee provide any final
comments and take action to recommend formal City Council approval of the plan.

Questions from Committee:
None.

Public Comments:
None.

Staff Response:
None.

Discussion:
Chair Steven Bowser stated that Phoenix is in its infancy of historic preservation. Chair
Bowser complemented the picture on the cover of the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan
of a historic building on Central Avenue and Osborn Road.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 561
Desert View Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Committee Member George Birchby concurred.

Committee Member Reginald Younger asked who the Arizona Veterans Memorial
Coliseum is owned by. Mr. Weight responded that it is owned by the State and is part
of the Arizona State Fairgrounds. Mr. Weight added that they have been working with
the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office to encourage the Fairgrounds to preserve
it. Mr. Weight stated that they have been somewhat non-committal, but they have not
demolished it, which is good. Mr. Weight stated that it is on their list of significant
historic properties for the post-World War II era.

Chair Bowser stated that there are interesting resources available about historic
properties and historic preservation.

MOTION:
Committee Member Gary Kirkilas made a motion to recommend approval of the
Historic Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff
recommendation. Committee Member Jason Israel seconded the motion.

VOTE:
12-0; the motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025) per the staff recommendation passes with Committee
Members Barto, Birchby, Carlucci, Israel, Kirkilas, Kollar, Nowell, Reynolds, Santoro,
Younger, Lagrave and Bowser in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

Staff has no comments.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 562
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Date of VPC Meeting June 2, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHIstoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 14-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

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

STAFF PRESENTATION:

Helana Ruter, Historic Preservation Officer for the City of Phoenix, provided an
overview of the Preserve Phoenix 2025 Plan and its current progress and noted that this
is the City’s first comprehensive, citywide historic preservation plan, which was originally
adopted by the Phoenix City Council in 2016. Ms. Ruter stated that the planning
process began with a consultant study which included focus groups and identified both
challenges and opportunities in historic preservation. Mr. Ruter stated with this
foundation, staff initiated a public engagement process to refine and prioritize
preservation goals and strategies. Ms. Ruter said that Preserve Phoenix 2025 is a
supplement to the City’s General Plan and supports its vision and core values by
highlighting the role of historic preservation and heritage resources in shaping Phoenix’s
future. Ms. Ruter stated the updated plan builds on the previous 2015 efforts and
considers emerging tools, policies, and actions to address current needs. Ms. Ruter
acknowledged that the process has evolved over the last 18 months, especially in
response to recent state legislation focused on housing and new laws have introduced
challenges by limiting local zoning and design review authority, which affects how
Phoenix can enforce overlays and guidelines that protect the character of historic
properties and neighborhoods. Ms. Ruter stated that language addressing these
challenges will be included in the updated draft plan and the plan includes updated tools
and policy recommendations that will require extensive public engagement to address



Encanto Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

evolving issues. Ms. Ruter stated the importance of balancing growth with the
preservation of Phoenix’s unique historic character and that not everything can be
preserved, and the city must be strategic about what and how it preserves. Ms. Ruter
stated the Historic Preservation Commission is a nine-member advisory body that will
review the progress during its annual work session in August and in that session, it will
help assess achievements, identify gaps, and plan future actions. Ms. Ruter stated the
city’s continued commitment to protecting historic resources within the constraints of
new legislative limitations and that the final draft of the plan will reflect public comments
and, upon completion, will be presented to the Phoenix City Council. Ms. Ruter stated
once adopted, the updated plan will not only guide staff efforts but also serve to elevate
public awareness and reaffirm the city's dedication to historic preservation.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE:

Committee Member Warnicke stated that they understood federal funding for the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) may be ending, and it was unclear what
alternative funding options might exist for the SHPO. Committee Member Warnicke
asked how the SHPO’s inability to operate effectively would impact the City’s ability to
protect historic resources and fulfill the objectives of the Preserve Phoenix 2025 plan.
Ms. Ruter responded that while the City’s Historic Preservation Program is somewhat
insulated due to being city funded, the city is still facing broader budget challenges. Ms.
Ruter stated that the city does not directly receive federal funds for its preservation
program, but it does regularly consult with the SHPO and noted that grants for privately
owned historic properties often flow through the SHPO and they are crucial in the
federal compliance process. Ms. Ruter said if the SHPO were unable to operate, all
required consultations would have to go directly to the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, creating delays and complications. Ms. Ruter stated that the city’s
Government Affairs Office is aware of the issue and is working to advocate for the
continuation of SHPO funding.

Committee Member Wagner thanked Ms. Ruter for the presentation and asked
whether any changes had been made to the draft plan since the previous presentation
in April and if it remained the same. Ms. Ruter responded that there had been some
updates, particularly related to how the plan addresses legal and policy challenges
stemming from new state legislation. Ms. Ruter stated that she has been working
closely with the City’s Law Department to carefully craft language that explains these
challenges, especially those posed by the missing middle housing law without drawing
unwanted attention or concern from the legislature. Ms. Ruter explained that while the
city aims to continue its current design review processes, there are specific provisions
in the new law, such as limitations on restricting building heights to two stories, that
require careful legal interpretation, and these considerations are still being refined
for inclusion in the final draft of the plan.




Encanto Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Committee Member Kleinman asked if the draft version is currently available is
intended to be the final version presented for adoption, or if a more complete version
will be developed. Committee Member Kleinman expressed concern that, while a draft
had been made available, it may not yet reflect all relevant updates, particularly given
recent developments, and asked for clarification on the timing for a finalized version.
Ms. Ruter responded that a draft version of the plan has been available since April and
that it included a link for public review and comment and noted that beyond recent
updates related to state legislation, no significant additional comments had been
received to date. Ms. Ruter stated that she is actively working on incorporating further
comments as they are submitted by Village Planning Committees. Ms. Ruter stated the
Planning Commission will receive the plan as an information item this month in June,
and it is scheduled to return in August for a formal recommendation and the goal is to
compile all feedback into a final draft by then.

Committee Member Wagner asked why a recommendation was being requested at
this stage when key information especially regarding the impact of recent state
legislation had not yet been fully incorporated. Committee Member Wagner questioned
asked if there was a compelling reason to move the plan forward now rather than
delaying it until all outstanding issues could be addressed and if there was a specific
funding-related deadline or another reason for moving forward. Joshua Bednarek,
Director of the Planning and Development Department, responded that staff would
welcome a recommendation from the committee, including direction to address state
legislation as part of that recommendation. Mr. Bednarek stated that due to the political
sensitivity surrounding recent laws passed by the state legislature, staff have been
advised to proceed cautiously in how that language will be incorporated. Mr. Bednarek
stated that while the legislation affects only a small portion of the plan, the overall
significance of Preserve Phoenix 2025 lies in its reaffirmation of the city’s and the
community’s commitment to historic preservation. Mr. Bednarek encouraged the
committee to make a recommendation on the plan while also providing guidance on
how to address legislative challenges in the final draft.

Committee Member Kleinman asked for clarification, inquiring whether staff was
requesting the committee to submit language that would be legally binding, or whether
this would be more of a policy recommendation. Mr. Bednarek responded that the
committee could choose to recommend approval of the plan along with direction to staff
to incorporate language addressing the challenges posed by recent state legislation. Mr.
Bednarek stated that this would not be legally binding but would serve as policy
guidance and that such a recommendation would help emphasize the importance of the
issue as the City Council considers the plan.

Committee Member Perez asked whether previous public feedback submitted prior to
the most recent legislative changes had been incorporated into the draft. Committee




Encanto Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Member Perez expressed concern that while the committee was being asked to
comment on the new legislative language, it was unclear whether earlier feedback had
already been addressed and asked how the committee could confirm that their prior
input had been meaningfully considered. Mr. Bednarek responded that in addition to
incorporating forthcoming comments on state legislative language, any feedback
already submitted apart from the new legal concerns has been reviewed. Mr. Bednarek
encouraged committee members to notify staff if there are any previously submitted
comments that appear to be missing from the updated draft. Mr. Bednarek emphasized
that comments about the legal and practical impacts of state legislation are being
addressed in collaboration with the Law Department and will be reflected in future
revisions.

Committee Member Wagner stated that the only comments previously provided
appeared to be focused on the missing middle housing legislation. Mr. Bednarek
confirmed that those legal concerns have been received and that staff are working with
the City’s Law Department to find appropriate language to incorporate into the plan. Mr.
Bednarek invited any additional input and reassured the committee that the issue is
being taken seriously.

Committee Member George asked what the overall expectation was for the committee
in relation to the proposed plan. Mr. Bednarek responded that it is important to support
the goals and strategies outlined in the plan and that staff recommends forwarding a
recommendation of approval to the City Council, along with any additional direction the
committee may wish to provide, especially regarding recent state legislation.

Committee Member Procaccini asked whether property taxes are addressed in the
proposed plan. Mr. Bednarek responded that he did not believe the plan addresses
property taxes and could not speak with certainty on whether such provisions were
included in any associated legislation.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Mr. Eric Gilmore introduced himself as a resident of a historic neighborhood and
addressed the committee, expressing concern about the state legislation and the status
of the Historic Phoenix Plan. Mr. Gilmore noted that while the plan includes technical
details, it could benefit from additional emphasis on the cultural and demographic
aspects of historic preservation. Mr. Gilmore recommended incorporating more data on
demographics such as older adults, youth, and marginalized communities and
emphasized the importance of preserving the city's cultural fabric. Mr. Gilmore also
referenced prior reporting and urged staff to ensure that findings from earlier studies are
adequately reflected in the updated plan.

Committee Member Wagner stated that there are remaining comments and questions,
noting that while the legal issues had not been discussed in detail, it was important to



Encanto Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

clarify that under the new legislation, developers could potentially demolish existing
historic homes on single-family lots and construct multi-family units of up to four
dwellings. Committee Member Wagner asked whether this interpretation was accurate,
emphasizing its potential to significantly alter the character of historic neighborhoods.
Mr. Bednarek responded that staff is preparing a text amendment to bring the City into
compliance with the newly enacted state law. Mr. Bednarek cautioned the committee
against engaging in detailed discussion on the forthcoming amendment, as it would
return to the committee as a formal agenda item and asked committee members to
submit questions in advance to help facilitate a productive discussion when the text
amendment is presented. Mr. Bednarek reiterated that the text amendment and the
historic preservation plan are separate items, though related. Committee Member
Wagner acknowledged the clarification but stated that the text amendment, the state
law, and the preservation plan are inherently linked due to their shared impact on
historic districts. Committee Member Wagner reiterated concern about moving forward
before fully addressing these issues.

Committee Member Doescher commented that the committee was being asked to
support the preservation plan while significant concerns remained unresolved and that
the request for approval without complete information felt premature. Mr. Bednarek
responded that the preservation plan is a policy document and does not carry the legal
authority to modify or enforce state legislation. Mr. Bednarek clarified that while there is
a connection between the preservation plan and the state mandated text amendment,
they are distinct in function and the text amendment will be developed and adopted
separately to meet the January 1, 2026 compliance deadline set by the state. Mr.
Bednarek stated the preservation plan is intended to guide the city’s long-term
preservation efforts but does not have regulatory power over zoning or development
entitlements.

Vice Chair Matthews closed the discussion and called for a motion.

STAFF RESPONSE:

None.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: MOTION, DISCUSSION, AND VOTE:

MOTION:
Committee Member Wagner made a motion to recommend approval of the Preserve
Phoenix 2025 Historic Preservation Plan Update, per the staff recommendation, with
direction:

Motion to approve the Preserve Historic Phoenix 2025 Historic Preservation Plan
Update to include an assessment and analysis of how the Missing Middle Law ARS




Encanto Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

(Arizona Revised Statues) §9-462.13/HB (House Bill) 2721 will impact historic districts
with one mile of Phoenix’s Central Business District.

Committee Member G.G. George seconded the motion.

VOTE:
14-0, motion to recommend approval of the Preserve Phoenix 2025 Historic
Preservation Plan Update, per the staff recommendation, with direction passes with
Committee Members Cardenas, Doescher, Garcia, George, Kleinman, Mahrle, Perez,
Picos, Procaccini, Schiller, Tedhams, Wagner, Warnicke, and Matthews in favor.

Committee Member Warnicke commented that the state has become the biggest
single threat to the city’s neighborhoods.

Committee Member Wagner stated that the legislation poses a clear threat to historic
preservation and should be prioritized in the plan’s list of identified challenges.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 17, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 5-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Helana Ruter, with the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, provided an overview
of the Historic Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), noting that the plan
will set the framework for historic preservation in Phoenix for the next 10 years. Ms. Ruter
stated that the plan is an update to the 2015 plan. Ms. Ruter discussed what the
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan includes and the five goal areas of the plan. Ms. Ruter
concluded with the public hearing timeline and stated that staff recommend that the Village
Planning Committee provide any final comments and take action to recommend formal

Questions from the Committee:
Kristine Morris asked if only government buildings or residential buildings could be listed
as historic. Ms. Ruter stated that a historic preservation overlay is not limited to
government buildings or residential buildings and noted examples such as grain silos. Ms.
Ruter noted that the recent bond allowed people to apply and encouraged a diversity of
buildings and structures. Ms. Morris asked for more information regarding identifying
historic properties because she was the superintendent of a school that was currently
restoring a schoolhouse from the 1920’s. Ms. Ruter noted that there were land surveys
from the 1980’s through the early 2000’s but that that stopped during the recession. Ms.
Ruter stated that with this updated plan, there is a larger initiative to start surveying
properties again. Ms. Ruter requested Committee Member Morris to follow up with her
regarding the schoolhouse.

Chair Parris Wallace stated that numerous of these historic neighborhoods consisted of
the working class. Chair Wallace asked how the update would address gentrification. Ms.
Ruter stated that the way properties are identified as historic was by rezoning the site to
include the Historic Preservation Overlay in the zoning designation. Ms. Ruter added that
that designation would have to go through the public hearing process and be approved by

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 569
Estrella Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 17, 2025
Page 2

the City Council. Ms. Ruter stated that there is a certain classification that does not require
rezoning the property. Ms. Ruter added that this would give individual properties the
recognition of historic designation without it being regulatory. Ms. Ruter noted that a
historic preservation overlay doesn’t limit development, if the property meets all the
requirements. Ms. Ruter provided some examples like keeping the building façade.

Chair Wallace asked how the update would impact future development or redevelopment.
Ms. Ruter stated that if a property was over 50 years old, then it is put on hold for 30 days
to allow the Historic Preservation Office to analyze the property and possibly save it from
being torn down. Ms. Ruter added that some property owners do not want the historic
designation on their property but that their department requests small features to tie the
property to the past.

Vice Chair Lisa Perez remembered the Circles Records and Tapes store that faced a lot
of backlash when it was demolished. Vice Chair Perez stated that Phoenix does not have
a deep history. Chair Perez mentioned the historic building on 3rd Street and Osborn
which was able to restore the façade, but the building was used for a different use.

Ms. Ruter stated that with the update, she hoped that there would be more initiatives such
as grants to assist these developments and improvements. Vice Chair Perez mentioned
the rezone case that consisted of a historic laundromat and how there were a wide range
of opinions.

Ms. Morris asked why historic properties were not included in the General Plan Update
discussions. Vice Chair Perez noted that the General Plan Land Use Map focused on
land use and not necessarily the historic property designation.

Ms. Morris asked how they provide feedback regarding the update. Ms. Ruter noted that
they were seeking a recommendation from the committee but that she would be happy to
discuss any comments and comments can still be provided now or via email.

Marcus Ceniceros asked for more information regarding the amtrack, and the old train
station located in downtown Phoenix. Ms. Ruter stated that that property was owned by a
private entity but that it was both on the National and Phoenix Historic Registry.

Public Comment:
Opal Wagner stated that she was on the Encanto Village Planning Committee and noted
that she lived in the oldest historic districts in the city. Ms. Wagner noted that the Encanto
committee has requested the Historic Preservation Office to amend the plan to address
the missing middle housing. Ms. Wagner voiced her concern on how the state level
initiatives could affect over 22 different neighborhoods. Ms. Wagner noted that many of the
houses located in these historic neighborhoods are one story and that the initiative could
potentially cause a lot of demolition to allow for additional houses. Ms. Wagner requested
the Estrella committee to include the same direction in their recommendation as the
Encanto committee.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 570
Estrella Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 17, 2025
Page 3

Aaron Montano noted that he was also on the Encanto Village Planning Committee and
that he echoed and supported the comments and request presented by Opal Wagner. Mr.
Montano agreed that Phoenix does not have many historic buildings and noted that these
historic neighborhoods dated back to the 1930’s. Mr. Montano stated that he supported
affordable housing but that the updated needed to be updated to address the missing
middle housing.

Committee Discussion/Motion/Vote:
Vice Chair Perez noted that there was a collision that focused on the missing middle
housing movement. Vice Chair Perez was skeptical that this approach would provide
affordable housing. Vice Chair Perez thanked both members of the public for coming to
the Estrella Village Planning Committee meeting to provide their comments. Vice Chair
Perez noted that she was familiar with the level of engagement and passion by residents
that live in these historic neighborhoods. Vice Chair Perez voiced her support to add the
same direction as the other committees.

Chair Wallace thanked the members of the public for their comments but noted that four
houses would help serve the community more than one.

Ms. Wagner noted that they were not opposed to additional or affordable housing but
would like the updated plan to assess how it would affect historic neighborhoods.

Motion:
Vice Chair Lisa Perez motioned to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation
Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction
that staff amend the report to include an assessment and analysis of how the Middle
Housing Law, ARS Section 9-426-13, House Bill 2721 will impact Phoenix historic
districts. Kristine Morris seconded.

Vote:
5-0, motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction passed with
Committee Members Ceniceros, Dominguez, Morris, Perez, and Wallace in favor.

Staff Comments Regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 571
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 9, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 10-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Kevin Weight, with the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, introduced himself
and provided an overview of the Historic Preservation Plan update. Mr. Weight shared
how to access the plan. Mr. Weight discussed what the update is for and the
collaborative effort of the plan update. Mr. Weight shared what the plan update includes
and the goals of the plan update. Mr. Weight concluded with the public hearing timeline
and stated that staff recommends the Village Planning Committee provide any final
comments and take action to recommend formal City Council approval.

Questions from the Committee:
None.

Public Comment:
Chair Stephanie Hurd asked Phil Hertel if he would like to speak since he submitted a
speaker card. Phil Hertel noted that he did not need to speak.

Dan Penton voiced his support for the preservation plan. Mr. Penton noted that one of
the plan’s goals was identifying and protecting the neighborhood heritage concept. Mr.
Penton stated that numerous properties in the Laveen village would meet the 40–50-
year criteria to be identified as a heritage neighborhood. Mr. Penton requested more
historic preservation enforcements that would prevent historic properties from being
neglected or demolished. Mr. Penton added that South Mountain Park should be
designated as cultural property to further protect it from future development.

Tom Doescher stated that he was there representing the Willo Historic Neighborhood.
Mr. Doescher requested that the updated plan address the missing middle housing. Mr.
Doescher stated that historic houses could be torn down and converted into four units,
thus eliminating history. Mr. Doescher reiterated his request to add a recommendation
to address missing middle housing in the updated plan.
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 572
Laveen Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 9, 2025
Page 2

Staff Response:
Mr. Weight appreciated the support voiced by the members of the public and noted that
they have discussed the request to include missing middle housing during the Encanto
Village Planning Committee meeting. Mr. Weight added that the committee was
supportive of the direction and approved the updated plan. Mr. Weight noted that this
would not affect Laveen but understood the community’s request to preserve single-
family houses. Mr. Weight stated that he would not oppose the Laveen committee’s
decision if they wanted to add direction to address missing middle housing.

Committee Discussion/Motion/Vote:
None.

Motion:
Kristi McCann motioned to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction that
staff amend the report to include an assessment and analysis of how the Middle
Housing Law, ARS Section 9-426-13, House Bill 2721 will impact Phoenix historic
districts. Mixen Rubio-Raffin seconded.

Vote:
10-0, motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction passed with
Committee Members Darby, McCann, Nasser-Taylor, Ortega, Perrera, Rouse, Rubio-
Raffin, Serrette, Barraza, Jensen, and Hurd in favor.

Staff Comments Regarding VPC Recommendation:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 573
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Date of VPC Meeting June 11, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with
direction
VPC Vote 13-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

Committee Member Lupita Galaviz arrived during this item bringing the quorum
thirteen.

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

Helana Ruter, City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Officer, indicated that the
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan is an update to the first historic preservation
plan adopted by the City of Phoenix ten years ago. Ms. Ruter noted a firm and
focus group were employed to provide recommendations which kicked off a
public engagement process. Ms. Ruter said the majority of the historic districts
are on the periphery of downtown. Ms. Ruter stated there was an effort at the
state level with legislation trying to limit municipal design review and zoning to
keep buildings more affordable.

Ms. Ruter added that coming later in the Fall to the Village Planning Committees
is a text amendment related to the missing middle housing. Ms. Ruter said she
mentioned it as it applies to the historic areas around downtown and it will
impact the historic districts. Ms. Ruter noted the plan outlines what the City’s
Historic Preservation and Archaeology Office does and outlines their goals. Ms.
Ruter said the original five goals of the 2015 plan are still relevant but this plan
now provides background information and recommended tools or policy action
items which vary in complexity. Ms. Ruter said it’s a broad overarching
document and mentioned she would be going out to the other Villages to make
this presentation. Ms. Ruter said that today she was ultimately looking for a
recommendation of approval.

Vice Chair Derie asked for the criteria for a building. Ms. Ruter said it could be
archaeological resources and the built environment. Ms. Ruter said the Maryvale
Terrace is a neighborhood of important significance. Vice Chair Derie asked for
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 574
Maryvale Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary – June 11, 2025
Historic Preservation Plan Update


the results of the David and Gladys Wright House. Ms. Ruter said the house was
listed on the National Register of Historic Places and a historic conservation
easement was put on the house. Vice Chair Derie asked because it was about
an event center.

Al DePascal asked if it is mainly for the downtown area. Ms. Ruter said this is
citywide and the plan looks beyond the city to be more innovative.

Vice Chair Derie asked if the Western Savings building was considered historic.
Ms. Ruter said it was not designated but eligible. Vice Chair Derie said the City
of Phoenix used to not see the significance of preserving historic structures.

Warren Norgaard asked if the actual plan was the link from the QR Code. Ms.
Ruter said that was the 55 pages and outlines goals as a summary of the
different resources and tools they’d like to implement over the next decade.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Opal Wagner from the Encanto Village Planning Committee said that her village
has some of Phoenix’s largest and oldest historic areas in the City. Ms. Wagner
brought to the attention of the committee the missing middle housing legislation
in the areas near downtown. Ms. Wagner said the Encanto Village Planning
Committee recommended approval of the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic
Preservation Plan update with the stipulation that staff amend the report to
include an assessment and analysis of how the Missing Middle Housing Law
(A.R.S. Section 9-462.13, HB 2721) will impact Phoenix’s historic
neighborhoods.

Ms. Wagner added the Camelback East, Central City, Laveen and Rio Vista
Villages adopted the same amended language. Ms. Wagner shared her
concerns with the plan update and asked if the Maryvale Village Planning
Committee would consider doing this.

Al DePascal asked if the State Legislature and what the State passed would
allow the demolition of historic structures and build 2-story homes in place of
them. Vice Chair Derie asked if the suggested recommendation would be to
amplify the voice together of the different Villages. Ms. Wagner said yes and the
suggestion would make the report better.

Ken DuBose thought what was being asked was not a whole lot.

Al DePascal asked what the Governor said and Ms. Wagner said she had
signed the House Bill.

Vice Chair Derie asked if they had information about the plan update before and
Mr. Moric said the Village Planning Committee received a brief update at a


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 575
Maryvale Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary – June 11, 2025
Historic Preservation Plan Update


previous meeting and the Historic Preservation Plan staff report was provided in
the monthly packet.

Motion
Patricia Jimenez motioned to recommend approval of the PreserveHistoricPHX
2025 Historic Preservation Plan update, per the staff recommendation, with
direction that the staff amend the report to include an assessment and analysis
of how the Missing Middle Housing Law (A.R.S. Section 9-4692, 13, HB2721)
will impact Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods. Vice Chair Derie seconded the
motion.

Vote
13-0, Motion to recommend approval of the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic
Preservation Plan update, per the staff recommendation, with direction passed,
with Committee Members Acevedo, Alonzo, Demarest, DePascal, DuBose,
Ewing, Galaviz, Jimenez, Norgaard, Ramirez, Weber, Derie and Barba in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

Staff has no comments.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 576
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)



Date of VPC Meeting June 12, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 9-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Helana Ruter, with the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, provided an
overview of the Historic Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), noting
that the plan will set the framework for historic preservation in Phoenix for the next 10
years. Ms. Ruter stated that the plan is an update to the 2015 plan. Ms. Ruter discussed
what the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan includes and the five goal areas of the plan.
Ms. Ruter concluded with the public hearing timeline and stated that staff recommends
that the Village Planning Committee provide any final comments and take action to
recommend formal City Council approval of the plan.

Questions from Committee:
None.

Public Comments:
Tom Doescher introduced himself as a member of the Encanto Village Planning
Committee, with concerns. Mr. Doescher stated that the Encanto Village Planning
Committee recommended approval of the plan with direction. Mr. Doescher stated that
the Arizona State Legislature passed a bill called the Missing Middle Housing bill (HB
2721) a year ago, which will allow duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes in single-family
residential areas within a mile of the central business district. Mr. Doescher expressed
concerns with the impacts HB 2721 would have on historic single-family districts and
historic single-family homes, noting that a majority of the historic districts are within a
mile of the central business district in Phoenix. Mr. Doescher stated that the Encanto
Village Planning Committee recommended approval of the plan with direction to
include an analysis of how HB 2721 would impact historic neighborhoods. Mr.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 577
North Gateway Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Doescher requested that the North Gateway Village Planning Committee include this
same direction in their recommendation.

Staff Response:
None.

Discussion:
Committee Member Paul Carver asked for clarification if the request would be to take
HB 2721 into consideration. Mr. Doescher responded affirmatively, noting that the
Encanto Village Planning Committee tried to get an amendment to the bill to exempt
historic districts from the bill, but it was at the end of the legislative session and would
not be heard. Mr. Doescher stated that the State Legislature encouraged them to come
back to the next session to consider it. Committee Member Carver stated that a
consideration would not remove the problem to leave the historic districts untouched.
Mr. Doescher clarified that the recommendation would be approval with direction to
staff to look at how HB 2721 would impact historic districts. Committee Member Carver
responded that he would be supportive of this recommendation.

Chair Julie Read stated that the City must comply with State law and cannot exempt
historic districts if the law does not allow it. Chair Read stated that the direction could
be for staff to note it and look into it. Chair Read added that Committee members could
testify at the next legislative session speaking as a member of the Committee, but not
on behalf of the Committee.

Ms. Ruter stated that the City is working on a Text Amendment to address HB 2721,
which has to be adopted by the end of the year.

Committee Member Paul Li expressed concerns with adding a stipulation that is fairly
vague.

Adrian Zambrano, staff, stated that it would not be a stipulation, but rather would be
direction for staff to look into this topic and include it in an updated version of the plan.

Vice Chair Michelle Ricart asked for clarification if it would be included only if staff is
able to include it. Mr. Zambrano responded that this is a policy plan and is not
regulatory, so that information on how the bill affects historic neighborhoods could be
included.

MOTION:
Committee Member Li motioned to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation
Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction
to include an analysis of how the Missing Middle Housing bill (HB 2721) will impact
historic neighborhoods. Vice Chair Ricart seconded the motion.

VOTE:
9-0; the motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025) per the staff recommendation with direction passed with

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 578
North Gateway Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Committee members Carver, Crouch, Li, Manion, McCarty, Salow, Stein, Ricart and
Read in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 579
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Date of VPC Meeting June 18, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 9-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Helana Ruter, staff, stated that the draft plan is available online and directed the
Committee to either the link in the staff report or the QR code in the flyer. Ms. Ruter
stated that the current plan update is an update to the first plan that was adopted in
2015. Ms. Ruter stated that the city contracted with a consultant to prepare a report
and hold various focus groups that identified challenges with historic preservation. Ms.
Ruter stated that the report was published in 2023, but since that time things have
come up including recent state legislation, which will have an effect on some of the
historic districts within one mile of the downtown area. Mr. Ruter stated that she
anticipated hearing public comments later in the evening and looked forward to
providing additional information in the plan update to address those concerns. Ms.
Ruter stated that plan update serves as a framework that discusses the underpinnings
of historic preservation, the legal basis for historic preservation, accomplishments
over the last ten years, and outlines the goals for the coming ten years. Ms. Ruter
stated that the original goals of the 2015 plan were still very relevant but that certain
tools needed to achieve those goals were missing. Ms. Ruter stated that the city has a
city archeologist who operates within the city’s Archeology Office under the Arts and
Culture Department. Ms. Ruter stated that Chapter 8 of the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance includes protections of archeological resources but needs some bolstering.
Ms. Ruter stated that the Historic Preservation Office worked with the city’s
Archeology Office to provide policy guidance in the plan update to address these
needs. Ms. Ruter discussed the implementation of the goals of the plan update and
their timing, as well as the role of the Historic Preservation Commission. Ms. Ruter
reminded the Committee of the historic preservation video that was presented to the
Committee a couple months back. Ms. Ruter stated that they were looking to take the
plan update to the Historic Preservation Commission for recommendation in July, with
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 580
North Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
GPA-2-25-Y

recommendation from the Committee as well as any direction the Committee may
have.

Public Comments:
Aaron Searles identified himself as the Chair of the Encanto Village Planning
Committee and the Vice President of the Willo District Neighborhood Association. Mr.
Searles stated that the plan update is missing a discussion regarding the effects of
the Missing Middle Housing Bill that was passed into law and represents one of the
greatest challenges to historic preservation that has happened in the last 40 years as
it represents a radical change to historic neighborhoods located within one mile of
downtown. Mr. Searles stated that the new law essentially allows historic
neighborhoods to be torn down and redeveloped as fourplexes without a single-story
restriction. Mr. Searles stated that the majority of the homes in the Willo District are
single-story and that the new law would drastically change the character of the
neighborhood. Mr. Searles stated that the city does not have a lot of history and
cannot afford to erase what history it has. Mr. Searles stated that when the plan
update was presented to the Encanto Village Planning Committee, the Committee
included the following direction for staff: “I move that the Encanto Village Planning
Committee recommend approval of the Preserve Historic Phoenix 2025 Historic
Preservation Plan Update with a stipulation that staff amend the report to include an
assessment and analysis of how the Missing Middle Housing Bill will impact Historic
districts within one mile of the Central Business District.” Mr. Searles stated that they
had been out talking to the other Village Planning Committees regarding this issue
and that he hopes that the North Mountain Committee will join the effort so that others
will know the potential impact the bill will have on their communities. Committee
Member Joshua Carmona asked for clarification that the intent was that the plan
update includes data and other information that discusses how the redevelopment of
sites as fourplexes etc. are affecting historic neighborhoods. Mr. Searles stated that
was correct and that the law goes into effect in January of 2026. Committee Member
Massimo Sommacampagna asked if they had contacted other entities. Mr. Searles
stated that they had contacted Save Historic Arizona to raise awareness and that they
had collected over 2,000 signatures. Mr. Searles stated that he has yet to hear
anyone state that they knew anything about this bill. Committee Member Ricardo
Romero asked that the plan provide clarity as to the neighborhoods that are affected
and asked if they were looking for any mitigation efforts. Mr. Searles stated they were
only asking for the Committee’s recommendation to include a requirement that
information regarding this issue be included in the plan so that people are aware.

Eric Gilmore stated that he was on the local board with Mr. Searles and was in
agreement. Mr. Gilmore stated they were not opposed to middle housing but wanted
to protect the integrity of their historic neighborhood.

Staff Response:
Ms. Ruter stated that she understands what they are trying to accomplish and has no
issues with providing that information. Ms. Ruter stated that a Zoning Text
Amendment would be forthcoming and that she anticipates that it will be business as


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 581
North Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
GPA-2-25-Y

usual with respect to Design Review, but the city cannot prohibit the types of housing
that state law allows.

Discussion:
Committee Member Heather Garbarino asked if the inclusion of the requested
information will impact the timing of the approval process. Ms. Ruter stated that the
Zoning Text Amendment has not been drafted and that the challenge will be to figure
out the functional mechanics of how this will be implemented. Ms. Ruter stated that
the plan update sets up an outline and does not have a lot of narrative attached, and
that it might be an ongoing effort to analyze the effects of the legislation. Ms. Ruter
stated that absent the law being repealed, the city does not have the option of not
complying with the law.

Committee Member Arick O’Hara stated that he had been paying close attention to
the bill from a public safety perspective since it could result in additional people living
in a neighborhood that was designed for something different. Committee Member
O’Hara stated that the bill discusses the central business corridor as being a one-mile
buffer around that area but does not go into specific detail as to where that might
occur. Committee Member O’Hara asked if the city has already defined the boundary.
Ms. Ruter stated that her understanding was that the intent was to make the
downtown area the Central Business District, and that the law would apply to that
area and a one-mile buffer. Committee Member O’Hara asked if that would include
the Willo District. Ms. Ruter stated that it would include 22 historic neighborhoods
including the Willo District. Committee Member O’Hara asked the committee if there
was any interest in entertaining Mr. Searles’ request and while clarifying that he was
not making a motion, read Mr. Searles’ proposed motion into the record as follows: “I
move that North Mountain Village Planning Committee recommend approval of the
Preserve Historic Phoenix 2025 Historic Preservation Plan Update with a stipulation
that staff amend the report to include an assessment and analysis of how the Middle
Housing Law, ARS Section 9-462-13, House Bill 2721 will impact historic districts
within one mile of Phoenix’s Central Business District.” Committee Member Gabriel
Jaramillo asked if that should be amended to include the forthcoming coming Zoning
Text Amendment. Mr. Kuhfuss, staff, stated that the text amendment was not on the
table for discussion and that the Committee would potentially be looking for staff to
include an analysis of the house bill in the plan update. Committee Member Garbarino
stated that she would like to add potential mitigation measures. Committee Member
Jim Larson stated that he understood that the Committee was to vote on the plan
update and asked for clarification as to how mitigation measures would be included in
the plan update. Committee Member Garbarino stated that it would be included in the
discussion.

MOTION:
Committee Arick O’Hara motioned to recommend approval of the Historic
Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation,
with direction that staff amend the report to include an assessment and analysis, and
possible mitigation, of how the Middle Housing Law, ARS Section 9-462-13, House


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 582
North Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
GPA-2-25-Y

Bill 2721 will impact historic districts within one mile of Phoenix’s Central Business
District. Committee Member Heather Garbarino seconded the motion.

VOTE:
9-0, motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction with
Committee Members Alauria, Carmona, Garbarino, Jaramillo, Knapp, Larson, O’Hara,
Sommacampagna, and Matthews in favor and none opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 583
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)


Date of VPC Meeting June 2, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation
VPC Vote 14-0

VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Kevin Weight with the Historic Preservation Office provided an update of the City’s
Historic Preservation Plan update. Mr. Weight noted this was an update to the city’s
first Historic Preservation Plan which was adopted in 2015. Mr. Weight added that a
collaborative effort began with a consultant’s recommendations for improvements to
advance historic preservation in Phoenix which launched a public engagement
process to identify goals/tools/actions to create a draft plan update.

Mr. Weight stated the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan supports and refines the goal
in the General Plan under Celebrate Our Diverse Communities and Neighborhoods
to encourage historic and cultural preservation in the planning process. Mr. Weight
added that it details the social and cultural, economic and environmental benefits of
historic preservation. Mr. Weight said it supplies a legal and historical background on
historic preservation nationally and in Phoenix. Mr. Weight stated it provides a
timeline of historic preservation in Phoenix, outlines the City of Phoenix Historic
Preservation Program, and assesses accomplishments since the adoption of the
historic plan from 2015.

Mr. Weight said the PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 plan includes five goal areas, each
of which has defined tools, processes or actions to facilitate accomplishment and
achieve the vision of the 2025 plan. Mr. Weight stated the goal areas include protect
archaeological resources, protect historic resources, explore preservation incentives,
develop community awareness, and promote partnerships. Mr. Weight added the
Vision Statement for the plan as: Phoenix is a vibrant and dynamic place with many
layers of history. Together with PlanPHX’s central vision of a “More Connected
Phoenix,” PreserveHistoricPHX2025 envisions a city linked by an appreciation for its
diverse heritage and a desire to sustain it for the benefit of present and future


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 584
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary – June 2, 2025
Historic Preservation Plan Update


generations. Mr. Weight concluded his presentation by sharing a timeline for plan
approval and noted staff was recommending approval of the plan.

Mr. Wise noted he read about a legislative bill where historic buildings could be torn
down to put up multiple buildings like in the Encanto area. Mr. Weight said it is the
missing middle housing bill and said it was being addressed but not part of the initial
plan as the bill was passed a month or two ago. Mr. Weight said it would affect
neighborhoods mainly in the Encanto and Central City Villages. Mr. Weight added
the Village Planning Committees will work with staff on a text amendment to work
through it as gracefully as they can as it is not popular in the historic districts but still
will need to meet the intent of the state legislation.

Motion
Roy Wise motioned to recommend approval of the historic preservation plan per the
staff recommendation. Paul Hamra seconded the motion.

Vote
14-0; motion to recommend approval of the historic preservation plan update per the
staff recommendation passes with Committee members Balderrama, Franks,
Goodhue, Gubser, Hamra, Marcolla, Mazza, Petersen, Schmidt, Sepic, Soronson,
Wise, Sommer, and Mortensen in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

Staff has no comments.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 585
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)



Date of VPC Meeting June 10, 2025
Request Adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Approval, per the staff recommendation, with direction
VPC Vote 5-0


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Presentation:
Kevin Weight, with the City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, introduced himself
and provided an overview of the Historic Preservation Plan update. Mr. Weight shared
how to access the plan. Mr. Weight discussed what the update is for and the
collaborative effort of the plan update. Mr. Weight shared what the plan update includes
and the goals of the plan update. Mr. Weight concluded with the public hearing timeline
and stated that staff recommends the Village Planning Committee provide any final
comments and take action to recommend formal City Council approval.

Questions from the Committee:
Committee Member Eileen Baden asked if there is a focus on reusing historic
buildings and if there are any incentives for historic preservation. Mr. Weight responded
affirmatively, noting that it was addressed in the 2015 plan and has been expanded
upon in the plan update. Mr. Weight stated that there is a fairly robust grant program
that is funded both by the general fund as well as the 2023 General Obligation Bond.
Mr. Weight stated that the grant program provides incentives and funds for rehabilitation
and adaptive reuse. Mr. Weight added that the Historic Preservation Offices works
closely with the Office of Customer Advocacy for their adaptive reuse program. Mr.
Weight stated that there are also fee waivers and preferential treatment of the building
code for adaptive reuse projects.

Chair Dino Cotton asked if there are historic underground tunnels in Phoenix. Mr.
Weight responded that some do exist, but they may not be to the extent that people
have rumored. Mr. Weight stated that there are basements that are connected and
some government buildings that are connected underground.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 586
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Committee Member Will Holton asked how far back historic preservation goals in
Phoenix go and if there is any federal interest in historic preservation. Mr. Weight
responded that two of the goals in the plan are to protect archaeological resources as
well as historic resources. Mr. Weight stated that the historic built environment started
when Phoenix first became a city around 1867. Mr. Weight added that there is a lengthy
history with indigenous people in Phoenix, which the Archaeology Office works with to
protect archaeological resources. Mr. Weight stated that the City of Phoenix Historic
Preservation Office works closely with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office
and the National Park Service. Mr. Weight added that their office follows the Secretary
of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings. Mr. Weight stated that the state and federal level also have tax incentives for
historic preservation. Committee Member Holton asked what impact archaeological
discoveries have on construction. Mr. Weight responded that there are strict laws
regarding archaeological resources, especially for human remains.

Committee Member Baden stated that Phoenix used to have trolleys and San
Francisco has turned their trolley system into a tourism opportunity. Committee Member
Baden asked if the plan addresses the trolley lines in Phoenix. Mr. Weight responded
that it does not address trolley lines specifically. Mr. Weight stated that light rail has
been a big transportation investment in Phoenix, and they have worked with the
Planning staff to support light rail and ensure minimal impact to historic properties as
the light rail lines are constructed. Mr. Weight added that there are maps that show
where the trolley lines were and there are still some rails buried in certain locations
along certain streets.

Committee Member Ozzie Virgil asked if there are any maps showing where
stagecoach lines were. Mr. Weight responded that there is documentation in data
archives that shows where stagecoach lines were, noting that some did go as far north
in Phoenix as the Rio Vista Village. Mr. Weight stated that this would be of interest for
their office to research moving forward for the next 10 years.

Committee Member Baden stated that human remains can typically be found around
river corridors, since that is where people used to live. Committee Member Baden
asked if there could be opportunities for wayfinding signage or mile markers along the
river corridors to incorporate cultural significance into the signage as the river corridors
are improved, such as for Rio Reimagined project. Mr. Weight responded affirmatively,
noting that they would encourage it and it is something that would fit nicely into the plan.
Mr. Weight stated that they have done it along the light rail lines for historic properties.

Public Comments:
Opal Wagner introduced herself as a member of the Encanto Village Planning
Committee. Ms. Wagner stated that the Encanto Village has many of Phoenix’s oldest
and largest historic districts. Ms. Wagner stated that there was a bill called the Missing
Middle Housing bill that was signed into law last year, which targets all single-family
neighborhoods within one mile from the central business district, which includes 22
historic districts, for redevelopment as multifamily. Ms. Wagner stated that each lot
could be developed into as many as four units. Ms. Wagner stated that many historic

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 587
Rio Vista Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

homes are one-story, but the bill does not allow height restriction less than two stories.
Ms. Wagner stated that the bill also allows lot splits into four parcels. Ms. Wagner stated
that the plan update does not include anything about the Missing Middle Housing law.
Ms. Wagner stated that the Encanto Village Planning Committee recommended
approval with a condition to amend the plan to include an assessment and analysis of
how the Missing Middle Housing law (HB 2721) will impact historic districts. Ms. Wagner
stated that the Central City, Camelback East, and Laveen Village Planning Committees
also recommended this.

Staff Response:
Mr. Weight responded that staff supports Ms. Opal’s recommendation. Mr. Weight
stated that it was not deliberate to exclude mention of the Missing Middle Housing law in
the plan but rather a timing issue. Mr. Weight stated that this would be the time to
address anything that is missing from the plan.

Discussion:
Committee Member Virgil asked for clarification that Mr. Weight was not the one that
left the Missing Middle Housing law out of the plan. Mr. Weight responded that he was
not. Mr. Weight stated that it was a timing issue, since the plan update began back in
2021 and the law was just recently passed. Mr. Weight added that staff appreciates any
feedback of missing items from the plan.

Committee Member Holton asked if there is anything that needs to be tailored to the
Rio Vista Village. Vice Chair Scott Lawrence responded that there are no historic
districts within the Rio Vista Village.

Chair Cotton stated that the only historic property in the Rio Vista Village may be
Pioneer Village.

MOTION:
Vice Chair Lawrence motioned to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation
Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025), per the staff recommendation, with direction
to amend the plan to address how the Missing Middle Housing law (HB 2721) will
impact historic properties, per the Encanto Village Planning Committee
recommendation. Committee Member Virgil seconded the motion.

VOTE:
5-0; the motion to recommend approval of the Historic Preservation Plan update
(PreserveHistoricPHX 2025) per the staff recommendation with direction passed with
Committee members Baden, Holton, Virgil, Lawrence and Cotton in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 588
Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)

Date of VPC Meeting June 10, 2025
Request Request to adopt the Historic Preservation Plan
update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
VPC Recommendation Continuance to the July 8, 2025 Village Planning
Committee meeting
VPC Vote 11-0

VPC DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS:

One member of the public registered to speak on this item and did not indicate support or
opposition.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Helana Ruter, staff, provided a presentation regarding the draft PreserveHistoricPHX
2025 Historic Preservation Plan Update. Ms. Ruter stated that the plan builds upon the
2015 plan, stated that the plan is intended to guide the City’s preservation efforts over
the next decade, explained that consultant work for the plan identified key challenges
facing preservation, and stated that the project included robust public outreach. Ms.
Ruter stated that feedback from Village Planning Committees emphasized the need to
reflect recent state legislation, including the Missing Middle Housing Bill, explained that
the plan includes five overarching goals, and stated that the plan is designed to be
nested under the General Plan. Ms. Ruter requested final comments from the
Committee, asked for a recommendation of approval, and stated that the plan will be
ultimately adopted by City Council.

QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Committee Member George Brooks shared that there are many historic buildings in
South Phoenix, expressed concern that there is confusion among residents about how
historic preservation regulations apply, and stated that property owners often wish to
modify their homes while retaining historic designation. Ms. Ruter responded that the
goal of the plan is not to preserve buildings in a static or “amber-like” state, but to allow
for respectful alterations that maintain historical integrity.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Tom Doescher explained that he is a member of the Encanto Village Planning
Committee, described the Missing Middle Housing Bill, explained that the bill was
passed by the State Legislature in 2024, and explained that the bill allows additional



South Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 10, 2025

residential units within one mile of the Central Business District (CBD). Mr. Doescher
stated that most of Phoenix’s historic districts fall within the one-mile radius of the CBD,
expressed concern that the bill could lead to increased demolition of historic buildings,
and requested that the plan include an analysis of its potential impacts.

FLOOR/PUBLIC DISCUSSION CLOSED: MOTION, DISCUSSION, AND VOTE

Committee Member Fred Daniels asked whether funding is being pursued for historic
home rehabilitation and referenced a requirement that recipients live on the property. Ms.
Ruter stated that the City currently has GO Bond funds available for grants, some of
which are allocated to residential properties, stated that the funding focuses on exterior
improvements, and explained that the funding allows for up to $20,000 in matching
funds.

Committee Member Mark Beehler stated that he did not understand the issue with the
Missing Middle Housing Bill and asked for information on the Bill’s impact on the Historic
Preservation Plan. Ms. Ruter stated that a Missing Middle Housing Text Amendment is
forthcoming and acknowledged concerns that the bill has not been referenced in the
plan. Ms. Ruter stated that she is requesting recommendation of approval and that
information will be added to address how state-level changes may impact historic
preservation.

Committee Member Kassandra Alvarez stated that she needs more information about
the Missing Middle Housing Bill, expressed concern that the plan is vague on protections
for archaeological resources, and stated that Indigenous people should be represented
in the process. Ms. Ruter stated that archaeological protection is addressed by another
department that meets with four tribes and stated that protecting archaeological
resources is important to the City.

Vice Chair Emma Viera asked what exactly was being requested. Ms. Ruter stated that
she was requesting approval of the Historic Preservation Plan Update, stated that the
plan is intended to be nested under the General Plan, explained the plan would be
adopted by City Council, and stated that the plan establish policies that outline what the
City wants to accomplish over the next ten years.

Committee Member Kay Shepard asked whether archaeology is handled by another
department. Ms. Ruter confirmed that archaeology is handled by another department,
stated that archaeological protection is within the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and
explained that they are looking to partner more with the Archaeology Office.

Committee Member Brooks asked for clarification on what the motion would include.
Chair Arthur Greathouse III asked how other Village Planning Committees had voted
on the item. Samuel Rogers, staff, explained that Laveen and Central City Village




South Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 10, 2025

Planning Committees had both approved the plan with direction that the plan be
amended to address how the Missing Middle Housing Bill will impact historic districts.

Committee Member Beehler stated that he had not seen the updated Historic
Preservation Plan and did not want to vote on something he had not seen. Committee
Member Beehler asked for clarification on the direction the other Village Planning
Committees had provided. Mr. Rogers stated that at the other Village Planning
Committees there were community concerns that the Missing Middle Housing Bill would
incentivize demolition of historic buildings. Mr. Rogers stated that the Committee had
received a video presentation on the Historic Preservation Plan Update at the prior
meeting.

Chair Greathouse asked what options were available for a motion. Mr. Rogers stated
that it would be at Ms. Ruter’s discretion whether a continuance would be acceptable and
stated that the Committee could approve, deny, or take no action on the plan.

Ms. Ruter stated that a hyperlink to the plan was included in the staff report provided in
the Committee’s packet, but that the full plan was not included in the packet. Ms. Ruter
stated that she would ensure a direct link is distributed and stated that she is willing to
return next month.

Committee Member Lee Coleman asked how many historic buildings and how many
historic neighborhoods are designated in South Phoenix. Ms. Ruter stated that she
would follow up at the next meeting.

Committee Member Brooks identified two historic properties in the South Mountain
Village.

Committee Member F. Daniels asked for the criteria used to determine what qualifies
as a historic property.

Chair Greathouse asked for an explanation of the Missing Middle Housing Bill. Mr.
Rogers stated that staff are working on a Text Amendment to comply with the bill but
village planning staff have not yet been educated on the bill yet.

Mr. Doescher stated that the bill would eliminate single-family zoning, expressed that
the bill had good intentions but was poorly implemented, stated that legislative overreach
will impact South Phoenix, stated that bills are being passed without consideration for
how they affect cities and towns, and referenced a study published by the City of Tucson.

Motion:
Committee Member Kay Shepard made a motion to recommend a continuance of the
Historic Preservation Plan update to the July 8, 2025 South Mountain Village Planning
Committee meeting. Committee George Brooks seconded the motion.




South Mountain Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
Historic Preservation Plan Update (PreserveHistoricPHX 2025)
June 10, 2025


Vote:
11-0, motion to recommend a continuance of the Historic Preservation Plan update to
the July 8, 2025 South Mountain Village Planning Committee meeting passed with
Committee Members Alvarez, Beehler, Brooks, Busching, Coleman, F. Daniels, Falcon,
Shepard, Thompson, Viera, and Greathouse in favor.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




Attachment D




Addendum A Staff Report:
Historic Preservation Plan – PreserveHistoricPHX2025
August 22, 2025


INTRODUCTION
The first comprehensive plan for historic preservation in the city of Phoenix was adopted
in 2015. PreserveHistoricPHX2025 provides the opportunity to assess the
achievements made after the adoption of the original plan, new challenges as well as
new opportunities to advance historic preservation in Phoenix. A copy of the draft
version of PreserveHistoricPHX2025 can be accessed here: PreserveHistoricPHX | City
of Phoenix

BACKGROUND
The city commissioned the preeminent historic preservation data analysis firm
PlaceEconomics to conduct stakeholder meetings to identify challenges and create a
series of recommendations to advance historic preservation in Phoenix based on
practices occurring across the country. The city began a public engagement effort
based on the findings of this PlaceEconomics study (included in plan as appendices)
with a series of public meetings and a publicly posted survey from fall of 2023 through
summer of 2024 to evaluate the relevancy of the original 2015 goals and to set priorities
for the next decade.

The City Archaeology Office played an important role in developing recommendations
for PreserveHistoricPHX2025 because archaeology is a key component of historic
preservation. The City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Ordinance – Chapter 8 of the
Zoning Ordinance – mandates the identification and preservation of archaeological
resources and the recognition that “archaeological resources found on public land are
the property of all citizens and are not private property.” (§802.B.2(c))

These engagement efforts revealed that the original five goals of the 2015 plan continue
to have relevance:

1. Protect Archaeological Resources
2. Protect Historic Resources
3. Explore Preservation Incentives
4. Develop Community Awareness
5. Promote Partnerships
The goals and tools can be found starting on page 54 of the draft
PreserveHistoricPHX2025 plan.


Addendum Staff Report: PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic Preservation Plan
August 22, 2025
Page 2


PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Village Planning Committees (VPCs) considered the request for plan approval
throughout June, with an additional meeting in July. Two VPCs recommended approval,
per the staff recommendation; twelve VPCs recommended approval, per the staff
recommendation, with direction and one VPC did not meet quorum.

The City of Phoenix Historic Preservation (HP) Commission considered the request on
July 14, 2025, and recommended approval per the staff recommendation.

Following these public hearings, updates have been made to the draft plan to address
comments as well as the direction from the VPCs to assess how the Middle Housing Law
(A.R.S. § 9-462.13) will impact historic districts within one mile of Phoenix’s Central
Business District.

STAFF REQUEST
Staff recommends plan approval with the following changes:

Location in HP Plan Proposed Changes
Page 3 Acknowledgements Amend Council, Commission and Staff members as
needed
Page 10 Under Create a Replace as follows: “Commercial areas with a
Network of Vibrant Cores, concentration of heritage buildings, such as the historic
Centers & Corridors Grand Avenue or Miracle Mile corridors, are magnets for
small businesses, legacy businesses, and businesses in
the creative and technology sectors.”
Page 10 Under Connect Add as follows: “Residents of Phoenix’s historic districts
People & Places live closer to museums, libraries and other cultural
institutions compared to the city overall.”
Page 10-11 Under Add as follows: “Phoenix’s heritage commercial areas are
Strengthen our Local home to 20% of all jobs in arts, entertainment and
Economy recreation.”
Page 11 Under Celebrate Replace as follows: “Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods are
our Diverse Communities great models of diversity, not only in architectural style or
and Neighborhoods housing unit type, but also in resident demographics.”
“As a share of housing stock, Phoenix’s historic districts
have 6% of 2-to-4-unit structures versus 1% for the
remainder of the city. A much wider range of housing unit
options yields a diversity of housing and rent prices.”
“Historic districts have both a slightly higher share of high
income and low-income residents as compared to the city
overall reflecting economic diversity.”
“With rapid population growth between 2010 and 2020;
Phoenix’s historic districts gained fewer white residents
Addendum Staff Report: PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic Preservation Plan
August 22, 2025
Page 3

and lost fewer residents of other races than the rest of
Phoenix, maintaining levels of population diversity in these
areas.”
“The city’s inventory of older housing stock is providing
affordable housing largely without subsidy, likely due to its
age, condition and smaller unit size.”
Page 11 Under Build the Delete:
most Sustainable Desert “Historic neighborhoods in Phoenix are walkable—most
City rated “Very Walkable” as contrasted to “Car Dependent”
for the city as a whole.”
Add as follows:
“Phoenix’s historic neighborhoods are significantly more
pedestrian, bike and transit friendly than the city has a
whole.”
Modify as follows:
“Reusing existing buildings encourages adaptive reuse
and diverts waste from our landfills while also reducing
carbon emissions that result from new construction.”
Page 42 under table Replace as follows: “Current real estate market conditions
are evident in the top four challenges selected by
respondents and for good reason. Demand for housing
and increasing real estate prices have placed direct
pressure on historic resources. Arguments that existing
housing is inefficient or expensive to maintain result in
proposals for demolition and redevelopment and continue
to lead to the loss of historic buildings in Phoenix.
Additionally, some property owners, unaware of historic
preservation requirements, or as a result of market
conditions, undertake renovation or demolition work
without obtaining the necessary plan reviews and permits.
Respondents expressed concerns about limited
enforcement mechanisms and the resulting difficulty in
ensuring compliance with historic preservation
requirements.
A new state law, A.R.S. § 9-462.13, related to middle
housing has heightened the concern of historic district
residents about the impact of market pressures on their
neighborhoods. A.R.S. § 9-462.13 requires cities to allow
up to four units on single-family zoned lots within one mile
of a city’s downtown or central business district. In
Phoenix, while historic districts make up only 1% of the
total land area of the city, they make up 78% of the single-
family zoning acreage within the one-mile area of
downtown, making them disproportionately impacted by

Addendum Staff Report: PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic Preservation Plan
August 22, 2025
Page 4

this legislation. The law allows for this additional density,
by right, but does not prohibit historic preservation plan
review. The City of Phoenix Planning and Development
Department will continue to require historic preservation
plan review (demolition and/or new construction) on all
housing proposals for historically designated properties
As the long-term impacts of A.R.S. § 9-462.13 to historic
districts are not yet known, city staff will monitor and
collect data on new development in historic districts related
to middle housing. A report will be prepared and presented
at each annual work session of the Historic Preservation
Commission.”
Page 44 Under first Add as follows: “A primary concern expressed about the
paragraph potential impact of A.R.S. § 9-462.13 to historic districts
relates to the possible demolition of historic dwellings for
the construction of new multi-family dwellings on the
existing parcel.
While A.R.S. § 9-462.13 grants increased rights, it does
not alter the provisions of the Historic Preservation
Ordinance, including the authority to impose a one-year
stay of demolition for properties with HP overlay zoning.
As part of strategies to preserve historic resources, the city
may explore amending the Historic Preservation
Ordinance to allow for the extension of demolition stays
beyond one year. Such a measure could further
discourage speculative redevelopment that undermines
the historic character of neighborhoods.”
Page 45 Under table Add as follows: “In the time since the original public
outreach effort prioritized the development of a “pattern
book” for Accessory Dwelling units (ADUs) the city has
begun an initiative to develop standardized accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) plans that will be preapproved and
made available free to the public. Specific designs will also
be preapproved for historic districts. While noted as
“ADU’s” these preapproved plans will expedite the
permitting of small, sensitively designed housing units
which can add density in districts under A.R.S. § 9-
462.13.”




Addendum Staff Report: PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 Historic Preservation Plan
August 22, 2025
Page 5


Page 53 Mission statement Add as follows: “The August annual work session of the
following last sentence Historic Preservation Commission will provide the
opportunity for staff to report on plan achievements made
the prior year and discuss action items for the coming
year.”
Page 57 Implementation Add row in table as follows: “Create Enhanced Design
Table Guidelines – HPO Partnering with consultants – Medium to
long term”
Revise timeframes for the following items:
• Complete Context development and surveys of
post-World War II property types - Short to medium
term
• Explore creation of honorific Heritage
Property/District Classification - Short to medium
term
Page 61 Implementation Modify third row in table as follows: “Present on relevant
Table HP topics at neighborhood and organization meetings to
include Village Planning Committee meetings.”
Revise timeframes for the following items:
• Develop educational tools for real estate
professionals - Medium term
• Create an HP 101 Series - Short term

PROJECT TIMELINE
PreserveHistoricPHX 2025 is tentatively set to go before the Council Transportation,
Infrastructure and Planning Subcommittee on October 15, 2025, and to City Council on
November 19, 2025.


WRITER/TEAM LEADER
Helana Ruter
8/22/2025




Attachment E


REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
September 4, 2025

ITEM NO: 2
DISTRICT NO.: Citywide
SUBJECT: Presentation, discussion, and possible recommendation regarding
adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan update (PreserveHistoricPHX
2025).
Applicant: City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Commission
Representative: Helena Ruter, City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Commission

ACTIONS:

Staff Recommendation: Approval, with the changes outlined in the Staff Report.

Historic Preservation Commission: 7/14/2025 Approval, per the staff recommendation.
Vote: 8-0.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Ahwatukee Foothills 6/23/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 10-0.
Alhambra 7/22/2025 No quorum.
Camelback East 6/3/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 17-0.
Central City 6/9/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 8-0.
Deer Valley 6/17/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 10-0.
Desert View 6/3/2025 Approval. Vote: 12-0.
Encanto 6/2/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 14-0.
Estrella 6/17/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 5-0.
Laveen 6/9/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 10-0.
Maryvale 6/11/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 13-0.
North Gateway 6/12/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 9-0.
North Mountain 6/18/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 9-0.
Paradise Valley 6/2/2025 Approval. Vote: 14-0.
Rio Vista 6/10/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 5-0.
South Mountain 7/8/2025 Approval, with direction. Vote: 14-0.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval, per the staff recommendation.

Motion Discussion: Vice-Chairperson Boyd was supportive of the plan, however he raised
concerns about some of the proposed changes outlined in the staff report. He was concerned
about how middle housing is portrayed as a negative impact and the reference to affordability of
historic properties.

Motion details: Vice-Chairperson Boyd made a MOTION to approve the PreserveHistoricPHX
2025 update, per the staff recommendation.

Maker: Vice-Chairperson Boyd
Second: James
Vote: 6-0
Absent: Odegard-Begay, Matthews
Opposition Present: Yes




Findings: PreserveHistoricPHX2025 provides the opportunity to assess the achievements
made, new challenges as well as new opportunities to advance historic preservation in Phoenix.

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Saneeya Mir at 602-686-6461, saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov, TTY: Use 7-1-1.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
***REQUEST TO WITHDRAW (SEE ATTACHED MEMO)*** Public Hearing and
Modification of Stipulation Request - Rezoning Application PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1
(3) - Northeast Corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane - District 3

Request to hold a public hearing on a Planning Hearing Officer application for the
following item and consider adoption of the Planning Commission recommendation on
November 6, 2025.

Summary
Application: PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
Existing Zoning: R-O
Acreage: 1.12

Owner/Applicant/Representative: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
PHO Appellant: Patrick Gray and Chinnaz Sayegh
PC Appellant: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC

Proposal: Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to the site
plan date stamped April 16, 1999 and the elevations date stamped May 18, 1999.

VPC Action: The Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee heard this item on
September 8, 2025, and recommended denial, by a vote of 11-1.
PHO Action: The Planning Hearing Officer (PHO) heard this item on September 17,
2025, and recommended approval with additional stipulations.
PHO Appeal: The PHO recommendation was appealed, therefore the item was
scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on November 6, 2025, and
recommended denial, per the Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
recommendation, by a vote of 7-1.
PC Appeal: The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed by the
owner/applicant/representative on November 13, 2025.

Location
Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane
Council District: 3



Parcel Address: 15151 N. 32nd Street

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





ATTACHMENT A

Planning Commission Recommended Stipulations
PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)

Location: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane

STIPULATIONS:

1. That THE development SHALL be in general conformance with the site
plan presented, as modified by the site plan dated April 16, 1999, and elevation
dated May 18, 1999 for the south portion of site.

2. That An 8-foot landscaped setback SHALL be provided along the east
property line including 24-inch box size, drought-resistant shade trees
planted 20 feet on center, or in equivalent groupings.

3. That No trash dumpsters SHALL be located within 50 feet of the east
property line.

4. That The building height SHALL be limited to one story (17 feet 4 inches)

5. That A one-foot vehicular non access easement SHALL be placed along
both Sunnyside Lane and Greenway Lane.

6. That A cross access SHALL be provided on the north portion of the site
upon final site plan approval for the north property, or in the alternative, a
common driveway entrance be provided, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department




ATTACHMENT B
*REVISED*
November 4, 2025




Staff Report: PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
October 30, 2025


APPLICATION #: PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)

LOCATION: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane

EXISTING ZONING: R-O

ACREAGE: 1.12

REQUEST: Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance to the site plan date stamped April 16, 1999
and the elevations date stamped May 18, 1999.

APPLICANT: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC.

OWNER: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC.

REPRESENTATIVE: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC.


STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Approval with additional stipulations, per the Planning Hearing Officer (PHO)
recommendation.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

On September 17, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer recommended approval with
additional stipulations.

VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee (VPC) heard the request on
September 8, 2025 and recommended denial by a vote of 11-1.




Staff Report-PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
November 6, 2025 Planning Commission

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS

The subject site consists of 1.12 gross acres located at the northeast corner of 32nd
Street and Sunnyside Lane and is zoned R-O (Residential Office-Restricted
Commercial). The applicant requested a modification to Stipulation No. 1 regarding
general conformance with the site plan date stamped April 16, 1999 and the elevations
date stamped May 18, 1999 (Exhibit B).

The appellants argue the following points:

• The proposed narrative and site plan indicate incorrect dates. The appellants
indicate the site plan date stamped September 9, 2000 should be the approved
drawings to replace in Stipulation 1.
• The proposed use does not fit the vision for the City of Phoenix’s North 32nd
Street Revitalization Project.
• The unmanned structure will be inviting homeless and security related issues to
the site.
• The use is not a public utility.
• No Use Permit approval on file for a public utility use on the site.
• The R-O zoning district indicating office use or other low impact development to
the neighboring residential should be proposed, rather than an unmanned public
utility.
• The CC&Rs were never amended to allow the R-O zoning.
• The Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee voted 11-1 to deny the
modification to Stipulation No. 1.
• Lack of response from the community regarding questions raised at the Planning
Hearing Officer Virtual Meeting.
• The agreement information for the public utility was never presented to the
public.
• No environmental studies or climate plans have been conducted for this site
concerning neighboring residential areas about safety and noise.
• No Storm Water Management plan exists for this site.
• Future development of cell towers on the proposed site.
• Risk of reduced property value, income loss from short term rentals, security,
blight, and other negative neighborhood impacts.

One of the appellants also submitted a petition that contains 84 signatures from nearby
residents in opposition to the proposed ILA Hut stating the development would have a
negative impact on the community and property values. (Exhibit A)




Staff Report-PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
November 6, 2025 Planning Commission
PREVIOUS HISTORY

On September 16, 1987, the Phoenix City Council heard Rezoning Case No. Z-47-87-1,
a request to rezone approximately 2.23 acres located at the southeast corner of 32nd
Street and Greenway Lane from R1-14 (One family Residence) to C-O/G-O
(Commercial Office District, General Office Option – Restricted Commercial). The City
Council recommended denial as filed per the Planning Commission’s recommendation
and approved R-O (Residential Office – Restricted Commercial).

On June 9, 1999, the Phoenix City Council concurred with the recommendation of the
Planning Hearing Officer for approval of PHO-1-89—Z-47-87-1(3), a request for a six-
month time extension of the conditional zoning time stipulation and general site plan
conformance, subject to stipulations.

On June 28, 1999, the Phoenix City Council concurred with the recommendation of the
Planning Hearing Officer for approval of PHO-2-99—Z-47-87-1(3), a request for a time
extension of conditional zoning; and general site plan conformance, subject to
stipulations.

On February 8, 2012 the Phoenix City Council concurred with the recommendation of
the Planning Hearing Officer for approval of PHO-3-11—Z-47-87-1(3), a request for
Administrative action to modify Stipulation No. 5 to extend or remove the conditional
time stipulation, or determine compliance with schedule for development or take
legislative action to revert the R-O zoning to its former R1-14 zoning classification due
to noncompliance with rezoning stipulations. The City Council ratified the item as
recommended by the Planning Hearing Officer for approval of the deletion of Stipulation
No. 5. (Exhibit E).

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS

Public Correspondence

Besides the appeals received, one letter of opposition was received, indicating
concerns regarding noise, unsightly condition, decrease in property value, blight,
homelessness and the absence of a completed environmental study. A petition of
opposition was submitted containing over 75 signatures, requesting the denial of PHO-
4-25—Z-47-87-1(3) (Exhibit N).

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION

Residential 3.5 to 5 dwelling units / acre




Staff Report-PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
November 6, 2025 Planning Commission

CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING LAND USE

Zoning Land Use

On-site R-O Vacant land
(overall development site):

North: R-O Vacant land

North (Across Greenway Lane): C-2 Convenience Market,
Auto Sales

East: R1-14 Single-Family Residential


South (Across Sunnyside Lane): R1-14 Single-Family Residential


West (Across 32nd Street): R1-14 School District Office

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER FINDINGS

1) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to a site plan
and elevations is recommended for approval. The proposed project, a fiber-optic
service communications hut, will have access to the right-of-way from a
proposed concrete drive immediately west of the parcel. The parcel is currently
undeveloped, and the development will include an approximately 864-square foot
hut, natural gas back-up generator, CMU block screening wall around the
compound and landscaping throughout the entire parcel. The proposed
development is less intense and will create less traffic, sound and impact on the
surrounding neighborhood. The proposal is compatible with and consistent with
development in the surrounding area.

2) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to the
Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an application
requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to require the applicant to
record this form and deliver it to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record.

3) The site is identified as archaeologically sensitive and three additional
stipulations are recommended to be included to address requirements for
archaeological survey and testing.




Staff Report-PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
November 6, 2025 Planning Commission

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS

1. That THE development SHALL be in general conformance with the site
plan AND ELEVATIONS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 7, 2025, AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED
BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. presented
as modified by the site plan dated April 16, 1999, and elevation dated
May 18, 1999 for the south portion of site.

2. That An 8-foot landscaped setback SHALL be provided along the east
property line including 24-inch box size, drought-resistant shade trees
planted 20 feet on center, or in equivalent groupings.

3. That No trash dumpsters SHALL be located within 50 feet of the east
property line.

4. That The building height SHALL be limited to one story (17 feet 4 inches)

5. That A one-foot vehicular non access easement SHALL be placed along
both Sunnyside Lane and Greenway Lane.

6. That A cross access SHALL be provided on the north portion of the site
upon final site plan approval for the north property, or in the alternative, a
common driveway entrance be provided, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

7. PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER SHALL
EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD.

8. IF DETERMINED NECESSARY BY THE PHOENIX ARCHAEOLOGY
OFFICE, THE APPLICANT SHALL CONDUCT PHASE I DATA TESTING
AND SUBMIT AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AREA FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY
ARCHAEOLOGIST PRIOR TO CLEARING AND GRUBBING,
LANDSCAPE SALVAGE, AND/OR GRADING APPROVAL.

9. IF PHASE I DATA TESTING IS REQUIRED, AND IF, UPON REVIEW OF
THE RESULTS FROM THE PHASE I DATA TESTING, THE CITY
ARCHAEOLOGIST, IN CONSULTATION WITH A QUALIFIED
ARCHAEOLOGIST, DETERMINES SUCH DATA RECOVERY
EXCAVATIONS ARE NECESSARY, THE APPLICANT SHALL CONDUCT
PHASE II ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY EXCAVATIONS.

10. IN THE EVENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALS ARE ENCOUNTERED
DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE DEVELOPER SHALL IMMEDIATELY
CEASE ALL GROUND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES WITHIN A 33-FOOT
Staff Report-PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
November 6, 2025 Planning Commission
RADIUS OF THE DISCOVERY, NOTIFY THE CITY ARCHAEOLOGIST,
AND ALLOW TIME FOR THE ARCHAEOLOGY OFFICE TO PROPERLY
ASSESS THE MATERIALS.

Exhibits:
A- Appeal Documents (19 pages)
B- Applicant’s Narrative for PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) (2 pages)
C- Aerial Map
D- Zoning Map
E- Approval Letter for PHO-3-11--Z-47-87-1(3) (2 pages)
F- Sketch Map for Z-48-87-1(3)
G- PHO Summary for PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) from September 17, 2025 (5 pages)
H- VPC Summary for PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) from September 8, 2025 (6 pages)
I- Conceptual Site Plan, date stamped August 7, 2025 (2 pages)
J- Conceptual Landscape Plan, date stamped August 7, 2025
K- Conceptual Elevations, date stamped August 7, 2025 (4 pages)
L- Stipulated Site Plan for PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)
M- Stipulated Elevations for PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)
N – Correspondence (10 pages)*




EXHIBIT A




(;+,%,7%




11880 College BLVD, Suite 100 | Overland Park, KS 66210
metronet.com



August 7th, 2025


Mr. Byron Easton
Planning Hearing Officer
200 W. Washington St, 2nd Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85003


Re: PHO Stipulation Modification from PHO-3-11--Z-47-87-1



Mr. Easton,



We, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC (Metronet/Vexus), request the Planning Hearing Officer’s approval to
modify a stipulation for our development parcel. Metronet/Vexus is a fiber-optic service provider that is
proposing the communications hut located at 3206 E. Sunnyside LN/15051 N 32ND ST. The parcel is currently
undeveloped, and our proposed development would include an 864sqft hut, natural gas back-up generator,
CMU block screening wall around our compound, and landscaping of the whole parcel.

Metronet/Vexus is requesting to modify stipulation #1 of the Zoning Case PHO-3-11--Z-47-87-1. The stipulation
reads:
1. That development be in general conformance with the site plan presented as modified by the site
plan dated August 1, 2025 April 16, 1999, and elevation dated August 1, 2025 May 18, 1999, for the
north south portion of the site.

The attached/submitted site plan and elevations will show a smaller development, which would be located on
the Northern middle of the parcel, with access coming off 32nd Ave. The rest of the parcel would be landscaped
per city requirements/standards. This will be an unmanned communications hut to provide fiber-optic service to
the residents of Phoenix. Minimal traffic will be on site after construction, besides for normal maintenance of
the building, equipment and landscaping. The existing site plan has shown a proposed building of 8,500sqft,
with 35 parking spaces. This is a major decrease in development size adjacent to a residential property.

All other stipulations to the zoning case PHO-3-11--Z-47-87-1, will be met by Metronet. Those stipulations are:
2. That an 8-foot landscaped setback be provided along the east property line including 24-inch box
size, drought-resistant shade trees planted 20’ on center, or in equivalent groupings.
3. That no trash dumpsters will be located within 50 feet of the east property line.
4. That the building height be limited to one story (17 feet, 4 inches)
5. That a one-foot vehicular non-access easement be placed along both Sunnyside Lane and
Greenway Lane.
6. That cross access be provided on the north portion of the site upon final site plan approval for the
north property, or in the alternative, a common driveway entrance be provided, as approved by the
Planning and Development Department.




www.metronet.com

11880 College BLVD, Suite 100 | Overland Park, KS 66210
metronet.com




This development is necessary to provide fiber-optic service to the residents and businesses of Phoenix.
Construction of the development should take around 2 months to complete, baring any inspection delays. We
would like to have planning approval as soon as possible, so we could seek a building permit immediately after
approval.



Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns about our development.


Sincerely,


Lee W. Wright, P.E.
Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
11880 College BLVD, Suite 100
Overland Park, KS 66214




www.metronet.com

EXHIBIT C




C-2




N 32ND ST




R-O*




R1-14


E SUNNYSIDE LN




mapservices@phoenix.gov



PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Property Location: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane




Planning & Development Department 0 45 90 180 Feet
´
EXHIBIT D




C-2




N 32ND ST




R-O* R1-14




E SUNNYSIDE LN




PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Property Location: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane




Planning & Development Department 0 45 90 180 Feet
´
EXHIBIT E




Mod




EXHIBIT F




EXHIBIT G




REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Byron Easton, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Teresa Garcia, Planner I, Assisting

September 17, 2025

ITEM NO: 1
DISTRICT NO. 3
SUBJECT:

Application #: PHO 4-25--Z-47-87-1(3)
Location: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane
Zoning: R-O
Acreage: 1.12
Request: 1) Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance to the site plan date stamped April 16,
1999 and the elevations date stamped May 18, 1999.
Applicant: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
Owner: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
Representative: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC

ACTIONS:

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer
recommended approval with additional stipulations.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The Paradise Valley
Village Planning Committee heard the request on September 8, 2025 and
recommended denial by a vote of 11-1.

DISCUSSION:

Lee Wright, representative with Metronet Infrastructure Group LLC, introduced
the background of Metronet, a fiber optic provider. He stated the request is to
modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to a previously approved site
plan dated April 16, 1999 and elevations dated May 18, 1999. He indicated the
stipulated site plan shows an 8,500 square foot office building and the proposed
site plan includes an 850 square foot Inline Amplification Hut (ILA Hut).

Byron Easton, Planning Hearing Officer, asked for clarification on the size of the
previously approved building.

Mr. Wright responded 8,500 square feet (office building) as shown on the site
plan from 1999. Mr. Wright stated that the proposed hut would be located on the
north side of the parcel enclosed by a 75-foot X 75-foot CMU block wall. He




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of September 17, 2025
Application PHO-4-25-Z-47-87-1(3)
Page 2

added the ingress and egress to the site would be located off 32nd Street. He
also included the site would meet all landscaping requirements.

Mr. Easton asked for the height of the wall around the proposed site.

Mr. Wright responded that the applicant is proposing a 6-foot wall but they would
be willing to go as high as necessary. Mr. Wright noted the 12-foot-tall building
would be concealed behind the CMU block wall. He added the east/west
elevations are the shorter side at 24 feet wide, with air conditioners on each side,
and the north/south elevations feature an entry door on each side.

Mr. Easton asked what the stipulated height was.

Logan Zappolo, Planning Hearing Officer Assistant, confirmed it was taller (17
feet, 4 inches) than is currently proposed.

Chinnaz Sayegh, member of the public in opposition, stated her properties will be
affected by the proposed development. She noted that she operates a Short-
Term Rental (STR) close to the subject site and said there is no record in the
CC&R’s that the lots were changed from residential to office use. She continued
to state that the proposal will affect her investment, source of income, will create
blight, and will negatively affect neighborhood safety. She included this use
should be relocated to either a commercial or industrial site.

Mr. Wright added that fiber-optic service is considered a public utility, is
registered with the city and state, and is allowed to be located on this site as a
public utility use.

Brett Reall, member in opposition, asked if there will be any intensification of this
use on this site. He included concerns regarding radio frequency transmissions,
small cell or macro sites in the future.

Mr. Wright stated this application is only for a fiber optic hut. He included they
have their own stipulations to only allow one ILA Hut on the parcel. There will be
no more huts, or intensification of the use. He included that they cannot sell or
lease the land to any other companies. Mr. Wright added they are only a fiber
optic provider, there will be no RF’s, cell phone towers, cellphone providers, 5G
towers or small cells.

Ms. Sayegh asked where the documentation is that says he is allowed to have
the hut at this location.

Mr. Easton stated that through City review it has been determined the proposed
development is considered a public utility.




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of September 17, 2025
Application PHO-4-25-Z-47-87-1(3)
Page 3

Mr. Easton stated correspondence was submitted for the case, including from
Ms. Sayegh, indicating concerns regarding noise, unsightly condition, decrease
in property value, blight, homelessness and the absence of a completed
environmental study. Mr. Easton stated the correspondence in opposition
received was focused on the use, but that is not the intent of the PHO hearing.
The focus of the PHO hearing is to determine if the proposed building is in
general conformance to the stipulated site plan. He added the Paradise Valley
Village Planning Committee heard the case on September 8, 2025 and
recommended denial by a vote of 11-1. Mr. Easton recommended that the
proposed modification of Stipulation 1 be approved regarding general
conformance to the site plan and elevations. He stated that the site has been
identified as archaeologically sensitive and that three additional stipulations will
be added to address related requirements. He also added a stipulation requiring
a Recorded Proposition 207 Waiver prior to final site plan approval.

FINDINGS:

1) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to a
site plan and elevations is recommended for approval. The proposed
project, a fiber-optic service communications hut, will have access to the
ROW from a proposed concrete drive immediately west of the parcel. The
parcel is currently undeveloped, and the development will include an
approximately 864 square foot hut, natural gas back-up generator, CMU
block screening wall around the compound and landscaping throughout
the entire parcel. The proposed development is less intense and will
create less traffic, sound and impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
The proposal is compatible with and consistent with development in the
surrounding area.

2) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to
the Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an
application requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to
require the applicant to record this form and deliver it to the City to be
included in the rezoning application file for record.

3) The site is identified as archaeologically sensitive and three additional
stipulations are recommended to be included to address requirements for
archaeological survey and testing.

STIPULATIONS:

1. That THE development SHALL be in general conformance with the site
plan AND ELEVATIONS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 7, 2025, AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPORVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. presented as




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of September 17, 2025
Application PHO-4-25-Z-47-87-1(3)
Page 4

modified by the site plan dated April 16, 1999 and elevations dated May
18, 1999 for the south portion of site.

2. That An 8-foot landscaped setback SHALL be provided along the east
property line including 24-inch box size drought-resistant shade trees
planted 20 feet on center or in equivalent groupings.

3. That No trash dumpsters SHALL be located within 50 feet of the east
property line.

4. That The building height SHALL be limited to one story (17 feet 4 inches)
5. That A one-foot vehicular non access easement SHALL be placed along
both Sunnyside Lane and Greenway Lane.

6. That A cross access SHALL be provided on the north portion of the site
upon final site plan approval for the north property or in the alternative a
common driveway entrance be provided, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department.

7. PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER SHALL
EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD.

8. IF DETERMINED NECESSARY BY THE PHOENIX ARCHAEOLOGY
OFFICE, THE APPLICANT SHALL CONDUCT PHASE I DATA TESTING
AND SUBMIT AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT AREA FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY
ARCHAEOLOGIST PRIOR TO CLEARING AND GRUBBING,
LANDSCAPE SALVAGE, AND/OR GRADING APPROVAL.

9. IF PHASE I DATA TESTING IS REQUIRED, AND IF, UPON REVIEW OF
THE RESULTS FROM THE PHASE I DATA TESTING, THE CITY
ARCHAEOLOGIST, IN CONSULTATION WITH A QUALIFIED
ARCHAEOLOGIST, DETERMINES SUCH DATA RECOVERY
EXCAVATIONS ARE NECESSARY, THE APPLICANT SHALL
CONDUCT PHASE II ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY
EXCAVATIONS.

10. 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,




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of September 17, 2025
Application PHO-4-25-Z-47-87-1(3)
Page 5

AND ALLOW TIME FOR THE ARCHAEOLOGY OFFICE TO PROPERLY
ASSESS THE MATERIALS.


Upon request, this publication will be made available within a reasonable length
of time through appropriate auxiliary aids or services to accommodate an
individual with a disability. This publication may be made available through the
following auxiliary aids or services: large print, Braille, audiotape or computer
diskette. To request a reasonable accommodation, please contact Saneeya Mir
at saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov or (602) 686-6461 or TTY: 7-1-1.




EXHIBIT H




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)



Date of VPC Meeting September 8, 2025
Date of Planning September 17, 2025
Hearing Officer Hearing
Request Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance to the site plan date stamped April 16,
1999 and the elevations date stamped May 18, 1999.
Location Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane
VPC Recommendation Denial
VPC Vote 11-1


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Background Presentation
Adrian Zambrano, staff, provided a background presentation of the request and stated
the site is 1.12 acres and zoned R-O (Restricted Commercial). Mr. Zambrano noted the
original rezoning case, Z-47-87-1, is subject to six stipulations. Mr. Zambrano displayed
the original site plan and shared the original stipulations. Mr. Zambrano then provided
background on the last three Planning Hearing Officer cases, PHO-1-89—Z-47-87-1,
PHO-2-99—Z-47-87-1, and PHO-3-11—Z-47-87-1(3), including each request, their
stipulations, and the site plan and elevations for PHO-2-99—Z-47-87-1. Mr. Zambrano
summarized the request and proposal and displayed the site plan, landscape plan, and
elevations.

Applicant Presentation
Lee Wright, with Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC, introduced himself and provided
an overview of the proposal. Mr. Wright stated that the hut would be an enclosed
unmanned facility screened by a six-foot-tall CMU block wall. Mr. Wright stated that the
hut would be a pre-cast manufactured building up to 12 feet tall. Mr. Wright added that
there would be a natural gas back-up generator, which would only run once a week for
maintenance. Mr. Wright stated that the vehicular driveway would be from 32nd Avenue
and the rest of the parcel would be landscaped per City requirements. Mr. Wright
displayed the landscape plan and elevations. Mr. Wright noted that the building footprint
from the previous office building that was proposed compared to this proposal is about a
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 652
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)

90 percent reduction in size, with the new building footprint proposed as 834 square
feet.

Questions from the Committee
Committee Member Jennifer Hall asked what the purpose of the hut is for. Mr. Wright
responded that it is for all fiber that would be servicing the residences of Phoenix. Mr.
Wright stated that it would be the main office for fiber. Committee Member Hall asked if
there would be above ground utility lines. Mr. Wright responded that all wiring would be
located underground within the public right-of-way. Committee Member Hall asked if
there are more of these facilities in Phoenix. Mr. Wright responded that this is the first
Metronet hut in Phoenix, but there is one under construction in Glendale. Committee
Member Hall asked what this land use would be considered in the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance.

Mr. Zambrano responded that it would probably fall under the public utility building or
facility use, which is allowed in residential districts. Committee Member Hall asked
what would happen with the north parcel. Mr. Zambrano responded that the north parcel
would still remain vacant, and the original stipulations would still apply to the north
parcel. Mr. Zambrano added that any new development that comes to the north parcel
would have to go through the Planning Hearing Officer public hearing process to modify
the stipulation for general conformance to the site plan and elevations.

Committee Member Daniel Mazza asked if this would support fiber for Cox customers.
Mr. Wright responded that it would not. Mr. Wright stated that Metronet is a
construction company that places fiber for T-Fiber, which is T-Mobile.

Committee Member Robert Goodhue asked what the decibel level is of the
mechanical equipment. Mr. Wright responded that it is about the same level as a
standard car at the maximum level. Committee Member Goodhue asked if the property
would be subject to the City noise ordinance regarding noise levels.

Mr. Zambrano responded that it may be in the City Code. Mr. Zambrano stated that
there is no specific zoning requirement regarding noise levels, but it could be added as
a stipulation by the Committee if desired.

Committee Member Toby Gerst asked if the proposal is similar to a wireless
communication facility and asked what the facility does. Mr. Wright responded that it
houses all the equipment to run the fiber optic network. Mr. Wright stated that there
would be no communication towers, and it has nothing to do with wireless
communications or cellphones. Mr. Wright stated that they are a fiber optic company
and everything they would be doing would be coming out of the proposed building and
underground.

Committee Member Hall stated that the Committee has been trying to turn 32nd Street
into a unique corridor with restaurants and pedestrian activities. Committee Member
Hall asked why Metronet chose this location. Mr. Wright responded that one of their
main thoroughfares through the city is the nearby freeway and along Bell Road.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 653
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)

Committee Member Hall asked for clarification that Metronet wants to be close to those
thoroughfares. Mr. Wright responded affirmatively and added that this hut would
connect to the hut in Glendale. Committee Member Hall stated that she is concerned
because this site is along 32nd Street. Mr. Wright responded that the corner would be
improved and would likely look like a park with the amount of landscaping that would be
planted.

Public Comments
Erika Smith Royal introduced herself as a nearby neighbor, opposed to the project.
Ms. Royal stated that these lots are within the Sunnyside Acres subdivision, which has
recorded Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). Ms. Royal stated that she
has done extensive research and has not been able to find documentation that
amended the CC&Rs for rezoning Lots 18 and 19. Ms. Royal stated that the proposed
fiber optic hut is not consistent with the residential office uses per the R-O zoning
district. Ms. Royal stated that the community is opposed to the shelter being built on this
lot. Ms. Royal added that the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance states that a Use Permit is
required for public utility buildings and facilities within the R-O zoning district. Ms. Royal
summarized the conditions that must be met in order for the Hearing Officer to rule
favorably on a Use Permit request. Ms. Royal expressed concerns with property values,
homeless people, trash dumping, precedent for this use, and environmental impacts.

Committee Member Anna Sepic asked where in the CC&Rs would it limit land uses.
Ms. Royal responded that the majority of the property owners have to agree to approve
what is being stipulated. Ms. Royal shared a copy of the CC&Rs.

Committee Member Robert Goodhue stated that CC&Rs are a private matter that
does not concern the City. Committee Member Goodhue stated that the City does not
include CC&Rs in zoning approvals or City approvals.

Victoria Vinson introduced herself as a nearby neighbor, opposed to the project. Ms.
Vinson stated that the community has worked hard to improve the community and to
make it nice. Ms. Vison stated that the proposed hut would invite more homeless people
into the area. Ms. Vinson expressed concerns with noise levels.

Gene Colucci expressed concerns with the electrical components and fire near a
residential community. Mr. Colucci stated that there was an explosion in Downtown
Phoenix a few years ago. Mr. Colucci stated that residents in the community also have
animals and expressed concerns with potential impacts to the animals. Mr. Colucci
stated that the shelter should be located within an industrial area rather than next to a
residential area.

Christian Marquez introduced himself as a nearby neighbor, opposed to the project.
Mr. Marquez expressed concerns with property values and health impacts. Mr. Marquez
stated that the shelter should be located within an industrial area rather than next to a
residential area. Mr. Marquez added that there has been an issue in the neighborhood
with homeless people that was recently resolved. Mr. Marquez expressed concerns with
the site becoming a homeless encampment.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 654
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)

Applicant Response
Mr. Wright stated that all the power will be coming from the north side from the existing
utility easement, noting that it is a 600-amp service. Mr. Wright stated that natural gas
would be tied into from the west along 32nd Street, once the natural gas upgrade is
complete. Mr. Wright stated that there is an existing water meter off of 32nd Street that
can be used. Mr. Wright stated that all fiber cables would be placed off of 32nd Street,
underground. Mr. Wright stated that there would not be a cellphone tower on the site
that would emit radio waves and there would be no radio frequencies at all. Mr. Wright
stated that the power coming into the facility would be a lot less than the school across
the street. Mr. Wright added that there is an electrical transmission site on 33rd Place
nearby, which is probably more concerning than the proposed fiber optic hut. Mr. Wright
stated that adding fiber to properties increases home values. Mr. Wright stated that the
generator is louder than the air conditioning units at 81 decibels, and with the muffler on
it, it would be less than a standard truck at 47 decibels. Mr. Wright stated that the
generator would run in a 20-minute cycle once a week and would otherwise not be
running unless there is a loss of power. Mr. Wright stated that they are a permitted use
under the R-O zoning district, classified as a public utility building and facility.

Committee Discussion
Mr. Zambrano clarified that the Use Permit requirement for public utility buildings and
facilities within the R-O zoning district is specifically for repair and/or storage facilities,
including outdoor, as accessory to a public utility building and facility.

Committee Member Gerst asked how many fiber optic facilities are located within the
Gerst asked what kind of studies have been done regarding fiber optic facilities and
their health impacts on humans. Mr. Wright responded that he does not know.

Committee Member Roy Wise stated that CenturyLink has been providing fiber optic
all over the city, mostly in residential and commercial areas. Committee Member Wise
stated that they are usually housed in a box, often seen at corners of intersections.
Committee Member Wise stated that there is no electromagnetic force coming out of the
fiber optic cables or its connections, so there is no effect on humans since it is all
contained.

Committee Member Mazza stated that he has fiber at his home from Cox and there is
a box within his neighborhood that hums a little when walking by it. Committee Member
Mazza asked if this is a fiber optic box. Committee Member Wise responded that this
is the electrical power box to allow the fiber optic to function. Committee Member Wise
stated that the electrical power is no different than the amount needed to power a
house. Committee Member Wise stated that it would be a centralized facility, similar to
the central offices that telephone services used to go through. Committee Member
Mazza stated that the residents do not want to be guinea pigs for this new type of facility
in Phoenix. Committee Member Wise stated that CenturyLink has a centralized facility
within a residential community, on Doubletree Ranch Road between Scottsdale Road
and 64th Street, which looks like a residential property because the Town of Paradise
Valley wanted it to look like a house.

200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 655
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)

Chair Anita Mortensen asked the applicant to describe the size of the building again.
Mr. Wright responded that the hut would be 24 feet by 36 feet and 12 feet tall, with the
compound being 75 feet by 75 feet, which would be enclosed by a CMU block wall.

Committee Member Hall stated that the Committee adopted the North 32nd Street
Plan 10 years ago, which made a commitment to the community that 32nd Street would
be transformed into a really special corridor. Committee Member Hall stated that she
does not see how the proposed hut fits into what the community envisioned for 32nd
Street.

Committee Member Sepic asked if the proposed modification to the stipulation for the
south lot affects the zoning for the north lot. Mr. Zambrano responded that it does not.
Mr. Zambrano stated that the modified stipulations would only be for the south lot, and
the original stipulations would still be applicable for the north lot. Mr. Zambrano stated
that once development comes in for the north lot, they will have to go through the
Planning Hearing Officer public hearing process again to modify the stipulation for
general conformance to the site plan and elevations for the north lot.

Committee Member Gerst asked what the noncompliance issue was. Mr. Zambrano
responded that it was a previous PHO request, PHO-3-11—Z-47-87-1(3), which
requested administrative action to modify Stipulation 5 to extend or remove the
conditional time stipulation, or determine compliance with the schedule for development,
or take legislative action to revert the R-O zoning to its former R1-14 zoning
classification due to noncompliance with rezoning stipulations.

Committee Member Sepic stated that she knows this corridor well and noted that it is a
major transient corridor. Committee Member Sepic stated that she is not a fan of the
project. Committee Member Sepic suggested the applicant approach APS to locate on
their substation site near Greenway Road and the SR-51 freeway. Committee Member
Sepic added that the applicant would still have to go through the process with the HOA
to amend the CC&Rs, which would likely be an uphill battle with the neighbors in
opposition.

Committee Member Brendan Franks asked if this is part of Metronet’s business plan
to be centrally located in order to get to as many customers as possible without there
being any fiber waste. Mr. Wright responded that they have a giant plan for the entire
Metropolitan Phoenix area.

Committee Member Hall stated that she feels that this is a bad location for this type of
facility.

Committee Member Sepic echoed Committee Member Hall.

MOTION – PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)
Committee Member Hall motioned to recommend denial of PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3).
Committee Member Gerst seconded the motion.


200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 656
Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)

VOTE – PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)
11-1; motion to recommend denial of PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3) passes with Committee
members Franks, Gerst, Goodhue, Gubser, Hall, Hamra, Mazza, Schmidt, Sepic,
Sommer, and Mortensen in favor and Committee member Wise opposed.

STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING VPC RECOMMENDATION:

None.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 657
EXHIBIT I




IMPROVEMENT
PLANS FOR



METRONET SHELTER
DESIGN ENG: LWW

DRAWN BY: JDF
REVIEWED BY: LWW

SUBMITTALS
DATE DESCRIPTION REV
2/18/25 PERMITTING A




METRONET PROPOSED
UNMANED NETWORK
COMMUNICATIONS SHELTER




08/01/2025
1"=100'


SCALE:
NTS

SITE ADDRESS:
3206 SUNNYSIDE LN

SITE NAME:
PHOENIX SHELTER

SHEET NAME:
COVER SHEET

SHEET NUMBER:



PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Site Plan Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


OWNER: NAYEL-CHRISTY INVESTMENTS LLC OWNER:ERILLIAM LLC
APN: 21460020 APN: 21460018 OWNER: BEITMAN JASON
E.O.P E.O.P P/L ZONING: R-O ZONING: R1-14 APN: 21460019
P/L ZONING: R1-14
ROW TO CENTERLINE DIMENSION TRANSFORMER MEET POINT
WITH POWER COMPANY
169'-315"
49'-2" P/L P/L P/L
E.O.P E.O.P
20' REAR SETBACK LINE
20'-0"
40'-0"
X X
120/208VAC
GAS 3 PH 200
E.O.P AMP MAIN
E.O.P 24' W x 36' BREAKER
PARKING SPACE X L X
190'-015 " DUAL HUT P/L
150KW
32 SHELTER GEN
SET DESIGN ENG: LWW

DRAWN BY: JDF
PLACE 4"D CRUSHED
E.O.P P/L ROCK WITH WEED REVIEWED BY: LWW
E.O.P X X
BARRIER FABRIC P/L SUBMITTALS
COMPOUND AREA OWNER: SAYEGH JOHN S/CHINNCAZ
DATE DESCRIPTION REV
City Notes:
12"W CONCRETE DRIVE. 2/18/25 PERMITTING A
“Development and use of this site will conform with all applicable codes and
ordinances.”
“All new or relocated utilities will be placed underground.” X X OWNER: SAYEGH JOHN S/CHINNCAZ
“Structures and landscaping within a triangle measured back 10’ from the property
E.O.P E.O.P APN: 21460022D
line and 20’ along the
10'X20' SVT
ZONING: R1-14 APN: 21460022E
property line on each side of the driveways entrances will be maintained at a
maximum
height of 3’.”
“Structures and landscaping within a triangle measuring 33’ x 33’ along the
property lines will be maintained
6'H 8" CMU MASONRY WALL 4-1.25 HDPE
at a maximum height of 3’.”
“Any lighting will be placed so as to direct light away from adjacent residential
E.O.P 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK ZONING R1-14
districts and will not exceed
E.O.P 4-1.25 HDPE
199'-1011"
one foot candle at the property line. No noise, odor, or vibration will be emitted at any 16
level exceeding the OWNER: METRONET INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP, LLC P/L
general level of noise, odor, or vibration emitted by uses in the area outside of the APN: 21460021
site.”
“Owners of property adjacent to public rights-of-way will have the responsibility for
ZONING: R-O
maintaining all6' H 8" CMU MASONRY WALL
landscaping located within the rights-of-way, in accordance with approved plans.”
E.O.P
“All rooftop equipment and satellite dishes shall be screened to the height of the
E.O.P P/L
tallest equipment.”
4-1.25 HDPE
“All service areas shall be screened to conceal trash containers, loading docks,
P/L
8' SIDE YARD LANDSCAPE SETBACK
transformers, backflow 10'-0" 8'-0"
preventers and other mechanical or electrical equipment from eye level adjacent to all 4-1.25 HDPE 10'-0" 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK
08/01/2025
public streets.”
“Barbed, razor, or concertina wire (or similar) shall not be used on this site where 33'X33' SVT 20' SETBACK
visible from public streets 20'-0"
or adjacent residential areas.” E.O.P 25'-3"
“All signage requires separate reviews, approvals, and permits. No signs are
approved per this plan.” E. P/L 1" P/L
O. 165'-04
1' VEHICULAR
P SCALE:
E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
NON-ACCESS E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
LEGEND 4-1.25 HDPE E.O.P E.O.P E.O. 1"=32'
EASEMENT
SITE ADDRESS:
4-1.25 HDPE
P/L 3206 SUNNYSIDE LN
PROPERTY LINE
E.O.P SITE NAME:
EDGE OF PAVEMENT E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
P E.O.P E.O.P PHOENIX SHELTER
CENTERLINE O.
E.
SHEET NAME:
SEWER LINE OVERALL SITE PLAN
FIBER CONDUIT
SCALE BAR 1"=32' SHEET NUMBER:
ELECTRICAL CONDUIT E.O.P

WATER LINE 0 5 10 20 30 32
E.O.P


PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Site Plan Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


EXHIBIT J




E 16' COMMON DRIVEWAY
P/L NAYEL-CHRISTY INVESTMENTS LLC 16' UTILITY EASEMENT ERILLIAM LLC
PRELIMINARY PLANT LEGEND
PARCEL ID: 21460020 EXISTING O.H.E. (TYP.) PARCEL ID: 21460018 SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME - COMMON NAME QTY. SIZE COMMENTS
PROPERTY LINE P/L TREES
TRANSFORMER MEET POINT
EXISTING POWER E.O.P WITH POWER COMPANY
POLE (TYP.) GAS CHILOPSIS LINEARIS - DESERT WILLOW 13 24" BOX STANDARD
P/L P/L P/L P/L PARKINSONIA X 'DESERT MUSEUM' 9 24" BOX STANDARD
- DESERT MUSEUM PALO VERDE
E.O.P
X
SHRUBS
GAS
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE MetroNet
MetroNet
X X X
CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA - RED BIRD OF PARADISE 12 5 GAL FULL CAN
MetroNet
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE MetroNet

4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE
X
8' TELEPHONE
EASEMENT CALLIANDRA CALIFORNICA - RED FAIRY DUSTER 21 5 GAL FULL CAN
E.O.P X GAS
X
P/L 24' W X 36' L X EREMOPHILA HYGROPHANA - BLUE BELLS 18 5 GAL FULL CAN
EXISTING TREE DUAL HUT
SHELTER P/L
LEUCOPHYLLUM FRUTESCENS 'GREEN CLOUD' 18 5 GAL FULL CAN
150KW
GEN
SET
10' X 20' S.V.T. E.O.P
- GREEN CLOUD TEXAS RANGER
X X
14' DOUBLE SWING GATE TECOMA X 'SPARKY' - SPARKY TECOMA 22 5 GAL FULL CAN
- SEE CIVIL PLANS
12' WIDE CONCRETE DRIVE X
- SEE CIVIL PLANS ACCENTS
E.O.P X X X
4" DEPTH CRUSHED ROCK ASCLEPIAS SUBULATA - DESERT MILKWEED 17 5 GAL FULL CAN
W/WEED BARRIER FABRIC
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25

HDPE
MetroNet

MetroNet
COMPOUND AREA HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA - RED HESPERALOE 18 5 GAL FULL CAN
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25
4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE 4-1.25 HDPE
HDPE

MetroNet
MetroNet
- SEE CIVIL PLANS
4-1.25
4-1.25 HDPE
HDPE
EXISTING CMU WALL GROUND COVERS
E.O.P
X X X 4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
P/L 4-1.25 HDPE
LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS - PURPLE TRAILING LANTANA 10 5 GAL FULL CAN
4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE
X PROPERTY LINE
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
P/L
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
LANTANA X 'NEW GOLD' - NEW GOLD LANTANA 28 5 GAL FULL CAN
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
E.O.P X 4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
SALVAGE MATERIAL
N. 32ND STREET
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
R.O.W.
4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE
X EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN SEE - -
4-1.25 HDPE
WIDTH VARIES EXISTING PLAN
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
RESIDENTIAL
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
E.O.P
4-1.25 HDPE
EXISTING SIDEWALK 4-1.25 HDPE
DECOMPOSED GRANITE - T.B.D. 32,362 SQ.FT.
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
EXISTING CURB
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
NOTES:
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
E.O.P
X
P/L 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE

X 1. DUE TO PLANT MATERIAL AVAILABILITY, SUBSTITUTIONS FOR PLANT MATERIAL
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
LISTED ABOVE MAY BE USED. ANY ALTERNATES OR SUBSTITUTIONS MUST BE ON
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
P/L
4-1.25 HDPE
THE ADWR LOW WATER USE PLANT LIST.
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
E.O.P 4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
2. SUB-SPECIES OR HYBRIDS OF PLANT MATERIAL LISTED ABOVE MAY BE USED AS
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
X ALTERNATES/SUBSTITUTIONS.
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
3. ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE ADDED TO THE LIST ABOVE DUE TO
X 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE
UTILITY COMPANY OR H.O.A. REQUESTS AND/OR PLANTING RESTRICTIONS
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




P/L P/L 4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
WITHIN UTILITY EASEMENTS.
E. 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE


O
4-1.25 HDPE
.P 4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE

E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
4. NO TREES TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE P.U.E. OR ANY OTHER NOTED
E.O.P E.O.P 4-1.25 HDPE
4-1.25 HDPE
E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
33' X 33' S.V.T. EASEMENTS.
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
1' V.N.A.E.
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE
R.O.W. IS LIMIT OF WORK
4-1.25 HDPE

4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
E. SUNNYSIDE LANE
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE
25' R.O.W.
4-1.25 HDPE




4-1.25 HDPE



E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P 4-1.25 HDPE E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P E.O.P
P
O.
E.



08/01/2025




VICINITY MAP
E GREENWAY RD



E GREENWAY LN

N 32ND ST N 33RD PL


E SUNNYSIDE LN
SITE

E NISBET RD


NORTH
METRONET SHELTER SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
Landscape PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
Architects
Land 3206 E. SUNNYSIDE LANE, PHOENIX, AZ 85032
Planning JULY 30, 2025 0' 10' 20' 40' 60'
Irrigation

PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Landscape Plan Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


EXHIBIT K




7 7
514 8 " 42'10 8 "


436" 36'4"
SUPPLIED AND
INSTALLED BY OTHERS
FIELD WORK FIELDWORK
2" EXTERIOR LIGHT 2"
ENCLOSURE
831-01999
7"


3 FIELD WORK
(84 ") 4" NIPPLE IN 5" PVC EXTERIOR LED LIGHT FIELD WORK
831-02032 EXTERIOR STROBE
849-01251 DESIGN ENG: LWW

DRAWN BY: JDF
3070 DOOR
REVIEWED BY: LWW
3 8'-87"
CAST WALL HEIGHT
(20 4 ") 8
1 8'-47" SUBMITTALS
16 4 " 8 141" 11'9"
DATE DESCRIPTION REV
133" 11'1"
1 (110 8 ") 26"
(104 8 ") CAST-IN J.B. FOR 2/18/25 PERMITTING A
10'0" 120" 21" CARD READER
BY OTHERS
1 21"
46 4 " 40"
TYP. 7'-41"




6" 102"


432" 36'0"


ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-A




08/01/2025




NOTES:
1.REFER SHEET 1-3 FOR BUILDING NOTES.

C

THESE PLANS ARE THE 1300 DAVENPORT DRIVE, MINDEN, LA 71055
SCALE:
CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY NTS
HALF NO.2 AND TRADE SECRETS OF ph. (800) 824-2614 www.fibrebond.com
FIBREBOND CORPORATION.
ANY USE OF THESE ISSUED FOR:
B D DRAWINGS OR THE METRO FIBERNET, LLC *APPROVAL A.00* SITE ADDRESS:
INFORMATION CONTAINED
HEREIN FOR ANY REASON
OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY APPROVALS IN PDM
HALF NO.1 AUTHORIZED BY FIBREBOND
24' - 0" X 36' - 0" BUILDING DATABASE 3206 SUNNYSIDE LN
CORPORATION IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. THESE THIRD ANGLE
DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-A PROJECTION
DISTRIBUTED WITH THE SITE NAME:
UNDERSTANDING THAT DRN. DATE: APP. DATE: SCALE SHEET NO:
A ANYONE RECEIVING OR BY: GD BY:
OTHERWISE OBTAINING 29-DEC-2021 MG 1:48 2-2
POSSESSION OF THEM WILL DATE: SIZE DWG NO.:
PHOENIX SHELTER
ELEVATION KEY CHK. DATE: APP.
BE EXPRESSLY NOTIFIED OF BY:
REV. BY DATE REVISION APP. THEIR CONFIDENTIAL NATURE BY: DL B D11511
SHEET NAME:
SHELTER ELEVATIONS

SHEET NUMBER:

PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


(312" 26'0" )

292" 24'4"
( 2 ") 4-10 TON HVAC 4-10 TON HVAC
MODLINE GAP 837-01356 837-01356

SHIPPING SPLIT DRIP STRIP
2" 15" 1290002 2X 2"



7"




DESIGN ENG: LWW
DRAWN BY: JDF
LB REVIEWED BY: LWW
CAST WALL HEIGHT
SUBMITTALS
133" 11'1" 11'9" 141" DATE DESCRIPTION REV
2/18/25 PERMITTING A
120" 10'0" LA LA
HVAC#2 HVAC#1
LAA




(12 8 ") TYP.




6"


34" 34"

BRACE HVAC PRIOR TO
SHIPPING BUILDING
3 3 3 3
143 4 " 11'11 "4 143 4 " 11'11 4 "

HALF NO.2 HALF NO.1
288" 24'0"

ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-B
08/01/2025
NOTES:
1.REFER SHEET 1-3 FOR BUILDING NOTES.


C

THESE PLANS ARE THE 1300 DAVENPORT DRIVE, MINDEN, LA 71055
CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY
HALF NO.2 AND TRADE SECRETS OF ph. (800) 824-2614 www.fibrebond.com SCALE:
FIBREBOND CORPORATION. NTS
ANY USE OF THESE ISSUED FOR:
B D DRAWINGS OR THE METRO FIBERNET, LLC *APPROVAL A.00*
INFORMATION CONTAINED
HEREIN FOR ANY REASON
OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY APPROVALS IN PDM SITE ADDRESS:
HALF NO.1 AUTHORIZED BY FIBREBOND
24' - 0" X 36' - 0" BUILDING DATABASE
CORPORATION IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. THESE THIRD ANGLE 3206 SUNNYSIDE LN
DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-B PROJECTION
DISTRIBUTED WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT DRN. DATE: APP. DATE: SCALE SHEET NO:
A ANYONE RECEIVING OR BY: GD BY:
OTHERWISE OBTAINING 29-DEC-2021 MG 1:32 2-3 SITE NAME:
POSSESSION OF THEM WILL CHK. DATE: APP. DATE: SIZE DWG NO.:
ELEVATION KEY BE EXPRESSLY NOTIFIED OF
BY: DL BY:
REV. BY DATE REVISION APP. THEIR CONFIDENTIAL NATURE B D11511 PHOENIX SHELTER

SHEET NAME:
SHELTER ELEVATIONS

SHEET NUMBER:

PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


7 7
514 8 " 42'10 8 "


436" 36'4"
SUPPLIED AND
2" FIELDWORK INSTALLED BY OTHERS 2"
EXTERIOR LIGHT FIELD WORK
831-01999 ENCLOSURE
7"



FIELDWORK 3
(8 4 ")
EXTERIOR LED LIGHT
831-02032 FIELD WORK DESIGN ENG: LWW
EXTERIOR STROBE
849-01251 DRAWN BY: JDF
3070 DOOR
4" NIPPLE IN 5" PVC REVIEWED BY: LWW
CAST WALL HEIGHT
1 3 SUBMITTALS
(20 4 ")
16 4 " 133" 11'1"
141" 11'9"
DATE DESCRIPTION REV
(110 8 ")
26" 8 ") (104 2/18/25 PERMITTING A
120" 10'0" 21"

21"
CAST-IN J.B. FOR 1 "
40" TYP. CARD READER
46 4
BY OTHERS




6"
120"


432" 36'0"



ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-C




08/01/2025



NOTES:
1.REFER SHEET 1-3 FOR BUILDING NOTES.

C

THESE PLANS ARE THE 1300 DAVENPORT DRIVE, MINDEN, LA 71055
CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY SCALE:
HALF NO.2 AND TRADE SECRETS OF ph. (800) 824-2614 www.fibrebond.com NTS
FIBREBOND CORPORATION.
ANY USE OF THESE ISSUED FOR:
B D DRAWINGS OR THE METRO FIBERNET, LLC *APPROVAL A.00*
INFORMATION CONTAINED
HEREIN FOR ANY REASON SITE ADDRESS:
OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY APPROVALS IN PDM
HALF NO.1 AUTHORIZED BY FIBREBOND
24' - 0" X 36' - 0" BUILDING DATABASE
CORPORATION IS STRICTLY 3206 SUNNYSIDE LN
PROHIBITED. THESE THIRD ANGLE
DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-C PROJECTION
DISTRIBUTED WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT DRN. DATE: APP. DATE: SCALE SHEET NO:
A ANYONE RECEIVING OR BY: GD BY: SITE NAME:
OTHERWISE OBTAINING 29-DEC-2021 MG 1:48 2-4
POSSESSION OF THEM WILL CHK. DATE: APP. DATE: SIZE DWG NO.:
ELEVATION KEY BE EXPRESSLY NOTIFIED OF BY: DL BY: PHOENIX SHELTER
REV. BY DATE REVISION APP. THEIR CONFIDENTIAL NATURE B D11511

SHEET NAME:
SHELTER ELEVATIONS

SHEET NUMBER:

PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


(312" 26'0" )


292" 24'4"

( 2 ") SHIPPING SPLIT
MODLINE GAP 4-10 TON HVAC DRIP STRIP 4-10 TON HVAC
837-01356 1290002 2X 837-01356 2"
15"
2"


7"




80"

DESIGN ENG: LWW
826-00062 DRAWN BY: JDF
REVIEWED BY: LWW

LB SUBMITTALS
CAST WALL HEIGHT DATE DESCRIPTION REV
141" 11'9"
133" 11'1" 2/18/25 PERMITTING A

10'0" 120" LA LA
86 8 " LAA
HVAC#3 HVAC#4


(12 8 ") TYP.




6"
822-10365
822-13765
34" 827-00085 34"
BRACE HVAC PRIOR TO
SHIPPING BUILDING

3 3 3 3
143 "4 11'11 4 " 143 4 " 11'11 4 "

HALF NO.1 HALF NO.2
288" 24'0"
08/01/2025
ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-D

C

THESE PLANS ARE THE 1300 DAVENPORT DRIVE, MINDEN, LA 71055
CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY
HALF NO.2 AND TRADE SECRETS OF ph. (800) 824-2614 www.fibrebond.com
FIBREBOND CORPORATION.
ANY USE OF THESE ISSUED FOR:
B D DRAWINGS OR THE METRO FIBERNET, LLC *APPROVAL A.00*
SCALE:
INFORMATION CONTAINED NTS
HEREIN FOR ANY REASON
OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY APPROVALS IN PDM
HALF NO.1 AUTHORIZED BY FIBREBOND
24' - 0" X 36' - 0" BUILDING DATABASE
CORPORATION IS STRICTLY SITE ADDRESS:
PROHIBITED. THESE THIRD ANGLE
DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN ELEVATION, EXTERNAL, WALL-D PROJECTION
DISTRIBUTED WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT DRN. DATE: APP. DATE: SCALE SHEET NO: 3206 SUNNYSIDE LN
A ANYONE RECEIVING OR BY: GD BY:
OTHERWISE OBTAINING 29-DEC-2021 MG 1:32 2-5
POSSESSION OF THEM WILL CHK. DATE: APP. DATE: SIZE DWG NO.:
ELEVATION KEY BE EXPRESSLY NOTIFIED OF BY: SITE NAME:
REV. BY DATE REVISION APP. THEIR CONFIDENTIAL NATURE BY: DL B D11511
PHOENIX SHELTER

SHEET NAME:
SHELTER ELEVATIONS

SHEET NUMBER:

PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


EXHIBIT L




PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Stipulated Site Plan Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


EXHIBIT M




PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) Stipulated Elevations Hearing Date: September 17, 2025


EXHIBIT N




Home From Home STR LLC​
3311 E. Greenway Lane​
Phoenix, AZ 85032

September 14, 2025

Mr. Byron Easton​
Planning Hearing Officer-City of Phoenix​
Development Services Department​
200 W. Washington Street, 2nd Floor​
Phoenix, AZ 85003

Re: PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3) for 3206 East Sunnyside Lane requesting to modify​
stipulation #1 of the Zoning Case PHO-3-11--Z-47-87-1 regarding conformance to the​
site plan date stamped April 16, 1999, and the elevations date stamped May 18, 1999.

Dear Mr. Easton,

As a long-time homeowner and active member of Sunnyside Acres, I am writing to express my
deep concerns regarding the proposed Metronet facility at 3206 E. Sunnyside Lane. I own
3216 and 3226 E. Sunnyside Lane, and my family and I care deeply about maintaining the
safety, character, and livability of our neighborhood.

Through the research of one of our neighbors, Erika Smith Royal, who is an active and trusted
member of our community, it has been determined that there is no record of an amendment to
the CCRs that allowed lots #18 and #19 to be changed from R1-14 to R-O Residential Office –
Restricted Commercial. If there is proof of such a change, I ask that it be provided. Even if the
zoning stands, the intent of R-O zoning is for low-impact uses with residential characteristics,
which this proposal does not meet.

The City of Phoenix Planning & Development Department’s R-O Zoning Guidelines outline three
types of residential district uses: purely residential, a mix of residential and commercial, and
residential office where office use predominates. The proposed Metronet unmanned fiber optic
hub, also called the Metronet Shelter, does not fit within any of these categories. While Section
620 of the Phoenix Municipal Code allows public utility buildings under a use permit, Metronet is
a private utility, and this unmanned structure stretches the intended limits of the guidelines. Use
permits are intended for special exceptions where the activity does not significantly increase
pedestrian traffic, create odor, dust, gas, noise, vibration, heat, or glare beyond normal
conditions, or contribute to neighborhood deterioration or loss of property value. In this case, the
proposed shelter raises clear concerns on all of these points.

This project will have a direct and immediate impact on my property at 3216 E. Sunnyside
Lane, which is a licensed short-term rental (Home From Home Short Term Rental LLC, License
#STR-2025-002486) and shares a wall with the proposed facility. My guests come expecting a
safe, quiet, and welcoming environment. An unmanned utility structure so close to my property




risks creating noise, unsightly conditions, and potential security concerns. Guests may
feel unsafe or uncomfortable, which could harm my reputation as a licensed short-term rental
operator, reduce bookings, and negatively affect the income that helps maintain my properties.

I am also concerned that this unmanned structure could reduce the value of both of my
properties, as it sits directly adjacent to 3216 and 3226 E. Sunnyside Lane. Its presence could
attract loitering or unhoused individuals, potentially reversing years of progress in controlling
homelessness in the area. Additionally, even if the facility is safe, some guests may have
concerns about 5G and fiber optic equipment nearby, which can influence their perception of
safety and comfort.

In particular, there can be a significant issue with high-speed fiber optic converters installed
at the street or in homes, as they are not designed with low-EMI emissions in mind.
According to an article from EMF Analysis (link) ,these converters and their power supplies can
generate high amounts of wide-spectrum electromagnetic interference (EMI). In my
opinion, this raises a physical concern to me and to our future tenants at 3226 E.
Sunnyside Lane, making the immediate environment less desirable for residents and guests
alike. (https://www.emfanalysis.com/fiber-optics-increasing-electrical-sensitivity/)

Our neighborhood has worked for years to address homelessness and blight. Introducing a
facility that is unattended and invites loitering threatens to reverse this progress. Trash and
debris, as already seen at Lot #18 with Southwest Gas, accumulate quickly when structures are
left unsupervised. My guests should not have to contend with these risks, nor should our
neighbors.

There are additional unanswered questions about long-term impacts. No environmental study
has been conducted, no compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan has been
demonstrated, and no assurances have been given that fiber optic converters or towers
will not be added at a later date. A facility like this belongs in an industrial setting, not
directly adjacent to residential homes and a permitted short-term rental. With fiber lines
being redesigned, this is a timely opportunity to place the hub in a location better suited for its
commercial and operational needs.

I respectfully ask that the City carefully consider the voices of local residents and property
owners and protect the safety, comfort, and experience of residents and guests, as well as
the integrity and value of our neighborhood. Sunnyside Acres is a community we love and
actively care for, and we hope the City will help preserve the qualities that make it a safe and
welcoming place for everyone.

Thank you for your time, understanding, and attention to these concerns.

Sincerely,

Chinnaz & John Sayegh​
Home From Home STR LLC (602.790.8796)​
Cammari6571@gmail.com



*Additional Correspondence added: 11/4/2025




ATTACHMENT C

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
November 6, 2025

ITEM NO: 14
DISTRICT NO.: 3
SUBJECT:

Application #: PHO-4-25—Z-47-87-1(3)
Existing Zoning: R-O
Acreage: 1.12
Location: Northeast corner of 32nd Street and Sunnyside Lane
Request: Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to the
site plan date stamped April 16, 1999 and the elevations date stamped
May 18, 1999.
Applicant: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
Owner: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
Representative: Lee Wright, Metronet Infrastructure Group, LLC
Appellant: Patrick Gray and Chinnaz Sayegh

ACTIONS:

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation:
Paradise Valley 9/8/2025 Denial. Vote: 11-1.

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation (PHO): The Planning Hearing Officer heard the
request on September 17, 2025 and recommended approval with additional stipulations.

Staff Recommendation: Approval with additional stipulations, per the PHO recommendation.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Denial, per the Paradise Valley Village Planning
Committee recommendation.

Motion Discussion: Commissioner Matthews made a MOTION to deny PHO-4-25--Z-47-87-1(3),
per the Paradise Valley Village Planning Committee recommendation.

Motion details: N/A

Maker: Matthews
Second: James
Vote: 7-1 (Hu)
Absent: Gorraiz
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to a site plan
and elevations is recommended for denial, as the proposal does not meet the public's
expectations for an R-O development.

Stipulations:

1. That THE development SHALL be in general conformance with the site
plan AND ELEVATIONS DATE STAMPED AUGUST 7, 2025, AS

MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED
BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. presented
as modified by the site plan dated April 16, 1999, and elevation dated
May 18, 1999 for the south portion of site. PRESENTED
AS MODIFIED BY THE SITE PLAN DATED APRIL 16, 1999, AND ELEVATIONS
DATED MAY 18, 1999 FOR THE SOUTH PORTION OF SITE.

2. That An 8-foot landscaped setback SHALL be provided along the east
property line including 24-inch box size, drought-resistant shade trees
planted 20 feet on center, or in equivalent groupings.

3. That No trash dumpsters SHALL be located within 50 feet of the east
property line.

4. That The building height SHALL be limited to one story (17 feet 4 inches)

5. That A one-foot vehicular non access easement SHALL be placed along
both Sunnyside Lane and Greenway Lane.

6. That A cross access SHALL be provided on the north portion of the site
upon final site plan approval for the north property, or in the alternative, a
common driveway entrance be provided, as approved by the Planning and
Development Department

7. PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER SHALL EXECUTE A
PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE WAIVER SHALL BE
RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE AND
DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REZONING APPLICATION
FILE FOR RECORD.

8. IF DETERMINED NECESSARY BY THE PHOENIX ARCHAEOLOGY OFFICE, THE
APPLICANT SHALL CONDUCT PHASE I DATA TESTING AND SUBMIT AN
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AREA FOR
REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ARCHAEOLOGIST PRIOR TO CLEARING
AND GRUBBING, LANDSCAPE SALVAGE, AND/OR GRADING APPROVAL

9. IF PHASE I DATA TESTING IS REQUIRED, AND IF, UPON REVIEW OF THE
RESULTS FROM THE PHASE I DATA TESTING, THE CITY ARCHAEOLOGIST, IN
CONSULTATION WITH A QUALIFIED ARCHAEOLOGIST, DETERMINES SUCH
DATA RECOVERY EXCAVATIONS ARE NECESSARY, THE APPLICANT SHALL
CONDUCT PHASE II ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY EXCAVATIONS.

10. 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.

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Saneeya Mir at 602-686-6461, saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov, TTY: Use 7-1-1.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 2025) - Authorization to Grant Sheely Ted
D / ET AL c/o William Sheely / ET AL (Sheely Center) a Binding Waiver of
Enforcement (Waiver) of the Special Permit Provisions for Data Centers
(Ordinance S-52435) - District 5

Request authority to grant Sheely Ted D / ET AL c/o William Sheely / ET AL (Sheely
Center) a Binding Waiver of Enforcement (Waiver) of the Special Permit Provisions for
Data Centers under Ordinance G-7396. The Council is considering the Planning
Hearing Officer's recommendation regarding rezoning application PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-
7(5) for this development by a public hearing held on the same council agenda as this
item. This item must be heard following that hearing.

Summary
Following the City of Phoenix’s adoption of Ordinance G-7396 on July 2, 2025, which
established a regulatory framework for data centers, Sheely Center submitted a
demand to the City under A.R.S. § 12-1134, asserting that the ordinance diminished
the fair market value of its property located at Parcel No. 102-34-002E.

Parcel Address: 2209 N. 99th Ave.
Owner: Sheely Ted D / ET AL c/o William Sheely / ET AL (Sheely Center)
Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, P.L.C. and Andrew Gould,
Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak PLLC

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1134(E), Ordinance G-7396 authorizes the City Council, in its
sole discretion, to grant binding waivers of the special permit requirements for data
centers. In accordance with this provision, Sheely Center has formally requested such
a waiver. The special permit requirements set forth in Ordinance G-7396 were enacted
by the City Council to address public health and safety concerns and to mitigate
adverse secondary impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, businesses, and residents.

The purpose of the City's requirements are to protect public health and safety.
Therefore, the waiver requires the proposed data center to address and mitigate
potential health and safety impacts on neighboring properties, including, among other
things, fire and public safety threats, hazardous materials, energy use, water use, and
noise pollution. The waiver describes requirements for each category to comply with



Ordinance G-7396. At the City’s request, Sheely Center has submitted detailed
information and committed to measures designed to mitigate the potential impacts of
its proposed data center. Specific requirements will be outlined in the Waiver which will
be available to the public 24 hours prior to the meeting. The requirements may be
modified after the waiver is published.

The Planning and Development Department reviewed these submissions and
determined that the waiver request meets all the submittal requirements. They found
that Sheely Center’s mitigation commitments appear to adequately address the
ordinance’s public health and safety objectives. The City Manager reviewed and
makes a recommendation to approve the attached Waiver request.

Location
Southeast corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road
Council District: 5
Parcel Address: 2209 N. 99th Ave.

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








Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 2025) - Public Hearing and Ordinance
Adoption - Amend City Code - Ordinance Adoption - Rezoning Application PHO-
1-25--Z-29-12-7(5) - Southeast Corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road
(Ordinance G-7451) - District 5

Request to hold a public hearing and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to
consider the Planning Hearing Officer's recommendation by the City Council on
matters heard by the Planning Hearing Officer on June 18, 2025.

Summary
Application: PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)
Existing Zoning: PUD
Acreage: 197.0

Owner: Sheely Ted D / ET AL c/o William Sheely / ET AL
Applicant / Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, P.L.C.

Proposal:
1. Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding the site plan within the development
narrative.

VPC Action: The Maryvale Village Planning Committee heard this request on June 12,
2025 and recommended approval with a vote of 12-1.
PHO Action: The Planning Hearing Officer recommended approval with a modification
and an additional stipulation.

Location
Southeast corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road
Council District: 5
Parcel Address: 2209 N. 99th Ave.

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



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 STIPULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO REZONING APPLICATION Z-29-12-7(5)
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY ORDINANCE G-5779.

____________




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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning stipulations applicable to the site located at the

southeast corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road in a portion of Section 33,

Township 2 North, Range 1 East, as described more specifically in Exhibit A and

depicted in Exhibit B, are hereby modified to read as set forth below.

STIPULATIONS:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Sheely Center 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 JUNE 6, 2025
September 27, 2012, as modified by the following stipulations.

2. The applicant shall submit a revised Traffic Impact Study to the Street
Transportation Department and Planning and Development Department
prior to preliminary site plan approval. The applicant shall be responsible
for any dedications and required improvements adjacent to the boundaries
of the subject property as recommended by the traffic study, as approved
by the Street Transportation Department and Planning and Development
Department.



3. ALL STREETS, WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT,
SHALL BE DEDICATED AND CONSTRUCTED PER THE APPROVED
SHEELY FAMRS MASTER STREET PLAN. The applicant shall submit a
street alignment plan for public streets (design and alignment for all
arterial and collector streets), prior to preliminary site plan approval, for
review and approval by the Street Transportation Department and
Planning and Development Department.

4. Access to McDowell Road shall be reviewed by ADOT, Maricopa County,
city of Tolleson, and the city of Phoenix. Notification of such review shall
be submitted to the Street Transportation Department and the Planning
and Development Department prior to preliminary site plan approval.

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

6. PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER SHALL
EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD.

SECTION 2. Due to the site’s specific physical conditions and the use

district granted pursuant to Ordinance G-5779, this portion of the rezoning is now

subject to the stipulations approved pursuant to Ordinance G-5779 and as modified in

Section 1 of this Ordinance. Any violation of the stipulation is a violation of the City of

Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. Building permits shall not be issued for the subject site

until all the stipulations have been met.

SECTION 3. 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 19th day of November

2025.




________________________________
MAYOR
________________________________
Date

ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By: _________________________
_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager


Exhibits:
A - Legal Description (4 Pages)
B - Ordinance Location Map (1 Page)




EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)


The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Maricopa, State of
Arizona, and is described as follows:

LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR Z-29-
12-7(5)

THAT PART OF PARCELS 1, 2 AND 3 LYING WEST OF THE WESTERLY
LINE OF THAT PROPERTY CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF ARIZONA BY
DEED RECORDED JULY 31, 1998 IN 98-663064 AND NORTH OF THE
NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE ROOSEVELT IRRIGATION DISTRICT
MAIN CANAL.

PARCEL NO. 1:

THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH,
RANGE 1 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN,
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA:

EXCEPT THE NORTH 33 FEET AND THE WEST 70 FEET; AND

EXCEPT A TRIANGULAR SHAPED PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS
BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF
THE NORTH 200.00 FEET AND THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 70 FEET OF
SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33;

THENCE EASTERLY 5 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE
NORTH 200.00 FEET TO A POINT;

THENCE IN A SOUTH-SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION TO A POINT ON THE
EAST LINE OF THE WEST 70 FEET THAT IS 600 00 FEET SOUTHERLY
FROM SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION;

THENCE NORTHERLY TO SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION; AND EXCEPT A
PARCEL DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF
THE NORTH 33 FEET AND THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 75 FEET OF SAID
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33;

THENCE EASTERLY 35 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 33
FEET TOA POINT;




THENCE IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION TO A POINT ON SAID EAST
LINE OF THE WEST 75 FEET THAT IS 35 FEET SOUTHERLY FROM SAID
POINT OF INTERSECTION;

THENCE NORTHERLY TO SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION, AND EXCEPT
THE EAST 5 FEET OF THE WEST 75 FEET OF THE SOUTH 167.00 FEET OF
THE NORTH 200.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION 33.

PARCEL NO 2:

THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33,
TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE
AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA;

EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF THE WEST 298.72 FEET OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33, AS CONVEYED TO THE
ROOSEVELT IRRIGATION DISTRICT, BY THAT CERTAIN DEED RECORDED
IN BOOK 218 OF DEEDS, PAGE 366, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,
ARIZONA; AND INSTRUMENT 84-3648, AND

EXCEPT RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCH EXTENDING FROM NORTH TO
SOUTH BOUNDARIES OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION
33; ALONG AND IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE EAST LINE THEREOF AS
CONVEYED TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THAT CERTAIN DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 175 OF DEEDS, PAGE 429, RECORDS OF
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AND

EXCEPT THE WEST 65 FEET.

PARCEL NO 3:

PART OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION
33, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER
BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHICH THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 33 BEARS SOUTH 88 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 30 SECONDS
WEST 120 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH O DEGREES 11 MINUTES WEST 367 70 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREEES 36 MINUTES EAST 189.60 FEET;




THENCE SOUTH 27 DEGREES 23 MINUTES EAST 88 90 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH O DEGREES 01 MINUTES EAST 416.71 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 18 MINUTES EAST 246.60 FEET;

THENCE SOUTH 56 DEGREES 58 MINUTES EAST 54.85 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 00 MINUTES EAST 2070.23 FEET,
THENCE NORTH O DEGREES 12 MINUTES EAST 50 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 00 MINUTES EAST 60 FEET (FROM WHICH
POINT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 BEARS
SOUTH 0 DEGREES 12 MINUTES WEST 160 FEET);

THENCE NORTH O DEGREES 12 MINUTES EAST ALONG THE MIDSECTION
LINE OF SAID SECTION 33, A DISTANCE OF 1170 FEET TO NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 33;

THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33 A DISTANCE OF 2525.89 FEET TO THE
PLACE OF BEGINNING,

EXCEPT RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCH LYING IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE
EAST LINE CONVEYED TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY DEED
RECORDED IN BOOK 175 OF DEEDS, PAGE 429, RECORDS OF
MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA; AND

EXCEPT THE EAST 90 FEET OF THE WEST 298.72 FEET OF THE SOUTH
HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33, LYING
NORTH OF THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE
ROOSEVELT IRRIGATION DISTRICT MAIN CANAL;

ALSO BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE
OF THE WEST 208.72 FEET AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH HALF
OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33;

THENCE WEST 75 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH
HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; 75 FEET TO A POINT;

THENCE WEST 75 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH
HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, 75 FEET TO A POINT;

THENCE IN A SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION TO A POINT ON SAID EAST
LINE OF THE WEST 208.72 FEET THAT IS 75 FEET SOUTHERLY FROM
SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION;




THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION.

PARCEL NO. 4:

THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE­
QUARTER (S½ OF SW¼) OF SECTION THIRTY-THREE (33), TOWNSHIP
TWO (2) NORTH, RANGE ONE (1) EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER
BASE AND MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:

PARCEL A

THAT PART OF THE WEST 208 72 FEET OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF
THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER (S½ OF SW¼) OF SAID SECTION 33,
LYING WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND NINETY (90) FEET WIDE ON A CENTER
LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

USING AS A BASE THE SOUTH ONE-HALF (S½) OF THE WEST LINE OF
SECTION THIRTY-THREE (33), TOWNSHIP TWO (2) NORTH, RANGE ONE
(1) EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN, WITH AN
ASSUMED BEARING OF NORTH 0'04' EAST;

BEGINNING AT A POINT 256.9 FEET EAST OF AND 308.7 FEET NORTH OF
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33, AND RUNNING
THENCE NORTH 0'06' WEST 453 7 FEET TO A POINT;

THENCE NORTH 45'06' WEST 247.6 FEET TO A POINT;

THENCE PARALLEL TO AND 78.0 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID
SECTION 33, NORTH 0'04 EAST 476.0 FEET;

EXCEPT THE WEST SIXTY-FIVE (65) FEET OF SAID SECTION 33.

PARCEL B·

THAT PART OF THE WEST 208.72 FEET OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF THE
SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (S½ OF SW¼) OF SAID SECTION 33, LYING
NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 717.44 FEET OF SAID
SECTION 33 AND WEST OF PARCEL A AS DESCRIBED ABOVE:

EXCEPT THE WEST SIXTY-FIVE (65) FEET OF SAID SECTION 33




ATTACHMENT B




Village Planning Committee Meeting Summary
PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5)

Date of VPC Meeting June 12, 2025
Date of Planning June 18, 2025
Hearing Officer Hearing
Request Modification of Stipulation 1 regarding modifications to
the conceptual site plan and updated imagery within
the development narrative.
Location Southeast corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road
VPC Recommendation Approval
VPC Vote 12-1


VPC DISCUSSION:

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

Staff Background Presentation

Matteo Moric, staff, identified the location of the Sheely Center Planned Unit
Development (PUD) and shared a slide showing images from the PUD narrative
including the Conceptual Site Plan, Building Height Zones and Birdseye Perspective.
Mr. Moric stated the intent of the PUD is to have a mixed-use project with housing,
retail, entertainment, hotels, employment centers which include many specialized jobs.

Applicant Presentation

Jason Morris with Withey Morris Baugh, PLC, said the project was a culmination of
over 25 years and indicated what was being presented was largely built. Mr. Morris said
the Sheely Farms project originally came to the City in the early 2000’s. Mr. Morris
noted the site plan and PUD matched what was going on in the early 2000’s. Mr. Morris
said it was designed for all mixed-use developments but there were major amendments
which had changed the plans over time. Mr. Morris noted today’s portion of the project
was the last part and it included the commerce park, manufacturing, commercial, and
business park area. Mr. Morris added staff had told him over the previous six months
that if the PUD would be amended it would make sense to bring the entire Sheely
Center PUD up to date, so it would reflect what was already built. Mr. Morris said the
project includes the residential component, Sprouts anchored shopping center, and the
area immediately south of Thomas Road which was being constructed as commercial.
200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 697
Maryvale Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5)


Mr. Morris provided background on the developer, IDM Companies, and described a
main technology center they constructed out-of-state and felt they wanted to replicate it
in a smaller version at this site. Mr. Morris hoped this was the last amendment to the
Sheely Center PUD. Mr. Morris said that none of the underlying zoning and all the uses
as part of the original PUD are still in place. Mr. Morris said the proposal includes data
planning and tech, light manufacturing, business park and some of them could be office
showrooms and Mr. Morris equated it with a project at the Airpark area in Scottsdale.

Mr. Morris stated no changes are proposed to the narrative text, permitted uses or
development standards. Mr. Morris stated one of the buildings proposed has a
governmental service aspect with data planning analysis and a data center component.
Mr. Morris said he went to the City Council Office and stated with this type of project
there is lots of open space because of the nature of this type of development and the
required separation of other uses so they thought of creating a park.

Mr. Morris showed the weekday total trip comparison data as 93,333 in the current plan
versus the proposal of 20,087. Mr. Morris said the summary of benefits changes from a
vertical mixed-use to horizontal mixed-use project; maintaining employment and
commercial objectives of the PUD in a campus-like setting; providing public amenities,
meaningful enhancements to the social fabric through new connections; generating new
jobs; and activating an underutilized site.

Mr. Morris said there were soccer fields, and a park proposed per a request by the City
Council, and it was suggested to be closer to the retail by Thomas Road. Mr. Morris
added they would create walking paths to take people to the retail component and the
idea is to build and maintain fields which will be controlled.

Questions from the Committee/Applicant Response

Committee Member Jimenez asked if there was a fee for the league. Mr. Morris
responded no fee as it was through the charity itself.

Committee Member Ramirez asked if there was enough parking and said she did not
think it was enough parking for two fields as she had noticed parking was the biggest
issue for these types of fields. Mr. Morris said they created a little more room adjacent
to the fields for overflow parking but there would be a cross-access agreement with all
the retail uses for this reason.

Committee Member Ewing asked what makes the traffic less. Mr. Morris said the
traffic is less because the building itself changed and the original plan asked for very
traditional office square footage and the original offices were 3.8 million square feet and
it would be reduced down to about one half a million square feet which was the biggest
change. Mr. Ewing asked if the soccer fields were turf or grass. Mr. Morris said it was
more likely that they would be doing turf, but this decision had not been finalized.



200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 698
Maryvale Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5)


Committee Member DuBose said turf is really hot and people could not stand on it
during the summer. Mr. DuBose asked about the current soccer fields that were on the
site. Vice Chair Derie said the original soccer fields moved up north near the Cardinals
Stadium. Vice Chair Derie reminded the group of the concert venue at the property. Mr.
Morris said the Sheely family ran those venues and said the biggest change was when
they built the 101 Freeway in the City they did not sleeve water across to the west side.
Mr. Morris explained how water was needed to develop on the west side of the freeway

Committee Member Acevedo asked if the soccer fields would have public restrooms.
Mr. Morris said the restroom facilities could not be open all the time as they would be
opened and closed with the soccer fields and would be fenced off and controlled by the
soccer club. Vice Chair Derie said this would be like the same situation with the City
park where the restrooms would be locked. Committee Member Galaviz expressed
concerns for the homeless.

Committee Member Norgaard questioned what the change in the number of buildings
and employment would be from the current PUD to now. Mr. Morris said somewhere in
the magnitude of 60 buildings less. Mr. Morris said compared to the conceptual site plan
there would be less employment but felt the conceptual site plan would probably not be
applicable to today’s market.

Mr. Morris said that this proposal was not a pure data center as these were also training
centers. Mr. Morris indicated that there would be over 200 personnel per building as
they would be used for manufacturing, light assembly, and some showrooms and office.

Committee Member DuBose asked about the Sprouts. Mr. Morris said the Sheely’s
owned the farm and were not developers. Vice Chair Derie said Sheely Farms
originally included the eastern side of the 101 Freeway, which developed more quickly
because there was water.

Mr. Morris said the Council District was trying to push ownership versus rental.

Public Comments

Saul Perea, resident, asked how many of the jobs were for the local community and if it
would benefit everyone in the community. Mr. Perea said many of the community
colleges provide standardized job training. Mr. Perea felt there was nothing
guaranteeing jobs benefiting the local community in the long term. Mr. Perea added that
he wanted to know if the jobs would be for U.S. military veterans. Mr. Perea also added
about incorporating solar panels and shade for the parking.

Chair Barba said he wished there were pathways to jobs and as far as green space felt
the project was pretty green.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 699
Maryvale Village Planning Committee
Meeting Summary
PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5)


Mr. Morris said in terms of employees they were moving a large number of them from
Glendale to Phoenix so it would be net new employees. Mr. Morris said they would
follow the employment practices of the U.S. Government.

Mr. Morris added there would be shaded pathways from the retail to the soccer fields
and noted the open space would be unpaved and walkable and parts of it would be lit
with small ankle lighting.

Chair Barba said he hopes there would be pathways for people in Maryvale to get high
school students into these high paying jobs now that it would be in their backyard.

Committee Member Acevedo asked if they do anything about getting Maryvale
residents training and jobs to support the community.

Mr. Morris said IDM Cares, the charitable organization associated with the developer
does not do job training.

Floor/Public Comment Closed: Motion, Discussion, and Vote

Motion
Committee Member Jimenez motioned to approve PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5).
Committee Member Ewing seconded the motion.

Vote
12-1, Motion to recommend approval of PHO-1-25—Z-29-12-7(5) passes, with
Committee Members Acevedo, Alonzo, Demarest, DePascal, DuBose, Ewing, Galaviz,
Jimenez, Ramirez, Weber, Derie and Barba in favor; and Norgaard in opposition.




200 West Washington Street, 3rd Floor • Phoenix, Arizona 85003-1611 • (602) 262-6882 700
ATTACHMENT C
REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Byron Easton, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Teresa Garcia, Planner I, Assisting

June 18, 2025

ITEM NO: 1
DISTRICT NO. 5
SUBJECT:

Application #: PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)
Location: Southeast corner of 99th Avenue and Thomas Road
Zoning: PUD
Acreage: 197.0
Request: 1) Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding the updated
imagery within the development narrative.
Applicant: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC
Owner: Sheely Ted D / ET AL C/O William Sheely / ET AL
Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC

ACTIONS:

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer
recommended approval with a modification and an additional stipulation.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The Maryvale Village
Planning Committee heard this request on June 12, 2025 and recommended
approval with a vote of 12-1.

DISCUSSION:

Jason Morris, representative with Withey Morris Baugh PLC, introduced the
subject site and explained that zoning history. He stated that the North Gateway
Village Planning Committee (VPC) recommended approval by a vote of 12-1 and
this PHO Hearing is the result of a great deal of planning between the applicant
and City Council District office to update the PUD to conform with present market
conditions and the shared vision between the developer and the City. He stated
that the PUD has changed significantly since being approved in the 90’s and
early 2000’s and all stakeholders have agreed that the renderings must be
updated to support and reflect the new proposed development plan. There would
be no change to the underlying uses that are contained in the PUD.

Mr. Morris went on to explain the history of the Sheely Center PUD, including
some of the difficulties that were present that prevented development of the site.
IBM developed some of the infrastructure, including bringing water to the site.
He continued to explain the updates to the site, including replacing much of the



Planning Hearing Officer Summary of June 18, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)
Page 2

office uses with more mixed-use, including retail/commercial, multi-family, an as-
built, garden-style multi-family development, commerce park uses, and a 58,256
square foot Sprouts grocery shopping center. In addition, new public amenities
are included in the exhibits, featuring two standard soccer fields, a park and
trails.

Byron Easton, Planning Hearing Officer, asked if Mr. Morris could speak about
the large buildings located at the north of the site. Mr. Morris explained that the
large buildings will be aligned with employment uses and will include a
government building. Mr. Morris followed up with an explanation of the proposed
vs. existing exhibits in the PUD including renderings and elevations

Mr. Easton asked if the applicant would have to go through PUD Amendment
process in addition to the PHO. Mr. Morris stated that they will not be required to
go through a PUD Amendment. Mr. Easton asked if in addition to the renderings,
the site plan is being replaced in the PUD Narrative. Mr. Morris stated that yes,
replacing the existing site plan with a revised conceptual site plan is part of the
request.

Mr. Easton, Planning Hearing Officer, explained that the request was approved
by the Village Planning Committee with a vote of 12-1 and he voiced his support
for the request and the various mix of uses that are being proposed. He
recommended approval.

FINDINGS:

1) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding updating the imagery,
including renderings and the site plan contained in the PUD Narrative, is
recommended to be approved. The modification will include an updated
stamp date to be consistent with the latest version of these exhibits.

The Sheely Center PUD, originally approved in 2013, was approved as
mixed-use in nature and this proposal still reflects that intent. Although
the site has been partially developed it has been re-designed as a
horizontal mixed-use development in replacement of the originally
planned, vertical mixed-use development. The original conceptual site
plan for the Sheely Center PUD feature a more intense, urban, office
centric design that has not come to fruition and is inconsistent with market
demands. The applicant’s request is limited to updating the exhibits within
the PUD and will not change the uses allowed within the original PUD
Narrative.

2) Stipulation 3 is recommended to be modified by replacing the existing
language with updated language consistent with recommendation from the
Streets Transportation Department. The stipulation now references a
Master Street Plan that has been completed and approved by STD. The



Planning Hearing Officer Summary of June 18, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)
Page 3

updated stipulation acknowledges the Master Street Plan and requires
compliance with the Plan.

3) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to
the Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an
application requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to
require the applicant to record this form and deliver it to the City to be
included in the rezoning application file for record.

STIPULATIONS:

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Sheely Center 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 JUNE 6, 2025
September 27, 2012, as modified by the following stipulations.

2. The applicant shall submit a revised Traffic Impact Study to the Street
Transportation Department and Planning and Development Department
prior to preliminary site plan approval. The applicant shall be responsible
for any dedications and required improvements adjacent to the boundaries
of the subject property as recommended by the traffic study, as approved
by the Street Transportation Department and Planning and Development
Department.

3. ALL STREETS, WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT,
SHALL BE DEDICATED AND CONSTRUCTED PER THE APPROVED
SHEELY FARMS MASTER STREET PLAN. The applicant shall submit a
street alignment plan for public streets (design and alignment for all
arterial and collector streets), prior to preliminary site plan approval, for
review and approval by the Street Transportation Department and
Planning and Development Department.

4. Access to McDowell Road shall be reviewed by ADOT, Maricopa County,
city of Tolleson, and the city of Phoenix. Notification of such review shall
be submitted to the Street Transportation Department and the Planning
and Development Department prior to preliminary site plan approval.

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




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of June 18, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-29-12-7(5)
Page 4

6. PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER SHALL
EXECUTE A PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER OF CLAIMS FORM. THE
WAIVER SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE MARICOPA COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE REZONING APPLICATION FILE FOR RECORD.


Upon request, this publication will be made available within a reasonable length
of time through appropriate auxiliary aids or services to accommodate an
individual with a disability. This publication may be made available through the
following auxiliary aids or services: large print, Braille, audiotape or computer
diskette. To request a reasonable accommodation, please contact Saneeya Mir
at saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov or (602) 686-6461 or TTY: 7-1-1.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 2025) - Public Hearing and Ordinance
Adoption - Rezoning Application Z-29-A-14-1 (Metro North Corporate Park PUD) -
Approximately 550 Feet South of the Southwest Corner of Thunderbird Road
and Black Canyon Highway (Ordinance G-7450) - District 1

Request to hold a public hearing and consider amending the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, Section 601, the Zoning Map of the City of Phoenix, by adopting Rezoning
Application Z-29-A-14-1 and rezone the site from PUD (Planned Unit Development) to
PUD (Planned Unit Development) for a Major Amendment to the Metro North
Corporate Park PUD regarding data centers, landscape setbacks, and design
standards.

Summary
Current Zoning: PUD
Proposed Zoning: PUD
Acreage: 42.61 acres
Proposal: Major Amendment to the Metro North Corporate Park PUD regarding data
centers, setbacks, and design standards

Owner: CMB III, LLC, et. al.
Applicant: Ric Toris, Earl & Curley, P.C.
Representative: Taylor Earl, Earl & Curley, P.C.

Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations.
PC Action: The Planning Commission is scheduled to hear this item on November 6,
2025.

Location
Approximately 550 feet south of the southwest corner of Thunderbird Road and Black
Canyon Highway.
Council District: 1
Parcel Addresses: 13375, 13515, 13535, and 15355 N. 30th Avenue; and 13440 and
13610 N. Black Canyon Highway





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





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 SITE DESCRIBED
HEREIN (CASE Z-29-A-14-1) FROM PUD (PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT).

____________



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

follows:

SECTION 1. The zoning of a 42.61-acre site located approximately 550

feet south of the southwest corner of Thunderbird Road and Black Canyon Highway in a

portion of Section 14, Township 3 North, Range 2 East, as described more specifically

in Exhibit “A,” is hereby changed from PUD (Planned Unit Development) to “PUD”

(Planning Unit Development) to allow for a Major Amendment regarding data centers,

setbacks, and design standards.

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.”




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 Metro North Corporate PUD reflecting
the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning
Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request. The updated
Development Narrative shall be consistent with Development Narrative date
stamped October 28, 2025, as modified by the following stipulations.

a. Front Cover:
Revise Hearing Draft date to reflect October 28, 2025.
Add “City Council adopted: [Insert Adoption date]”.

b. Page 17: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Second Bullet. Revise as
follows:

• “A contractual agreement from a local utility company that affirms its
capacity and commitment to serve the energy demand for the proposed
data center shall be submitted to PDD prior to preliminary site plan
approval.”

c. Page 18: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Noise Generation. Revise
as follows:

• “Noise Generation:
o Noise generated by the data center, including but not limited to
noise generated by mechanical equipment, cooling systems, and
on-site power generators shall not exceed 55 dBA during daytime
hours (7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.) or 45 dBA during nighttime hours
(10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. as measured at the nearest residentially
zoned property.”
o Noise levels shall be measured using an ANSI-certified sound level
meter on an A-weighted scale at ground level.
o Compliance shall be demonstrated through submission of a sound
study prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer or other
equivalent measurement documentation.”

d. Page 19: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Law Enforcement and
Emergency Management Coordination. Please delete last sentence.




2. All improvements to the I-17 frontage road shall be reviewed and approved by
the Arizona Department of Transportation. Documentation of ADOT review and
approval shall be provided prior to Preliminary Site Plan approval.

3. 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.

4. Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition
207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the
rezoning application file for record. This stipulation shall not be applicable if
the property is owned by the City of Phoenix.

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 19th day of November,

2025.



________________________________
MAYOR


ATTEST:


_________________________
Denise Archibald, City Clerk


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


By:
_________________________




_________________________


REVIEWED BY:


_________________________
Ed Zuercher, City Manager


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




EXHIBIT A

Lot 7, of Metro North Corporate Park, per Book 445 of Maps, Page 3, at Recording No.
97-0460983 dated July 8, 1997 in the Records of Maricopa County, Arizona, being
located in a part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 3 North, Range2
East of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona.
Containing 42.11 Acres+-.




EXHIBIT B




Staff Report Z-29-A-14-1
(Metro North Corporate Park PUD)
October 31, 2025

Planning Commission November 6, 2025
Hearing Date:
Request From: PUD (Planned Unit Development)
(42.61 acres)
Request To: PUD (Planned Unit Development)
(42.61 acres)
Proposal: Major Amendment to the Metro North Corporate Park
PUD regarding data centers, landscape setbacks, and
design standards
Location: Approximately 550 feet south of the southwest corner of
Thunderbird Road and Black Canyon Highway
Owner: CMB III, LLC, et. al.
Applicant: Ric Torris, Earl & Curley, P.C.
Representative: Taylor Earl, Earl & Curley, P.C.
Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to stipulations

General Plan Conformity

General Plan Land Use Map Designation Industrial

Street Map Approximately 135 to
Black Canyon Highway Freeway
Classification 210-foot west half
STRENGTHEN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY CORE VALUE; JOB CREATION
(EMPLOYERS); LAND USE PRINCIPLE: Support General Plan Land Use Map and
zoning changes that will facilitate the location of employment generating uses in
each of the designated employment centers.

The subject site lies within the I-17 North Employment Corridor and is currently
developed with employment uses. The proposed PUD Major Amendment allows for
continuation and expansion of data center uses that address health and safety.




Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025


STRENGTHEN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY CORE VALUE; ENTREPRENEURS
EMERGING ENTERPRISES; LAND USE PRINCIPLE: Encourage land uses that
promote the growth of entrepreneurs or new businesses in Phoenix in
appropriate locations.

The proposal only allows for commercial uses which will facilitate new businesses on
the site.

CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS CORE
VALUE; CERTAINTY & CHARACTER; DESIGN PRINCIPLE: Create new
development or redevelopment that is sensitive to the scale and character of the
surrounding neighborhoods and incorporates adequate development standards
to prevent negative impact(s) on the residential properties.

As stipulated, the PUD Major Amendment incorporates development standards that
are sensitive and mitigate negative impacts to the surrounding residential area.

Resolution 22316; Data Centers; Location Criteria Policy: Locate away from
identified cores, centers and corridors where higher-intensity development is
encouraged for mixed-use, walkable communities.

The subject site is not in a core, center or corridor and is appropriately located
adjacent to a freeway.


Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning
Land Use Zoning
Office, data center,
On Site PUD
electrical substation
Commercial and related
North C-2, IND. PK.
parking
Townhomes, single-
East (across freeway) PAD-10, R1-8
family residential
South Office IND.PK.
West Multifamily residential R-4




Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

Background/Issues/Analysis

SUBJECT SITE
1. This request is to rezone a 42.61-acre site located approximately 550 feet south
of the southwest corner of Thunderbird Road and Black Canyon Highway from
PUD (Planned Unit Development) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). This
request is a Major Amendment to the Metro North Corporate Park PUD regarding
data centers, landscape setbacks, and design standards. The proposed PUD
Major Amendment seeks to:

1) Clarify that data centers are a principally permitted use;
2) Establish use criteria for data centers that include health and safety measures
such as data center size, noise mitigation, water and power consumption, fire
prevention, and hazardous materials;
3) Revise the north boundary landscape setback; and,
4) Eliminate the color palette requirements contained in the Design Guidelines
section of the PUD.

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
2. The area to the north consists of retail establishments, in-line shops, and
associated parking, zoned C-2 (Intermediate Commercial) and IND. PK.
(Industrial Park). To the east of the site is Interstate 17, while beyond the freeway
are townhomes zoned PAD-10 (Planned Area Development) and single-family
homes zoned R1-8 (Single-Family Residence District). South of the site is an
office building, also zoned IND. PK. West of the site are multifamily residences
zoned R-4 (Multifamily Residence District).




Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025




Existing Zoning Aerial Map
Source: Planning and Development Department

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION
3. The General Plan Land Use Map designates the subject site as Industrial. The
area to the north of the site is also designated as Industrial, while the area to the
east of the freeway is designated as Residential 3.5 to 5 dwelling units per acre
and Residential 10 to 15 dwelling units per acre. The area to the south is
designated as Industrial, while the area to the west is designated as Residential
15+ dwelling units per acre. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Map designation.




Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025



Thunderbird Road




31st Avenue



Residential 3.5 to 5 du/acre
Residential 10 to 15
Residential 15+
I-17 Commercial
Industrial
Transportation

Sweetwater Avenue

General Plan Land Use Map
Source: Planning and Development Department

PROPOSAL
4. The proposal was developed utilizing the Planned Unit Development (PUD)
zoning district. The PUD is intended to create a built environment that is superior
to that produced by conventional zoning districts and design guidelines. Using a
collaborative and comprehensive approach, an applicant 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.

5. The original PUD was designed to allow for employment uses with development
standards that are specific to this site. The proposed PUD Major Amendment
seeks to amend these criteria. Below is a summary of the proposed development
plan and permitted uses for the subject site as described in the attached PUD
Major Amendment Narrative date stamped October 28, 2025.

Conceptual Development Plan and Permitted Uses
The original PUD proposed a regulatory framework structured around
employment uses. The primary uses allowed under the proposed PUD Major
Amendment are consistent with those currently approved under the original PUD,
which include those allowed under C-O (Commercial Office), C-1 (Neighborhood
Retail), C-2 (Intermediate Commercial), CP (Commerce Park), and A-1 (Light
Industrial), with certain prohibitions. Since data centers were not specifically listed
as a permitted use in the original PUD Narrative, or any of the zoning districts
referenced within the PUD, the applicant has included data centers in the list of
allowed uses under Section G.1 of the PUD Major Amendment Narrative. The
Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

PUD Major Amendment Narrative also includes a robust list of prohibited uses as
outlined in Section G.4 of the PUD Narrative, which includes but is not limited to
adult businesses, rabbit slaughtering, and residential uses.

The applicant is also proposing certain use criteria specific to data centers to
address health and safety concerns, which are discussed in Section H of the PUD
Major Amendment Narrative and summarized below.

• Maximum cumulative building area of 100,000 square feet.
• Prohibition of nuclear generators
• Sound study and noise mitigation
• Limiting generator testing between the hours of 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM,
Monday through Friday, excluding holidays
• Fuel storage tank secondary containment per the Phoenix Fire Code
• Fire suppression and early detection systems
• Battery Energy Storage associated with data centers per applicable code
to include:
o Ventilation and suppression systems
o Battery inventory
o Facility Map
o Thermal runaway prevention
o Off-gas monitoring systems
• Emergency access per the Phoenix Fire Code to include:
o Emergency shutoffs
o Digital site plan
• Wastewater discharge pretreatment
• Bacteria control for water-based cooling towers
• Access controls and surveillance
• Emergency Response Plan
• Large Water User Ordinance (Ordinance G-7237): If applicable, the facility
will comply with Ordinance G-7237, which provides that developments that
use an average of 250,000-gallons of water or more per day are required
to provide a Water Conservation Plan. In addition, developments that use
an average of 500,000-gallons of water or more per day are required to
demonstrate a minimum of 30% water reuse in the Water Conservation
Plan. The Water Conservation Plan must be reviewed and approved by the
Water Services Department (WSD) prior to preliminary site plan approval.
• Disclosure of Hazardous Materials, which includes the submission of a
hazardous materials management plan that clearly identifies all hazardous
materials stored on site, including their quantities and reporting thresholds
to be updated annually and made available to local fire and emergency
management agencies




Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

Utility Agreement for Power Consumption
As identified in the Health and Safety Impacts Report 2025 prepared by the
Planning and Development Department, it is important to understand where a
data center will receive its power. A data center that produces its own power –
either permanently or while a local utility is ramping up its generating capacity –
presents different health and safety considerations than a data center that gets all
its power from a public utility, and large-scale on-site power production may not
be compatible with existing residential or other uses. Even when a data center
can be fully powered by the local utility, it may need a new substation or the
installation of new high-capacity transmission lines, and the impact of such
infrastructure on existing nearby uses should be understood. This is addressed in
Stipulation No. 1.b.

Noise Generation
The applicant proposes a sound level of 70 dB(A) for all times of the day and
exemptions for backup and emergency generators. This is inconsistent with the
sound levels outlined in Section 647.A.2.kk(3)(a) of the Phoenix Zoning
Ordinance, which limits the sound levels to no more than 55 dB(A) when
measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property to the
proposed data center property between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
and 45 dB(A) between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Given the health concerns linked to noise pollution, staff recommends the sound
levels be consistent with the 55dB(A) daytime sound level and 45 dB(A) nighttime
sound level when located near residentially zoned properties. Staff recognize the
proximity to the Interstate 17 freeway to the east, the size limitations of the
potential data center(s) and existing industrial users in the surrounding area that
currently generate noise in the area and therefore further refinement of the sound
levels can be considered through a study of noise. This is addressed in
Stipulation No. 1.c.

Law Enforcement and Emergency Management Coordination
Includes a site tour and training for Phoenix Fire Department on suppression
systems, hazardous materials, and emergency shutdown procedures prior to the
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Staff recommends removing the last
sentence. According to the International Association of Fire Fighters the growing
presence of data centers requires specialized training, lots of planning and close
cooperation with on-site security and engineering teams at these new sites; the
site tour and training of Phoenix Fire Department are essential to address health
and safety concerns with data centers. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 1.d.

Development Standards
Section I of the PUD Major Amendment Narrative proposes development
standards intended to respond to the unique conditions associated with the site.
Table 1 of Section I includes the proposed development standards. A summary of
the proposed development standards as compared to those currently approved is
provided below. The applicant proposes a change to one development standard,

Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

that being the landscape setback associated with the northern property line from
20 feet to zero feet.

COMPARATIVE ZONING STANDARDS
Standard Original PUD Amended PUD
Minimum Lot Width / Depth None None
Minimum Building Setbacks
North Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 20 feet
East Property Line Minimum 30 feet Minimum 30 feet
West Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 20 feet
South Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 20 feet
Landscape Setbacks
North Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 0 feet
East Property Line Minimum 30 feet Minimum 30 feet
West Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 20 feet
South Property Line Minimum 20 feet Minimum 20 feet
Building Height Maximum 60 feet Maximum 60 feet and
and 5 stories 5 stories
Building Separation Per City of Phoenix Per City of Phoenix
Building Code Building Code
Lot Coverage Maximum 60% Maximum 60%
Floor Area Ratio None None

The applicant is seeking the reduction of the landscape setback associated with
the north property of the site from 20 feet to zero feet. Staff is comfortable with
this provision due to the northern perimeter’s proximity to non-residential uses.

Landscape Standards
Section I.2 pertains to the landscape standards. The currently approved PUD
Narrative references “Commerce Park Zoning District Standards”; however, that
language is omitted from the proposed PUD Major Amendment Narrative, in
deference to Table 1, which establishes certain landscape setbacks. While not
specifically noted in either PUD Narrative, landscaping of the site must comply
with Section 507 Tab A of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

Walls and Screening
Section I.3 of the PUD Major Amendment Narrative refers to Section 702.B.7.b of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance and notes that an eight-foot-high solid masonry
wall will be provided along any property line that abuts residential zoning, except
if that line is adjacent to a street. The PUD also requires that any open use or
storage area will be screened by an eight-foot-high solid fence or continuous
plantings. These criteria remain unchanged with the proposed PUD Major
Amendment.

Parking Standards
Section I of the PUD Major Amendment Narrative also refers to Section 702 of
the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance and includes provisions that require a solid, eight-

Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

foot-high screen wall for loading spaces or loading docks located adjacent to a
public street or within 100 feet of a residential use or zoning district. These criteria
remain unchanged with the proposed Major Amendment.

Design Guidelines
Section J establishes design guidelines, which remain intact with the proposed
PUD Major Amendment; however, the applicant is proposing that the currently
approved Color Palette be omitted. The proposed omissions include:

“Color Palette
Colors and light materials for redevelopment or new development should be used
to create visual harmony within Metro North Corporate Park PUD. The
approved colors are as follows:
• Desert hues and other “earth tones”.
• Muted shades of blues, greens and reds found in the natural desert color
vocabulary.
• Colors appearing in natural stone utilized in buildings.”

Other provisions relating to building materials and configurations, such as the use
of common clay brick, ceramic tile, and internalized roof drains remain intact.

Special Consideration for Data Centers
Section J.1 includes design criteria specific to data centers, which include
architectural embellishments for building facades that exceed 100 feet in length.

Signage
Section K of the PUD Major Amendment Narrative states that all signage will
comply with Section 705 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance including a provision
for off-premise signs and a reference to an approved Comprehensive Sign Plan.

6. COMMUNITY INPUT SUMMARY
As of the writing of this report, staff has received two letters of support.

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
7. The Street Transportation Department provided standard stipulations as follows:

• All improvements to the I-17 frontage road shall be reviewed and approved by
the Arizona Department of Transportation. Documentation of ADOT review and
approval shall be provided prior to Preliminary Site Plan approval.

This is addressed in Stipulation No. 2.

8. 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
to properly assess the materials. This is addressed in Stipulation No. 3.

Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025


9. 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 final site plan approval. This
is addressed in Stipulation No. 4.

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

Findings

1. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation and
as stipulated, several General Plan policies related to data centers.

2. The proposal clarifies that data centers are an allowed use within the PUD and
establishes criteria for such use.

3. The proposal will allow for continued use as an employment center.

Stipulations

1. An updated Development Narrative for the Metro North Corporate PUD reflecting
the changes approved through this request shall be submitted to the Planning
Department within 30 days of City Council approval of this request. The updated
Development Narrative shall be consistent with Development Narrative date
stamped October 28, 2025, as modified by the following stipulations.

a. Front Cover:
Revise Hearing Draft date to reflect October 28, 2025.
Add “City Council adopted: [Insert Adoption date]”.

b. Page 17: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Second Bullet. Revise as
follows:

• “A contractual agreement from a local utility company that affirms its
capacity and commitment to serve the energy demand for the proposed
data center shall be submitted to PDD prior to preliminary site plan
approval.”

c. Page 18: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Noise Generation. Revise
as follows:

• “Noise Generation:
o Noise generated by the data center, including but not limited to
noise generated by mechanical equipment, cooling systems, and
Staff Report: Z-29-A-14-1
October 31, 2025

on-site power generators shall not exceed 55 dBA during daytime
hours (7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.) or 45 dBA during nighttime hours
(10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. as measured at the nearest residentially
zoned property.”
o Noise levels shall be measured using an ANSI-certified sound level
meter on an A-weighted scale at ground level.
o Compliance shall be demonstrated through submission of a sound
study prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer or other
equivalent measurement documentation.”

d. Page 19: Section H, Data Center Use Criteria, Law Enforcement and
Emergency Management Coordination. Please delete last sentence.

2. All improvements to the I-17 frontage road shall be reviewed and approved by
the Arizona Department of Transportation. Documentation of ADOT review and
approval shall be provided prior to Preliminary Site Plan approval.

3. 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.

4. Prior to final site plan approval, the landowner shall execute a Proposition
207 waiver of claims form. The waiver shall be recorded with the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office and delivered to the City to be included in the
rezoning application file for record. This stipulation shall not be applicable if
the property is owned by the City of Phoenix.

Writer
Robert Kuhfuss
October 31, 2025

Team Leader
Racelle Escolar

Exhibits
Sketch Map
Aerial Map
Correspondence (3 pages)
Metro North Commerce Park – PUD Amendment No.1 date stamped October 28, 2025




VAR RD C-2 SP*
CALA

31ST AVE
Z-83-93
PAD-10* R-5* C-2 C-2 SP* Z-SP-20-97
30TH AVE
Z-43-72 Z-34-97 Z-83-93 C-2*
Z-83-93
SP-1-13
R1-8 THUNDERBIRD RD
C-2*
C-2* SH
C-2* Z-64-04
Z-83-93 AR
ON
C-2* C-2* Z-97-01 AV
E
Z-50-90
Z-22-98
IND.PK.
PAD-10*
Z-143-72 HA
VE
VOLTAIRE AVE 25T

AVE IND.PK. H LN
EUGIE
2 6 TH DR
R-4*
Z-65-06 I 17 R 26T H AVE
MP 2 6T
25 T H LN
IND.PK. 25T HD R
OW AVE
WILL


ROVEEN AVE




BLACK CANYON HWY
AVE
REY PUD*
SUR R1-8
R-4* Z-29-14 C-2 HGT/WVR SP*
Z-129-00 S-1
Z-130-97 Z-SP-12-00

WOO

31ST DR
D DR
IND.PK.
R-5 *
Z-66-06 SWEETWATER AVE
A-1*
C-1
29TH AVE 28TH DR
Z-35-12

R1-6 DAHLIA DR C-2 C-2* R1-6
Z-147-87



¯ Miles
GREENWAY RD
ACOMA DR
THUNDERBIRD RD
SWEETWATER AVE
CACTUS RD
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 CHOLLA ST
PEORIA AVE
NORTH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE DUNLAP AVE
BUTLER DR
COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 NORTHERN AVE
39TH AVE I-17
19TH AVE
35TH AVE 15H AVE
Z-29-A-14-1 31ST AVE
7TH AVE
CENTRAL AVE
7TH ST
12TH ST

REQUESTED CHANGE:
APPLICANT'S NAME: Earl & Curley, P.C.
FROM: PUD ( 42.61 ac.)
DATE:
9/23/2025
APPLICATION NO: Z-29-A-14-1 REVISION DATES:

GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
ZONING MAP TO:
PUD ( 42.61 ac.)
42.61 Acres QS 32-22 L-7
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D OPTION
PUD N/A N/A
PUD N/A N/A
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus 725
Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2014\Z-29-A-14-1.aprx
VAR RD C-2 SP*
CALA

31ST AVE
Z-83-93
PAD-10* R-5* C-2 C-2 SP* Z-SP-20-97
30TH AVE
Z-43-72 Z-34-97 Z-83-93 C-2*
Z-83-93
SP-1-13
R1-8 THUNDERBIRD RD
C-2*
C-2* SH
C-2* Z-64-04
Z-83-93 AR
ON
C-2* C-2* Z-97-01 AV
E
Z-50-90
Z-22-98
IND.PK.
PAD-10*
Z-143-72 HA
VE
VOLTAIRE AVE 25T

AVE IND.PK. H LN
EUGIE
2 6 TH DR
R-4*
Z-65-06 I 17 R 26T H AVE
MP 2 6T
25 T H LN
IND.PK. 25T HD R
OW AVE
WILL


ROVEEN AVE




BLACK CANYON HWY
AVE
REY PUD*
SUR R1-8
R-4* Z-29-14 C-2 HGT/WVR SP*
Z-129-00 S-1
Z-130-97 Z-SP-12-00

WOO

31ST DR
D DR
IND.PK.
R-5 *
Z-66-06 SWEETWATER AVE
A-1*
C-1
29TH AVE 28TH DR
Z-35-12

R1-6 DAHLIA DR C-2 C-2* R1-6
Z-147-87



¯ Miles
GREENWAY RD
ACOMA DR
THUNDERBIRD RD
SWEETWATER AVE
CACTUS RD
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 CHOLLA ST
PEORIA AVE
NORTH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE DUNLAP AVE
BUTLER DR
COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 NORTHERN AVE
39TH AVE I-17
19TH AVE
35TH AVE 15H AVE
Z-29-A-14-1 31ST AVE
7TH AVE
CENTRAL AVE
7TH ST
12TH ST

REQUESTED CHANGE:
APPLICANT'S NAME: Earl & Curley, P.C.
FROM: PUD ( 42.61 ac.)
DATE:
9/23/2025
APPLICATION NO: Z-29-A-14-1 REVISION DATES:

GROSS AREA INCLUDING 1/2 STREET
AND ALLEY DEDICATION IS APPROX.
AERIAL PHOTO &
QUARTER SEC. NO.
ZONING MAP TO:
PUD ( 42.61 ac.)
42.61 Acres QS 32-22 L-7
MULTIPLES PERMITTED CONVENTIONAL OPTION * UNITS P.R.D OPTION
PUD N/A N/A
PUD N/A N/A
* Maximum Units Allowed with P.R.D. Bonus 726
Path: S:\Department Share\Information Systems\PL GIS\IS_Team\Core_Functions\Zoning\sketch_maps\2014\Z-29-A-14-1.aprx
Ricardo Toris

Subject: Non-opposition - Best Buy




From: Green, Ryan
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 11:06 AM
To: Taylor Earl
Subject: RE: Aerial

Thanks Taylor,
I don’t have any concern about the color pallet or the proposed [data center] use. If the landscape
setback request is simply intended to permit building owners to maintain the existing landscape setback
in it’s as-is form, I don’t have any issue with that component of the request either.
Regards,

Ryan Green
Sr. Director, Real Estate
Best Buy Co., Inc.
612-214-1655 m


From: Taylor Earl
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2025 3:29 PM
To: Green, Ryan
Subject: Aerial
Ryan, Here is the zoom in I was l ooking at. As part of our outreach process, we'd like to keep a record of neig hbor feedback. Accurate to say Best Buy is not opposed to our PUD amendme nt request? Taylor C. Earl Managing Partner Earl & Curley




Ryan,

Here is the zoom in I was looking at.

As part of our outreach process, we'd like to keep a record of neighbor feedback. Accurate to say Best Buy is not
opposed to our PUD amendment request?




Taylor C. Earl
Managing Partner
Earl & Curley

(602) 265-0094
3101 N. Central Avenue
Suite 1000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
www.earlcurley.com




This message and any and all attachments may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, duplication, retention, or unauthorized use of this information is strictly prohibited and no privilege has been waived by your inadvertent receipt.
Please notify the sender immediately and then completely delete this message and any and all attachments. Thank you.







Report

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

Item text
***REQUEST TO CONTINUE (SEE ATTACHED MEMO)*** (CONTINUED FROM
OCTOBER 15 AND NOVEMBER 5, 2025) - Public Hearing and Modification of
Stipulation Request - Rezoning Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 - Northwest
Corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue - District 6

Request to hold a public hearing on the Planning Hearing Officer rezoning application
for the following item and consider adoption of the Planning Commission
recommendation on September 4, 2025.

Summary
Application: PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Existing Zoning: C-O
Acreage: 1.16

Applicant: Brett Slavicek, Slavicek Holdings, LLC
Owner: Slavicek Holdings, LLC
Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh P.L.C.
Appellant: Kurt Waldier, Gilbert Blilie, PLLC

Proposal:
1. Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to the site plan and
rendering.
2. Request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios.
3. Request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding commencement of construction.
4. Request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height.

VPC Action: The Camelback East Village Planning Committee (VPC) opted not to hear
this item.
PHO Action: On May 21, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer took the item under
advisement. On July 7, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer took the item out from
under advisement and recommended denial as filed, approval with a modification and
an additional stipulation.
PC Action: The Planning Commission heard this item on September 4, 2025, and
recommended denial as filed, approval with a modification and an additional
stipulation, per the Planning Hearing Officer recommendation, with a modification, by a



vote of 5-1.
The Planning Commission recommendation was appealed on September 10, 2025.

Location
Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
Council District: 6
Parcel Address: 5500 N. 24th Street

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





ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Recommended Stipulations
PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6

Location: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue

STIPULATIONS:

1. THE Ddevelopment SHALL be to in GENERAL conformance with the site
plan and ELEVATIONS rendering DATE STAMPED APRIL 2, 2025, AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

2. The parking ratio to be one space for every 250 square feet.

3. Construction to commence within 24 months.

4. That it be a one-story office complex with a height limitation not to exceed
2. 24 feet.
3.

3. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
4. SHALL EXECUTE 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.




ATTACHMENT B




*REVISED
Staff Report: PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
*September 12, 2025


APPLICATION #: PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6

LOCATION: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue

EXISTING ZONING: C-O

ACREAGE: 1.16

REQUEST: 1) Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance to the site plan and rendering.
2) Request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios.
3) Request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding commencement
of construction.
4) Request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height.

APPLICANT: Brett Slavicek, Slavicek Holdings, LLC

OWNER: Slavicek Holdings, LLC

REPRESENTATIVE: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC.


STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Denial as filed, approval with a modification and an additional stipulation, per the
Planning Hearing Officer (PHO) recommendation.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

On May 21, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer took the case under advisement. On
July 7, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer took the case out from under advisement and
recommended denial as filed, approval with a modification and an additional stipulation.




Staff Report PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
September 4, 2025 Planning Commission

VILLAGE PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Camelback East Village Planning Committee (VPC) opted not to hear this request.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS

The subject site consists of 1.16 gross acres located at the northwest corner of 24th
Street and Missouri Avenue and is zoned C-O (Commercial Office-Restricted
Commercial). The applicant requested the following modification requests (*Enclosure
B):

• Modification to Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance with the site plan
and rendering.

• Deletion of Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios.

• Deletion of Stipulation 3 regarding commencement of construction.

• Modification to Stipulation 4 regarding building height.

* The conceptual site plan depicted the proposed second floor addition (957 square
feet), existing bay unit at mezzanine, and 33 parking spaces (*Enclosure G). The
conceptual elevations depicted a 24-foot-tall building with proposed slate roof tile, stone
veneer framing to match the existing stone, a metal roof, and decorative wood pop-outs
(*Enclosure H).

The appellant argues the PHO states in his findings for Request 4 “I support the
rationale in the original decision" in regards to the original zoning case, during which the
original applicant at the City Council hearing stated there would be "no mezzanine on
the inside and they would not have two-story use of the structure." However, despite the
PHO's concurrence, the PHO still recommended approval of modifying the original site
plan and renderings that provides for a potential use of a 'mezzanine level' which we are
appealing as well as allowing an increase in the parking ratio (*Enclosure A).

PREVIOUS HISTORY

On March 10, 1980, the Phoenix City Council approved Rezoning Case No. Z-323-79-6,
a request to rezone approximately 1.16 acres located at the northwest corner of 24th
Street and Missouri Avenue from RE-35 (Single-Family Residence) to C-O (Commercial
Office-Restricted Commercial) (*Enclosure E). The proposed development was
intended for professional offices.

The Planning Commission recommended denial of the case by a vote of 6-1 on, per
staff recommendation, on November 28, 1979 (*Enclosure K). The staff
recommendation indicated the following pros and cons of the case (*Enclosure L):




Staff Report PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
September 4, 2025 Planning Commission

Pros:
• The parcel is on a major street.
• C-O zoning requires a site plan review.

Cons:
• The property was reasonably developed under the RE-35 zoning.
• Approval would lead to similar requests for lots on the west side of 24th Street
and worsen traffic congestion on this street.
• Does not meet the recommended density designation of the 0-2 residential units
per the 1985 Urban Forms Plan.

*
The City Council approved the rezoning to C-O with four stipulations to ensure the
property remain compatible with the surrounding land uses (*Enclosure E).

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS

Public Correspondence
Ninety-seven letters of support were received, indicating the proposed
improvements will not cause any harm to the neighborhood, will not change its
character, and will provide architecture that will make the building look more iconic
(*Enclosure M).

Fifty-two letters of opposition were received, indicating concerns with the building
height, the applicant’s failure to obtain proper permits, the promotion of commercial
development in a residential neighborhood, the building not meeting building code
requirements, and privacy issues (*Enclosure N). A petition of opposition was
submitted, containing over 140 signatures, including some members who rescinded
their support for the case due to misinformation (*Enclosure O).

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION

Residential 1 to 2 dwelling units / acre

CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING LAND USE
Zoning Land Use

On-site: C-O Professional Office

North: RE-35 Vacant Residential Lot

East:
(Across 24th Street): PAD-6 Single-Family Residential




Staff Report PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
September 4, 2025 Planning Commission

South
(Across Missouri Avenue): RE-35 Single-Family Residential


West: RE-35 Single-Family Residential


PLANNING HEARING OFFICER FINDINGS

1) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding conformance to the site plan and
rendering is recommended to be approved with a modification. The modification
is to replace the existing language with a standard language stipulation regarding
general conformance to the site plan and elevations. The original stipulated site
plan depicts an office building situated at the southeast corner of the lot. The
proposed site plan depicts an 8,764 square foot office with a height of 26 feet-2
inches measured to the top of ridge. Note that maximum building height is
addressed in Stipulation 4. The proposal is not changing the building footprint so
there is no real change to the site plan. The building height is also not being
modified.

The stipulated rendering shows a well landscaped, commercial office that
resembles a single-family residential home. The building features a large,
pronounced front door, stone façade, a turret and undulating roof line. The office
that was built onsite was consistent with the stipulated rendering.

The proposed elevations reflect the existing office with modifications that include
architecturally distinct facades, additional turrets, and several building additions
including roof vents, pop-out windows and/or dormers. The west elevation shows
a new large dormer with four new windows and a variety of building materials
including stone veneer, decorative wood pop-outs, stucco and metal finishes that
match the existing building. The windows appear to align with the proposed
interior addition of office space to the existing mezzanine. The south elevation
features two new turrets with windows that are also shown on mezzanine level.
The east elevation shows several new roof vents and two new pop-outs with
windows, one at mezzanine level and one on the ground floor. The north
elevation features several proposed dormers and roof vents.

2) The request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding the parking ratio for required
parking is recommended to be approved. The parking provided on the proposed
site plan will allow the development to comply with current ordinance standards
for this use.

3) The request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding the commencement of construction
is recommended to be approved. This stipulation was met and the zoning was
subsequently vested with adoption of an Official Supplementary Zoning Map.




Staff Report PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
September 4, 2025 Planning Commission

4) The request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height is recommended to
be denied. The applicant requested a modification to remove the language
requiring the building to be built as one-story. The existing stipulation was
intended to ensure that a one-story building was built on the site. The original
stipulation was approved by City Council on March 10, 1980 and the minutes
reflect that the original plan for the development was revised from a two-story to
a one-story as a result of public concern related to the height of the building. In
addition, it was noted by the original applicant at the City Council hearing that the
maximum height would be 30 feet, with no mezzanine on the inside and they
would not have two-story use of the structure. The City Council was concerned
about the height and amended the motion to indicate one-story with a height
limitation of 24 feet rather than 30 feet. I support the rationale in the original
decision.

At the PHO hearing, the applicant acknowledged the building will remain one-
story after construction and they will not be adding an additional story to the
building. The applicant noted that the proposed improvements will add an
additional 1,035 square feet to an existing mezzanine that was constructed at
some point since the original rezoning case approval. The applicant will be
required to submit construction documents to the Planning and Development
Department for approval and will therefore be required to comply with the
stipulation, the Zoning Ordinance, and International Building Code requirements,
which will be addressed during the plan review process.

5) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to the
Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an application
requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to require the applicant to
record this form and deliver it to the City to be included in the rezoning
application file for record.

PLANNING HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS

1. THE Ddevelopment SHALL be to in GENERAL conformance with the site
plan and ELEVATIONS rendering DATE STAMPED APRIL 2, 2025, AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

2. The parking ratio to be one space for every 250 square feet.

3. Construction to commence within 24 months.

2. That it be a one-story office complex with a height limitation not to exceed
4. 24 feet.




Staff Report PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
September 4, 2025 Planning Commission

3. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
SHALL EXECUTE 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.


Enclosures:
A- Appeal Documents (3 pages)
B- Applicant’s Narrative for PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 (17 pages)
C- Aerial Map
D- Zoning Map
E- Approval Letter for Z-323-79-6 (1 page)
F- PHO Summary for PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 from May 21, 2025 (7 pages)
G- Conceptual Site Plan, date stamped April 2, 2025
H- Conceptual Elevations, date stamped April 2, 2025 (3 pages)
I- Stipulated Site Plan for Z-323-79-6
J- Stipulated Elevations for Z-323-79-6
K- Planning Commission Summary for Z-323-79-6 (3 pages)
L- Staff Recommendation from original staff report for Z-323-79-6 (2 pages)
M- Letters of support for PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 (102 pages)
N- Letters of opposition for PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 (62 pages)
O- Petition of opposition for PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 (46 pages)




ENCLOSURE A




PLANNING HEARING OFFICER APPEAL
*REVISED – 7/8/2025
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL HOLD
A PUBLIC HEARING ON:
CASE NUMBER: PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
LOCATION: Northwest Corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
PHO HEARING DATE: May 21, 2025 RECEIVED: July 7, 2025
(taken out from under
advisement on
July 7, 2025)
APPEALED BY: Opposition Applicant
APPEALED TO: PLANNING *September 4, 2025
COMMISSION TENTATIVE DATE
*October 15, 2025
CITY COUNCIL
TENTATIVE DATE
APPELLANT NAME AND ADDRESS/EMAIL: PHONE:
Kurt Waldier
Gilbert Blilie PLLC
701 North 44th Street
480-429-3061
Phoenix, AZ 85008
kwaldier@gilbertblilie.com

RECEIPT NUMBER: N/A
REASON FOR REQUEST:

The PHO states in Findings #4 that “I support the rational in the original decision” in
regards to the original zoning case during which the original applicant at the City
Council hearing stated there would be “no mezzanine on the inside and they would
not have two-story use of the structure.” However, despite the PHO’s concurrence,
the PHO still recommended approval of modifying the original site plan and
renderings that provides for a potential use of a ‘mezzanine level’ which we are
appealing, as well as allowing an increase in the parking ratio.

TAKEN BY: Greg Harmon

Joshua Bednarek PC Planner Asst – Camryn Thompson
Tricia Gomes PHO Secretary – Ruth Somoza
Racelle Escolar PC Secretary – Vikki Cipolla-Murillo
Adam Stranieri GIS Team
Byron Easton Raquel Moreno – Posting
PHO Planner Asst – Teresa Garcia




S:\Planning\Rezoning\Hearings\PHO\Appeals\2025\PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 - Kurt Waldier - Opposition (taken
out of advisement)\REVISED APPEAL\Internal Cover_REVISED.doc
*REVISED 7/8/2025
CITY OF PHOENIX
JUL O 7 2025
Planning & Development
Department
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

May 21, 2025- PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Taken out from under
The PLANNING HEARING OFFICER agenda for Advisement on July 7, 2025 is attached.

The City Council May Ratify the Recommendation of the Planning Hearing Officer
on August 27, 2025, Without Further Hearing Unless:

• A REQUEST FOR A HEARING BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION is filed by
5:00 p.m. on July 14, 2025. (There is a $630.00 fee for hearings requested by the
applicant.)

Any member of the public may, within seven (7) days after the Planning Hearing
Officer's action, request a hearing by the Planning Commission on any application.
If you wish to request a hearing, fill out and sign the form below and return it to the
Planning and Development Department by 5:00 p.m. July 14, 2025.


APPEAL FORM
I HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON:


PH O-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
APPLICATION NO. LOCATION OF APPLICATION PROPERTY

Kurt Waldier, Gilbert Blilie PLLC
NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
� OPPOSITION □ APPLICANT
701 N 44th St kwaldier@gilbertblilie.com
STREET ADDRESS: EMAIL:

Phoenix, AZ 85008 480-429-3061
CITY, STATE AN D ZIP CODE TELEPHONE NO

BY MY SIGNATURE BELOW, I ACKNOWLEDGE THE SCHEDULED HEARING DATE AS FOLLOWS:
Ma 21, 2025- PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Tak�n out from undeJ
APPEALED FROM advisement July 7, 2025 PHO HEARING TO * 9/4/2025 PC HEARING
DATE DATE




SIGNATURE: .... V...,---=-:t=
;:._j{A)
_...,J
..........�----' =----- DATE: 7/7/2025


REASON FOR APPEAL: The PHO states in Findings #4 that "I support the rationale in the original decision" in regards to the original zoning case

during which the original applicant at the City Council hearing stated there would be "no mezzanine on the inside and they would not have two-story use of

the structure." However. despite the PHO's concurrence, the PHO still recommended approval of modifying the original site plan and renderings that

provides for a potential use of a 'mezzanine level' which we are appealing. as well as allowing an increase in the parking ratio.

APPEALS MUST BE FILED IN PERSON AT THE 2ND FLOOR ZONING COUNTER, 200 W. WASHINGTON STREET, 602-262-7131, Option 6

PLANNER TAKING APPEAL: Gi�
Copies to: Case File PHO Planner - Teresa Garcia PHO Secretary- Ruth Somoza




ENCLOSURE B




April 2, 2025


VIA HAND DELIVERY
Byron Easton
Planning Hearing Officer
Phoenix Planning & Development Department
200 West Washington Street, 2 nd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Re: Modification of Stipulations - Case No. Z-323-79 NWC 24th Street and Missouri Avenue, Phoenix
Dear Mr. Easton:
This firm represents Brett Slavicek (the Owner ) regarding the proposal to renovate their law office building located
at 5500 N. 24th Street in Phoenix, which is also known as Maricopa County APN 164-46-017 This
Property is a transitional piece between single-family residential and the Camelback Road corridor, which has
intensive development and height. Please see attached Exhibit A for an aerial view of the Property. As explained
herein, the proposed development requires modification of stipulations, which were approved 46 years ago per
rezoning case Z-323-79, to accommodate the minor renovation to the existing office building.
BACKGROUND
The current office is a well-known charming building along 24th Street that resembles a stone home with
architecturally distinct facades, copper turret, ample landscaping, flowers, and no signage. The C-O zoning for the
site was approved in 1980, and the structure was built in 1982. The low impact of the current use on the site, the
considerate design of the building, and care of the Property has created an asset to the neighborhood.
The original rezoning approval and exhibits are attached at Exhibit B.
PROPOSAL
Due to the age of the existing building and need to modernize, the Owner would like to improve the interior of the
building and offer additional office space (approximately 1,000 square feet beyond what exists in the current
mezzanine). These offices will stay within the current building footprint and existing building height of 24 feet. In
addition to interior improvements, the building exterior will keep its charm, while updating aged elements such as the
roof, which will convert to slate and add more copper, and additional landscaping.
The proposed site plan, elevation, and rendering are attached at Exhibit C.
STIPULATION MODIFICATION
To allow the proposed renovation of the Property, the Owner requests the following modification of stipulations
approved for Z-323-79:
1. THE Ddevelopment SHALL to be in GENERAL conformance with the site plan and rendering. ELEVATIONS
DATED_________, AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.




April 2, 2025
Page 2


Rationale: This stipulation has been modified to reflect the updated site plan and elevations for the
minor office renovation.
2. The parking ratio to be one space for every 250 square feet.
Rationale: The parking should be consistent with the current and more modern city of Phoenix
parking ratios, which are met with the proposal.
3. Construction commences within 24 months.
Rationale: This stipulation was accomplished with the original building and therefore is obsolete for
this request.
4. THE BUILDING HEIGHT SHALL That it be one-story office complex with a height limitation not to exceed 24
feet.
Rationale: The intent of the original stipulation is still met with the height limitation of 24 feet, and
this modification would clarify and accommodate the proposed building renovation.
CONCLUSION
This minor office renovation will maintain the appeal and architectural integrity of the current building, while providing
more modern office building. The thoughtful proposal of the additional space positioned within the existing building
footprint and height continues the tradition of being a good neighbor.

Very truly yours,

WITHEY MORRIS BAUGH P.L.C.




By
Jason B. Morris

Attachments




ENCLOSURE C




PAD-6*
N 23RD PL
RE-35 E MARSHALL AVE




N 24TH ST
C-O*




E MISSOURI AVE




ALLEY
PAD-8*
N 24TH ST




mapservices@phoenix.gov



Property Location: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6




Planning & Development Department 0 40 80 160 Feet
´
ENCLOSURE D




E MARSHALL AVE
PAD-6*
N 23RD PL




C-O*
N 24TH ST




E MISSOURI AVE

RE-35




ALLEY N 24TH ST PAD-8*



N 25TH ST




PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Property Location: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue




Planning & Development Department 0 40 80 160 Feet
´
ENCLOSURE E




Mod

Del


Del

Mod




ENCLOSURE F




REPORT OF PLANNING HEARING OFFICER ACTION
Byron Easton, Planner III, Hearing Officer
Teresa Garcia, Planner I, Assisting

May 21, 2025

ITEM NO: 5
DISTRICT NO. 6
SUBJECT:

Application #: PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Location: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
Zoning: C-O
Acreage: 1.16
Request: 1) Request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding general
conformance to the site plan and rendering.
2) Request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios.
3) Request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding
commencement of construction.
4) Request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building
height.
Applicant: Brett Slavicek, Slavicek Holdings LLC
Owner: Slavicek Holdings LLC
Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, LLC

ACTIONS:

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation: The Planning Hearing Officer took
the case under advisement. On July 7, 2025, the Planning Hearing Officer took
the case out from under advisement and recommended denial as filed, approval
with a modification and an additional stipulation.

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: The Camelback East
Village Planning Committee opted not to hear this request.

DISCUSSION:

Jason Morris, representative of Withey Morris Baugh PLC, stated he is familiar
with the subject site and thought this would be a straightforward PHO request,
however, based on the amount of correspondence from the neighborhood, he
now thinks differently. He gave an overview of the site and his request to delete
Stipulations 1-4. He indicated the area was a target for urbanization in 1979 and
the City Council recognized the need for a professional office at this intersection.
He stated the current owner has owned the building since 2013 and has been a
good neighbor and has maintained the look of the building and landscaping.




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 2

He noted the building and parking lot are often underutilized and surrounding
neighbors have used the parking lot when they have social gatherings. He stated
there are parking canopies along the north and west boundaries of the parking lot
and the building is pushed more towards the intersection of 24th Street and
Missouri Avenue, thus creating separation from the surrounding residential uses.

He explained that the project will primarily be an interior remodel with just a few
exterior changes; they do not intend to increase the building height, change the
use, or add a second floor. He stated there is an existing mezzanine that meets
the definition of a mezzanine in the Zoning Ordinance and in addition, a City of
Phoenix Municipal Judge who heard the original Neighborhood Services violation
case. He explained that the applicant is proposing the addition of two and a half
meeting rooms to an existing space that contains a law library and a small
kitchen and the total square footage they are requesting includes an interior
mezzanine space addition of approximately 1,000 square feet.

Byron Easton, Planning Hearing Officer, asked Mr. Morris to clarify why the
existing 1,411 square foot mezzanine space is being incorporated into the new
total floor space.

Mr. Morris clarified there are three levels to the building: a small basement, the
main level and the existing mezzanine space, which has been in place for some
time. He stated their request is just to add an additional 1,035 square feet; there
will be no new mezzanine or new floor space added.

Mr. Easton asked if the total floor space is the sum of the new floor space and
the existing floor space. Mr. Morris confirmed this was correct.

Mr. Morris gave an overview of their request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding
general conformance to the site plan and rendering. The request is meant to
address the exterior changes proposed on the site. The project scope originally
focused on updating the roof to a slate roof and that warranted a larger remodel
of the building, including a new turret structure featuring a copper roof. He
reiterated the height of the building will remain under the approved 24-foot height
limit that was stipulated in the original rezoning case. He noted the mezzanine
level on the west side of the building will include windows that will be screened
by 4 levels of foliage and will face southwest towards Missouri Avenue. In
addition, the windows will be 5 feet above floor level to provide interior light and
views of the sky but will not provide views into the neighbor’s property adjacent to
the west.

He discussed his request to modify Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios by
noting the current parking standards are being met and the parking lot has rarely
been at maximum capacity. The parking lot is only full occasionally on the
weekends, when the owner has allowed neighbors to use it for personal
gatherings. He stated the renovations will be uniform with the neighborhood



Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 3

character and a second floor will not be added. He clarified that the mezzanine is
not a second story, and the property owner does not intend to exceed 24 feet in
height. Mr. Morris stated regardless of how much misinformation had been
circulated in the neighborhood, they have received 78 letters and 91 signatures
in support of the PHO request.

Paul Gilbert, representative of Beus Gilbert, stated he spoke on behalf of several
neighbors in opposition. He gave an overview of the site and the history of the
rezoning case. He indicated the original zoning stipulations were intended to
protect the neighborhood and make lasting commitments to the surrounding
neighbors. He stated the applicant has not been the good neighbor that he
claims to be.

He noted the site is “spot zoned” and is the only commercial zoned property
within a 2,000-foot radius. He noted the surrounding density is low density
residential, therefore the use is inconsistent with the General Plan designation of
Residential 1 to 2 du/acre. He stated the original case faced public opposition,
and Staff and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application.
The City Council minutes indicated the building was revised from a two-story
building to a one-story building with no mezzanine and the windows were not to
exceed 8 feet in height. He stated the applicant intended to change the parking
ratio to 1 space for every 300 square feet instead of 1 space for every 250
square feet. He noted the owner proceeded with construction of the second
story without obtaining the proper permits, even though the building was deemed
unsafe. He stated the only permit obtained was a roof permit, but no permits
were pulled for the other renovations. He stated the owner’s claims about the
existing mezzanine were not consistent with the narrative nor Mr. Morris’
presentation. He states the project will support multistory office uses along 24th
Street and encourage other property owners to start construction without
acquiring the appropriate permits first. He stated the parking lot has been full on
multiple occasions, prompting people to park in the surrounding neighborhood,
including himself when he’s attended a seminar in the building.

Mr. Morris expressed his disagreement with Mr. Gilbert. He stated some
neighbors who switched their position on the case were given incorrect
information. He reiterated the applicant is only adding 1,035 square feet, the site
plan Mr. Gilbert presented was incorrect, and they intend to meet the parking
standards per the Planning and Development Department. He stated he
appreciates and respects Mr. Gilbert’s opinion, but the applicant never made a
commitment to preserving the current appearance of the building, he only
committed to keeping the building appearance consistent with the character of
the neighborhood. He reiterated that a mezzanine is not the same as a new floor
or story. The applicant is remaining compliant with the definition of a mezzanine
and are not increasing the building height. He said the PHO hearing is not a
litigation regarding the non-permitted construction, but a way for the owner to
demonstrate compliance with City requirements.



Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 4



Brett Slavicek, the current property owner, stated he wanted more space to
accommodate his son going to law school. He noted that he was not advised the
proper permits were not obtained nor of the window height restriction. He
reiterated the definition of a mezzanine may be considered a floor, but not a story
and intends on meeting the 24-foot building height. He stated he is undergoing
the PHO process to correct the violations.

Peter Drake, a member of the public speaking in opposition to the request, stated
he is familiar with this case and has lived in the neighborhood for many years. He
stated there is no justification to change the building since the neighborhood has
not been subject to any residential to commercial conversions since 1980.

Bill Shubert, a member of the public speaking in opposition to the request, stated
he’s an active member of the neighborhood and has experience with contracting
and development. He stated the original applicant of the rezoning case was able
to convince some neighbors to withdraw their opposition because of the original
stipulations that were granted. He reiterated that modifying the stipulations and
doing unpermitted construction is no way to treat the neighborhood.

Dennis Clifford, a member of the public speaking in support of the request, lives
across the street from the site and does not see an increase in height. He stated
the members of the public that spoke in opposition to the request are
exaggerating the impact of the requests and the building modifications will not
negatively affect the neighborhood. He stated the owner is trying to
accommodate the neighbors and indicated he attended the same seminar Mr.
Gilbert attended and that was the only time the parking lot was full.

Greg Nadeau, a member of the public speaking in support of the request, said
the property owner is doing a great job of keeping the property clean. He stated
the new square footage added will not affect the building height and will enhance
the appearance of the building.

Mr. Easton asked Mr. Morris if he knew when the mezzanine was built. Mr.
Morris stated he remembers being inside the building in the 80’s and thinks it
was part of the original rezoning case. He stated the City Council minutes Mr.
Gilbert referred to were referring to a proposed building that was intended to be
30’ in height. Mr. Easton asked if they provided a rendering that indicated the
window height. Mr. Morris stated they did not. He asked Mr. Morris to elaborate
on how a mezzanine is not considered a floor or story. Mr. Morris said the
definition is laid out in the Zoning Ordinance.

He asked Mr. Morris if a mezzanine is not a story, then why is the applicant
requesting to delete Stipulation 4. Mr. Morris stated he is asking to work in the
confines of the height requirement.




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 5

Mr. Easton stated he received a large amount of correspondence from members
of the public during the review period. He received several more letters and
emails directly leading up to the hearing and did not have an opportunity to
review all the correspondence. In addition, information was presented during the
hearing that he would like to verify, including the definition of mezzanine, any
past rulings related to the mezzanine and the permit history tied to this parcel. He
stated that he would take the case under advisement in order to consider the
multitude of arguments in opposition and support of the request, both as
presented at the hearing and received via mail and/or email.

FINDINGS:

1) The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding conformance to the site plan
and rendering is recommended to be approved with a modification. The
modification is to replace the existing language with a standard language
stipulation regarding general conformance to the site plan and elevations.
The original stipulated site plan depicts an office building situated at the
southeast corner of the lot. The proposed site plan depicts an 8,764
square foot office with a height of 26’-2” measured to the top of ridge. Note
that maximum building height is addressed in Stipulation 4. The proposal
is not changing the building footprint so there is no real change to the site
plan. The building height is also not being modified.

The stipulated rendering shows a well landscaped, commercial office that
resembles a single-family residential home. The building features a large,
pronounced front door, stone façade, a turret and undulating roof line. The
office that was built onsite was consistent with the stipulated rendering.

The proposed elevations reflect the existing office with modifications that
include architecturally distinct facades, additional turrets, and several
building additions including roof vents, pop-out windows and/or dormers.
The west elevation shows a new large dormer with four new windows and
a variety of building materials including stone veneer, decorative wood
pop-outs, stucco and metal finishes that match the existing building. The
windows appear to align with the proposed interior addition of office space
to the existing mezzanine. The south elevation features two new turrets
with windows that are also shown on mezzanine level. The east elevation
shows several new roof vents and two new pop-outs with windows, one at
mezzanine level and one on the ground floor. The north elevation
features several proposed dormers and roof vents.

2) The request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding the parking ratio for required
parking is recommended to be approved. The parking provided on the
proposed site plan will allow the development to comply with current
ordinance standards for this use.




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 6

3) The request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding the commencement of
construction is recommended to be approved. This stipulation was met
and the zoning was subsequently vested with adoption of an Official
Supplementary Zoning Map.

4) The request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height is
recommended to be denied. The applicant requested a modification to
remove the language requiring the building to be built as one-story. The
existing stipulation was intended to ensure that a one-story building was
built on the site. The original stipulation was approved by City Council on
March 10, 1980 and the minutes reflect that the original plan for the
development was revised from a two-story to a one-story as a result of
public concern related to the height of the building. In addition, it was
noted by the original applicant at the City Council hearing that the
maximum height would be 30 feet, with no mezzanine on the inside and
they would not have two-story use of the structure. The City Council was
concerned about the height and amended the motion to indicate one-story
with a height limitation of 24 feet rather than 30 feet. I support the
rationale in the original decision.

At the PHO hearing, the applicant acknowledged the building will remain
one-story after construction and they will not be adding an additional story
to the building. The applicant noted that the proposed improvements will
add an additional 1,035 square feet to an existing mezzanine that was
constructed at some point since the original rezoning case approval. The
applicant will be required to submit construction documents to the
Planning and Development Department for approval and will therefore be
required to comply with the stipulation, the Zoning Ordinance, and
International Building Code requirements, which will be addressed during
the plan review process.

5) The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to
the Planning Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an
application requirement. An additional stipulation is recommended to
require the applicant to record this form and deliver it to the City to be
included in the rezoning application file for record.


1. THE Ddevelopment SHALL be to in GENERAL conformance with the site
plan and ELEVATIONS rendering DATE STAMPED APRIL 2, 2025 AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

2. The parking ratio to be one space for every 250 square feet.




Planning Hearing Officer Summary of May 21, 2025
Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6
Page 7

3. Construction to commence within 24 months.

2. That it be a one-story office complex with a height limitation not to exceed
4. 24 feet.

3. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
SHALL EXECUTE 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.


Upon request, this publication will be made available within a reasonable length
of time through appropriate auxiliary aids or services to accommodate an
individual with a disability. This publication may be made available through the
following auxiliary aids or services: large print, Braille, audiotape or computer
diskette. To request a reasonable accommodation, please contact Saneeya Mir
at saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov or (602) 686-6461 or TTY: 7-1-1.




ENCLOSURE G




PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Proposed Conceptual Site Plan Hearing Date: May 21, 2025


ENCLOSURE H




PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: May 21, 2025


PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: May 21, 2025


PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Proposed Conceptual Elevations Hearing Date: May 21, 2025


ENCLOSURE I




PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Stipulated Site Plan Hearing Date: May 21, 2025
ENCLOSURE J




PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 Stipulated Exhibit Hearing Date: May 21, 2025
ENCLOSURE K




ENCLOSURE L




ENCLOSURE M
For support correspondence, please see the link on the staff report website
(PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6):
https://www.phoenix.gov/administration/departments/pdd/about-us/reports-data/staff-
reports.html




ENCLOSURE N
For opposition correspondence, please see the link on the staff report website
(PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6):
https://www.phoenix.gov/administration/departments/pdd/about-us/reports-data/staff-
reports.html




ATTACHMENT C

REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
September 4, 2025

ITEM NO: 17
DISTRICT NO.: 6
SUBJECT:

Application #: PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6
Location: Northwest corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue
Existing Zoning: C-O
Acreage: 1.16
Proposal: 1) Modify Stipulation 1 regarding general conformance to the site
plan and rendering.
2) Delete Stipulation 2 regarding parking ratios.
3) Delete Stipulation 3 regarding commencement of construction.
4) Modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height.
Applicant: Brett Slavicek, Slavicek Holdings LLC
Owner: Slavicek Holdings LLC
Representative: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC
Appellant: Kurt Waldier, Gilbert Blilie, PLLC

ACTIONS:

Village Planning Committee (VPC) Recommendation: N/A

Planning Hearing Officer Recommendation (PHO): The Planning Hearing Officer heard the
request on May 21, 2025 and took the case under advisement. On July 7, 2025, the Planning
Hearing Officer took the case out from under advisement and recommended denial as filed,
approval with a modification and an additional stipulation

Staff Recommendation: Approval, per the Planning Hearing Officer recommendation.

Planning Commission Recommendation: Denial as filed, approval with a modification and an
additional stipulation, per the Planning Hearing Officer recommendation, with a modification.

Motion Discussion: N/A

Motion details: Commissioner Gorraiz made a MOTION to deny PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6 as
filed, and approve with a modification and an additional stipulation, per the Planning Hearing
Officer recommendation with a modification to keep Stipulation No. 2.

Maker: Gorraiz
Second: James
Vote: 5-1 (Jaramillo)
Absent: Odegard-Begay, Matthews
Opposition Present: Yes

Findings:

1. The request to modify Stipulation 1 regarding conformance to the site plan and
rendering is recommended to be approved with a modification. The modification is to
replace the existing language with a standard language stipulation regarding general
conformance to the site plan and elevations. The original stipulated site plan depicts an
office building situated at the southeast corner of the lot. The proposed site plan depicts
an 8,764 square foot office with a height of 26’-2” measured to the top of ridge. Note
that maximum building height is addressed in Stipulation 4. The proposal is not
changing the building footprint so there is no real change to the site plan. The building
height is also not being modified.

The stipulated rendering shows a well landscaped, commercial office that resembles a
single-family residential home. The building features a large, pronounced front door,
stone façade, a turret and undulating roof line. The office that was built onsite was
consistent with the stipulated rendering.

The proposed elevations reflect the existing office with modifications that include
architecturally distinct facades, additional turrets, and several building additions
including roof vents, pop-out windows and/or dormers. The west elevation shows a new
large dormer with four new windows and a variety of building materials including stone
veneer, decorative wood pop-outs, stucco and metal finishes that match the existing
building. The windows appear to align with the proposed interior addition of office space
to the existing mezzanine. The south elevation features two new turrets with windows
that are also shown on mezzanine level. The east elevation shows several new roof
vents and two new pop-outs with windows, one at mezzanine level and one on the
ground floor. The north elevation features several proposed dormers and roof vents.

2. The request to delete Stipulation 2 regarding the parking ratio for required parking was
added back to ensure the property abides by the originally required parking ratio and
reduce the possibility of parking in the right-of-way.

3. The request to delete Stipulation 3 regarding the commencement of construction is
recommended to be approved. This stipulation was met and the zoning was
subsequently vested with adoption of an Official Supplementary Zoning Map.

4. The request to modify Stipulation 4 regarding building height is recommended to be
denied. The applicant requested a modification to remove the language requiring the
building to be built as one-story. The existing stipulation was intended to ensure that a
one-story building was built on the site. The original stipulation was approved by City
Council on March 10, 1980 and the minutes reflect that the original plan for the
development was revised from a two-story to a one-story as a result of public concern
related to the height of the building. In addition, it was noted by the original applicant at
the City Council hearing that the maximum height would be 30 feet, with no mezzanine
on the inside and they would not have two-story use of the structure. The City Council
was concerned about the height and amended the motion to indicate one-story with a
height limitation of 24 feet rather than 30 feet. I support the rationale in the original
decision.

At the PHO hearing, the applicant acknowledged the building will remain one-story after
construction and they will not be adding an additional story to the building. The
applicant noted that the proposed improvements will add an additional 1,035 square
feet to an existing mezzanine that was constructed at some point since the original
rezoning case approval. The applicant will be required to submit construction
documents to the Planning and Development Department for approval and will therefore
be required to comply with the stipulation, the Zoning Ordinance, and International
Building Code requirements, which will be addressed during the plan review process.

5. The applicant did not submit a Proposition 207 waiver of claims prior to the Planning
Hearing Officer hearing. Submittal of this form is an application requirement. An
additional stipulation is recommended to require the applicant to record this form and
deliver it to the City to be included in the rezoning application file for record.


Stipulations:

1. THE Ddevelopment SHALL be to in GENERAL conformance with the site
plan and ELEVATIONS rendering DATE STAMPED APRIL 2, 2025, AS
MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS AND APPROVED BY
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

2. The parking ratio to be one space for every 250 square feet.

2. THE PARKING RATIO TO BE ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 250 SQUARE FEET.

3. Construction to commence within 24 months.

4. That it be a one-story office complex with a height limitation not to exceed
2. 24 feet.
3.

3. PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE LANDOWNER
4. SHALL EXECUTE 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.

This publication can be made available in alternate format upon request. Please contact
Saneeya Mir at 602-686-6461, saneeya.mir@phoenix.gov, TTY: Use 7-1-1.




ATTACHMENT D

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/ PHO-1-25—Z-323- (SIGNATURE ON ORIGINAL IN FILE)
LOCATION 79-6 opposition X applicant

Northwest corner of
24th Street and
Missouri Avenue
APPEALED FROM: PC 9/4/2025
701 North 44th Street
Phoenix, AZ 85008


PC DATE STREET/ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP
TO PC/CC CC 10/15/2025 Kurt Waldier
HEARING Gilbert Blilie PLLC
480-429-3061
kwaldier@gilbertblilie.com

CC DATE NAME / PHONE / EMAIL
REASON FOR REQUEST:

Second story windows should not be permitted on the property that is stipulated to be
a one-story building.


RECEIVED BY: 9/10/2025 RECEIVED ON: Andrew Birkelbach

Joshua Bednarek Dalia Adams
Tricia Gomes Camryn Thompson/Teresa Garcia
Racelle Escolar Micah Alexander
Sarah Stockham GIS
Adam Stranieri Byron Easton (for PHO appeals only)
Heather Klotz Village Planner - Robert Kuhfuss
Stephanie Vasquez Applicant




REVISED 10/16/2024 vcm
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT



To: Alan Stephenson Date: November 4, 2025
Deputy City Manager

From: Joshua BednarekPlanning and Development Director

Subject: CONTINUANCE OF ITEM 50 ON THE NOVEMBER 5, 2025, PUBLIC HEARING
AND MODIFICATION OF STIPULATION REQUEST - REZONING
APPLICATION PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 - NORTHWEST CORNER OF 24TH
STREET AND MISSOURI AVENUE

This memo serves to request the continuance of the agenda item scheduled for the
November 5, 2025, Formal Meeting, concerning the request to modify stipulations of
entitlement for a 1.16-acre site located at the northwest corner of 24th Street and
Missouri Avenue.

The applicant and appellant have begun developing modifications and additions to
the stipulations for the request. Staff recommends continuing this item to the
December 3, 2025, City Council Formal meeting to allow additional time for the
applicant and appellant to finalize the stipulations.




Approved: dU·?tfl
Alan Stephens:
Deputy City Manager

Supporting documents

No supporting documents stored.


View on Agenda Online ↗

77 item(s)