2026-10-28 - Planning and Zoning Commission

I'd like to call to order the planning

and zoning commission meeting for

Wednesday, October 28th, 2026.

And um there's a notice of option to

recess into executive session. And

that's pursuant to ARS

38-431.02.

That uh notice is hereby given to the

members of the commission and to the

general public.

um that at this meeting the commission

may vote to go into executive session

which will not be open to the public and

we would do that for legal advice and

discussion with the commission's

attorney on any item listed on today's

agenda pursuant to ARS

38431383.

I'll move into roll call.

>> [name] present.

>> [name] present.

[name] is excused. [name]

>> present

[name]

>> here. [name]

>> here.

>> And I would just like to make a note

that chair [name] will be here

until 5:00 and then at that time [name] will take over chair position.

>> Thank you very much.

So, right now we have an open call to

the public and at this time any member

of the public may address the commission

on any subject within our jurisdiction

that is not scheduled before the

commission today. Due to open meeting

laws, the commission cannot discuss or

act on items presented during this

portion of the agenda. to address the

commission on items that are on the

agenda. Please wait for the chair to

call for public comment at the time the

item is heard. Are there any um open

public comments at this time?

hearing and seeing none. Um I will move

on to approval of the minutes of the uh

meeting that was held on October 14th,

2026.

Move to approve the minutes from October

14th, 2026.

>> As written. As written.

>> Second.

>> Okay. So, it was um motioned by

Commissioner [name] and seconded by

Commissioner [name] to approve the

minutes of October 14th, 26. All in

favor say I.

>> I.

>> I.

>> I.

>> All opposed.

Motion carries.

So, now we'll move into the public

hearing. And the first item on the

agenda is public hearing item

PZ2500159-2.

and it is a request for a minor

amendment to the Flagstaff Regional Plan

2030 by the applicant. And I'll let

um [staff] give her presentation.

Um [staff], current planning

manager with the city of Flagstaff. So

my presentation's going to be on the

screen there. So if we need to

Hey, this is better because I can see it

from

>> Yeah, it's not quite better than what

you're right.

>> All right, so our first item is um

STL 290 minor regional plan amendment.

Um this is a request for a minor

amendment to the Flagstaff Regional Plan

2030

uh by the applicant. Um there are

three parts to this request. There is

the request to move the center of an

activity center S12 to the north on the

maps where it's shown on the plan. um to

remove an activity center at 17 and to

realign the road network to follow the

John Wesley Pal Boulevard future

extension.

Um,

so this minor regional plan amendment

request is connected to three other

entitlement cases that include a new

specific plan as well as two concept

zoning map amendments.

Um the property,

okay, the subject property existing

conditions,

the subject property is about 210 acres

of undeveloped land. Um it is an this

Lshaped piece of property that used to

be owned by the state that is in the

process of being purchased by the

applicant. So a little history

Um

part of this is that that land was 4

five acres.

It is it is slowly changed over time to

have some byite development that

development area 16 that we'll get to um

came in first. So part of that has is

affected the acreage. Um there's some

other acreage that um that the applicant

is in partnership with their neighbors

to the west to develop also by rights.

So that was in the plan was taken out of

the plan. So um this plan over the

course of review has shifted a bit in

acreage. So if you're seeing things like

I I believe the the TIA has a different

number associated with it. Um so there's

some other references to different

acreage. Don't let that throw you out.

It's all this project. So [laughter]

>> clarify. Yes.

>> The 290 does that include that I think

it was 126 acres that were in 16. Is

that part of

>> includes part of that and and I think

it's covered in other places but just to

get out there now there's some by right

residential development that has been

platted but there is also an amenity

space that was included in this plan

that covers the golf course um if

there's a future clubhouse things like

that. So that is part of the plan but

the residential component is not part of

the plan.

Right? So the proposed development and

I'm going to try and be clear about what

is proposed versus what is a range or

allowed uses. Um so keep that in mind as

we talk about this. There is a proposed

use, but there are also uses that may be

allowed as part of that specific plan,

as part of that reszone. So, what is

proposed

is 785 dwelling units, 120 key travel

accommodation use, that's what we call

hotels in the zoning code. um and an

estimated 80,000 square ft of commercial

space as well as natural and um

recreational spaces.

Um so that first request is to relocate

the future suburban activity center S12.

So you can see on the image on the top

right that S12 is currently located um

down on that John Wesley Pal alignment.

Um this request is to move it further

north onto this um this collector

roadway um on as part of the

development. Um it would in it would be

including the parcel at development area

five that is where they're proposing to

do that travel accommodation or the

applicant often refers to it as the

lodge. Um, [snorts] so it's it is along

that proposed collector roadway and

connects to John Wesley Pal not just

through that roadway but through

internal streets and the trail system.

Um, another request is to amend the road

network. So again, um the history in

this area, um years ago, John Wesley Pal

was designed to connect down through the

south end of Fourth Street through a

neighborhood and come into this area

from the east. Um

that has changed over time. We have a

different alignment now. So what is

being proposed by the applicant actually

aligns more closely with what the John

Wesley Pal boulevard um is proposed to

actually be. Um I did talk about in my

staff report how it it gets a little

choppy towards the north. There's not

quite the same amount of connection, but

both both the existing re or sorry, both

the 2030 regional plan as well as our

future 2045 plan show that area as a an

area to be studied um where the road

alignments are not fixed. Um, so I think

that gives us a little more flexibility

that this is still up in the air as far

as alignments.

And that third request is to remove

activity center S17.

Um, the 2030 plan does show it as this

neighborhood scale future suburban

activity center. Um it feels a bit

redundant looking at John Wesley Pal as

this suburban corridor that would

support um commercial and higher density

along the corridor to then also have an

activity center. Um and the applicant,

you know, is making um arguments talking

about the topography there and the

resources in the area and how that makes

that sort of concentrated

development of density that much harder

um as opposed to being able to to

stretch that out along the corridor.

Um so the findings for a minor regional

plan amendment um is that it needs to

meet the requirements of the general

plan and the subdivision code. Um

goals and policies should be considered

um that it's in conformance with the

overall vision. Um, I give you some

quotes from our regional plan that or

the 2030 plan that the Flagstaff

regional plan establishes the vision for

the future growth and development of

Flagstaff and founding area through

goals and policies and reminds us that

general plans are not static documents.

They recognize growth as a dynamic

process which may require revisions to

the plan as circumstances or changes for

it.

again the plan's sub vision um I think I

should back up a little bit

when this application came in and was

found complete that's when we vested it

that you are we are reviewing this

against the regional plan in place at

the time that was the 2030 plan we had

not yet adopted the 2045 so every time

I'm referring to the regional plan. I'm

talking about the 2030 regional plan.

All right. So, the 2030 plan talks about

the greater Flagstaff community,

embraces the region's extraordinary

cultural and ecological setting on the

Colorado Plateau,

um natural and built environments.

encourage the advance of intellectual,

environmental, social, and economic

vitality for today's citizens and future

generations.

So, in looking at the request number one

to relocate S12,

uh, suburban activity centers have a

pattern of commercial uses as the

primary anchor with supporting

residential around it. Um the regional

plan does consider the preservation of

natural spaces. Um there's goal LU4 that

talks about balancing housing and

employment land uses with the

preservation and protection of our

unique natural and cultural setting as

well as goal CC1 which states reflect

and respect the region's natural setting

and dramatic views in the built

environment. Um, the proposed zoning map

amendments will allow for a target of

484 units within the pedestrian shed of

the activity center resulting in 7.19

units per acre. Um, if I can talk a

little bit about this, I think it's

important to realize that the

development being proposed, this the

lodge, that travel accommodation is not

like the sort of traditional

motel that you need to be able to see

from the highway when you're need a

place to crash on your road trip. This

is more of a a destination that's trying

to really take advantage in a good way,

take advantage of the natural setting,

um the trees, the slopes, the canyons,

the waterways in this area. So although

although activity centers are more

commonly located directly on um on these

major roadways,

this the lodge is set back a little bit

and doesn't necessarily have that same

pattern of extreme density in the center

and then moving out from there. It's

almost like the lodge is the center and

then the house begins at the edges of

that

number two to amend map 25. Um the area

to the north is mapped as identify road

network solutions through future

studies. So that's why I was talking

about how there are some sort of cut off

roadways, but I I have confidence that

your studies will identify that road

network. Um the regional plan 2045 also

has that same comment about a future

connectivity study. Um it does align the

map with the current John Wesley Powell

Road alignment. Um, and because that

John Wesley Pal is seen as a suburban

corridor, I put in the definition of

that suburban corridor as serving larger

capacities of vehicles and people with

more intense land uses and pedestrian

safety as a priority in the setting.

These corridors will be wider with

vaster speed limits, although I think

John Wesley Pal had a lower speed limit.

agreed to 35 um

and emphasizes safe pedestrian and

bicycle crossings. Uh local roads access

the suburban corridor through a

hierarchy of functional road

classifications

and shops and services are in buildings

that front the street.

And then request three um delete S17. Um

again the by removing that activity

center we're essentially pushing

intensity and density along the corridor

rather than trying to cluster it around

an activity center that is also located

in a site that maybe is not ideal for

traditional development.

Um so the citizen participation plan the

applicant um had three neighborhood

meetings um they held those meetings

you'll see this slide or variations of

it um three more times um because they

held those meetings to discuss all four

of these applications. So they had three

meetings. Um the first meeting had five

people. The second meeting had four. The

third meeting had two. Um there weren't

questions or comments from the

attendees. Um

I I inherited this project later in the

game. I have not seen any comments or

received questions from the public. Um

I've reached out to the applicant about

if they've heard anything. Um it's been

pretty pretty cluff.

Um so

staff's recommendation is that the

planning and zoning commission forward

the minor regional plane and rent roof

bus city council with a recommendation

for approval in accordance with the

findings. Um to clarify, we're going to

have two public hearings on this item.

So we're not voting tonight. Um, we'll

vote at our next meeting.

Now,

please

pause while I pull up my next

presentation.

I tried to have them all as one document

and my computer

did not enjoy that and started getting

quite warm.

So,

Hey,

two,

the STL 290 specific plan.

So, this is a request for the adoption

of the STL 290 specific plan, a

regulating document for approximately

290 acres of state trust land. Um, I

included this certificate of purchase

just because getting APNS and addresses

kind of lags behind um, this entitlement

process. Um, but this is located

northeast of Pine Canyon Estates along

the plan John Wesley Pal Boulevard

extension. Um, this, as I referred to

earlier, the specific plan accompanies

two concurrent concept zoning map

amendment cases that we'll get to after

this. um proposing to reszone the

property or some of the property from

rural residential with the resource

protection overlay to a combination of

single family residential R1, medium

density residential MR, suburban

commercial SC, and highway commercial HC

all still with that resource protection

overlay.

Um, we talked about this on the last

one, the subject property,

the L now with a little bite out of

the side there. All right. So, the

specific plan, the specific plan um

defines land use, zoning,

infrastructure, and development

standards for approximately 290 acres of

state trust land. There are 20

development areas that throughout my

presentation I refer to as DAS, not to

be confused with development agreements.

Um, but 20 development areas with

proposed zoning classifications of RR,

R1, MR, SC, and HC. Um, it also

establishes designated open space, parks

and multimodal

trail corridors.

It outlines required water, sewer,

drainage, and public service

infrastructure and provides a phased

approach for constructing roads,

utilities, and amenities. So, you can

see over on the right side the overall

plan showing all those development

areas. We see the activity center and

its proposed location along that

collector.

question. Yes, this is where I wanted to

get some clarification. In previous

case, it was 210 acres. This specific

plan is called 290. Is that is that 290

acres of all of the colored area less

the part that become Juniper Point?

>> Maybe maybe the easier question is how

many acres are going to Juniper Point

out of the out of the original 405? I

believe that's 60 66

>> 66 acres.

>> Yes, that's the part that says not a

part on [laughter]

um so there are a few modifications that

happen in this specific plan. There are

modifications to the density

requirements. Um there's there are

tables included in the specific plan

that address density and development

standards. Um one of the things it does

is actually increase the minimum density

allowed in the RR zone. So um Flag Staff

I'm told is somewhat unique in that we

not only have maximum density but we

also control minimum density in a a lot

of zones. So our zoning code gives a

density range of between zero and one

unit.

Specific plan actually bumps that up to

0.8 to one unit per year in that

development area. Three,

it also increases the minimum density

allowed in the R1 zone. Again, the

zoning code allows for a range between

two and six units an acre. The specific

plan bumps it up to four to six units

per acre in development areas 2, four,

six, and nine.

It also increases minimum density

allowed in the MR zone. The zoning code

allows between six and 14 and the

specific plan requires a minimum of 12

units an acre in development areas 1 and

seven and between 11 and 14 units per

acre in development area 8.

Another modification made by the

specific plan are some of the land use

permissions or that allowed uses table.

Um it prohibits

one unit residential development. You

can think of that as single family

homes. Um it prohibits that use in

development areas 1 7 8 14 and 15.

It also allows the golf course and

related facilities use without a

conditional use permit in development

area 16. Now we all heard that

conditional use permit to allow a golf

game. What this does is now says I think

what I suspect and I'll let the

applicant explain when when they're

presenting, but right what we approved

was just a golf course. And this would

allow them to add like a clubhouse for

certain amenities to that golf course

without having to come in and amend that

conditional use permit.

[staff]

Do you have a a question comment?

>> CJ, you're muted.

>> Oh, sorry. I didn't know that I was up.

Um, my question is about the golf

course. Is it open to the public and

does it use reclaimed water?

Um so we heard a conditional use permit

on the golf course and it included a um

a reclaim water agreement with um with

the city. So yes, it does use reclaim

water as approved as as part of that

discussion. Um as far as being open to

the public, I'll let the applicant

address that. My understanding, how

staff reviewed it was as an amenity

space for the residential development

that was occurring alongside of it.

>> Question, can I ask? Yes. Um, [staff], it's

on the subject of the golf course and

the reclaimed water and I when I read in

the narrative that was for the specific

plan. So when that reclaimed water

contract was redrawn, they saved 30%.

But they're going to be asking for that

30% back in a new contract to to water

with reclaimed water the rest of this

development.

>> So

>> did I understanding from the specific

plan is that there will they intend to

request another agreement for reclaimed

water from the city. Um

I did not I don't think that necessarily

that is a finding to whether the

specific plan is approved or not because

it's not necessarily

promising any sort of entitlement or

saying by by approving the specific plan

we are therefore also appro going to

approve any reclaim water requests.

>> Yeah I just separate

>> I just wanted to bring it up. It wasn't

in your staff report, but it was in

their in their narrative that that was a

big deal that they gave 30% back. It's

coming back out. So, just wanted to make

that known. Thanks.

So, modifications to height

requirements. So, the specific plan

allows greater height in a number of of

these development areas. Uh the maximum

building height in the RR zone is 35

feet. The specific plan would increase

that to 48 feet in development area 16.

That is the golf course area. Um and it

was identified as being needed to allow

for a viewing tower.

Um the maximum building height in and I

just want to clarify that development

area 16 that increase in height is

specifically for the track that includes

the golf course and any amenities. It

does not include the residential tracks

um or laws sorry. The maximum building

height in the R1 zone uh is 35 feet per

the zoning code. A specific plan would

increase that to 48 feet in development

areas 2, 10,19,

and up to 60 feet in development areas

4, 14, and 15.

Uh, the maximum building height in the

MR zone is 35 feet per the zoning code,

and the specific plan allows for up to

60 feet in development areas 1, 7, and

8.

Uh the maximum building height in the HC

zone is 60 feet per the zoning code. Um

additional height in HC is permitted per

the zoning code with a conditional use

permit. Um the specific plan would allow

for an increase up to five stories or 75

ft. Um and that would be permitted that

would they would not need that

additional use permit. Um, the maximum

building height in the SC zone is 35

feet per the zoning code and a specific

plan would allow up to four stories or

60 ft.

Um, there are also modifications to

setbacks. Um, the zoning code includes

minimum setbacks uh requiring 20 feet

setback for parking. Um we have

interpreted that to mean parking

structures, um parking lots, parking

areas, um not your driveway.

And this requirement is removed by the

specific plan for development areas

zoned RR, R1, and MR. Um the development

area 16 again that by rate development

that that subdivision plat was already

approved is not included in this. Um the

specific plan increases the side setback

in the R1 zone um in D

what I wrote there. Um anyway from 3

feet to 5 feet except in development

areas 14, 15 and 19 where the side

setback is reduced to zero feet. Um code

actually the zoning code does allow for

a zero foot setback for attached single

family dwellings uh what people most

commonly call town homes. Um,

and the specific plan decreases the side

setback in the MR zone again. Why am I

anyway from three feet to zero feet and

code allows for again for that zero foot

setback for single family attached

single family dwellings. Um, I do want

to say that even if the setback is zero,

you still have to meet, you know, fire

code, building code for building

separations.

Um, part of the specific plan is um the

idea that the area will be developed as

part of that planned residential

development. There are a few

modifications that the specific plan

allows. um we would apply those PRD

standards sitewise rather than per phase

or per parcel slashdevelopment area. Um

it would count open space collectively

and meets the PRD points um for for

community scale amenities rather than

parcel specific features. So we could

award points for a community park as

opposed to,

you know, a a bench alongside a trail

somewhere. So we get

there maybe less throughout, but I would

hope higher quality

concentrated larger amenities.

Um, another thing the specific plan

addresses is those subdivision standards

that talk about um, block length and

street connectivity. Um, the specific

plan talks about how the street layout

in the activity center does not meet the

regional plan's desired pattern and

block size. Um, this mainly has to do

with topography again and natural

resources. In order to come up with how

the regional plan envisions development

in this flat grid interconnected system,

it is very hard to actually implement in

an area like Flagstaff. Um so the street

network in development areas one, four,

five, six, seven, eight, nine, and 10 um

will most likely have culde-sacs and

blocks that exceed that desired maximum

of a block length because of these

topographical constraints. Um, and the

plan instead proposes alternate

pedestrian connections to substitute for

vehicular block requirements. So, you

may not have

streets for cars that meet those block

standards, but there will be pedestrian

and bike connections that allow people

to move um kind of shortcut between

these roadways.

So, do we see that more

circularly or like where I live there's

a ton of cults because it backs to the

the forest. So, but they're all just

like this, you know, one kind of in a

row and then up in another row,

>> which I don't think is necessarily

an issue with this requirement. It's

more when those culde-sacs become very

very long and that if you were in one

culde-sac and you wanted to visit your

friend in the next culde-sac you're

walking all the way down to the end of

your culde-sac down the road and back up

your neighbor's culde-sac. So

>> this would be

>> this would have those pedestrian

connections between those roadways that

would allow people to more easily move

from one roadway to another. And just

two questions I have. Will it will it

also

are they providing access to the to the

forest so that people can walk in the

forest?

>> Yes. Some places. And are there plans

for urban trails in that area?

>> Okay.

>> All of the above.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Sorry. Okay. Sorry. Um the so community

services impact analysis. So when we're

looking at a specific plan, we look at

public services impact analysis review.

This includes transportation, water and

wastewater and storm water. Rather than

go through all of that and all of it

again, that is that analysis is included

with the concept zoning map amendments,

but they are relevant to the specific

plan. Specific plan also has spec more

specific analyses that are required. Um

so the following analysis that I

included in this presentation are just

those additional impacts that we look at

when adopting a specific plan.

So the first one is police and fire. Um

it's development. There's new homes. It

increases demand for police services. Um

there's added residential, commercial,

and the lodging use. Um there's also an

increase um demand for traffic

enforcement due to the new roadway

connections.

Um the Flagstaff Police Department is

the serving agency. Its main station is

located about 2.9 miles from the site.

Um current um police department

performance indicates it can absorb the

short-term increases and calls um and

references ongoing crime reduction

success and community policing programs.

Um so overall STL 290 is not expected to

overburden police services in the near

term but long-term growth will continue

will require continued coordination with

the FPD

as any growth in Flagstaff will require

it to to increase. A question on that as

well. If the bond and the sales tax

increase that are being voted upon next

week don't pass, how does that

>> So this analysis was done prior to those

bonds being

at least on staff's radar I think like

planning staff. Um so this is not

necessarily dependent on those on those

bonds. You also have a public safety

development impact fee. You

>> we have a public safety development

impact fee that we do collect.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Um this site is located in fire district

number six. Um it's within the response

range of several stations um including

station four that's approximately three

miles away. Um response times are within

NFPA standards um suggesting existing

service capacity is adequate for initial

phases of development.

again there will be an increase um

emergency medical calls that wildland

urban interface exposure um and similar

to police it the result of the analysis

was that it shouldn't strain things

initially but as it grows we'll need to

revisit it

um school. I believe there was an

attachment of a letter from um FUSD that

talked about this. Um the project is

projected to generate approximately 226

students at full buildout. Um they'd be

distributed among Kinsey Elementary

School, the Mount Elden Middle School,

Flagstaff High School. um all of which

currently have adequate capacity due to

districtwide declining enrollment

trends. Um the analysis notes that the

by putting more development on the south

side of the city, it can help stabilize

the district's

distribution of schools and of

enrollment.

um bringing it possibly into better

balance but may necessitate future

boundary adjustments.

Um and I attached the the letter from

FUSD that states that they support the

project and that they're ready to serve

future students. Question about that.

>> Yes. Um does this when you come up with

this re that when they come up with

these recommendations do they take into

account also the additional students

from like Juniper Point Canyon Del Rio

that'll also feed into those same

schools and I mean there's no parcels

being reserved or set aside for school.

they might be zoned where they could

accept a school, but as everything gets

built out, there could be no land left

in the area to build a school. And when

I when I was following the the JW Pal

specific plan, which was never finished,

I'm sure we'll get to that. Um, in 2020,

they in that initial evaluation, there

were going to be two elementary schools

and a middle school in this in the along

the JWPL corridor. Um, and the new

Kinsey school, they're not increasing

their capacity. They're only adding

preK. So, I'm I'm at a I'm at a loss to

how all these numbers will work and that

they that there won't be a school on

this whole south side, an additional

school on this whole south south of the

40. So when planning department or

school district looks at this, I mean

probably Juniper Point didn't trigger a

school or Canyon Del Rio or this, but

collectively they probably do. So could

you address how that gets figured? kind

of piggyback on that too to say

>> that you know

and I could be wrong but my

understanding of the busing system is

that they they don't bus as many

students as they used to and so how far

will students have to walk to Kenzie

that

>> you know they'll bust probably to MEMS

because it's further away and to um flag

high but to Kenzie with young children

how far way are these homes from Kinsey

Elementary School?

>> So, the information that I was given was

the letter from FUSD. I'm not sure how

school department came up with that

result and what they weighed into it.

Part of

guys always beat me to the punch here.

So, part of what I was going to say when

I was done with my presentation is

because we get to have two hearings

is I would love at the end of this to

hear at the end of the meeting and the

applicants presentation to hear what

additional information you might need

for the next meeting so that I can make

sure I have the staff here or I do

additional research or ask people

questions or the applicant can can

provide additional information about

that. So, it sounds like this might be

on that list of of questions that we

want addressed at our next meeting.

>> Madam Chair, I just have one just

comment generally when I've worked on

projects like this find the school have

like their owners. So they start looking

at these things where where they can

accommodate them in order to generate

the letter that they sent. So maybe you

could ask them for more clarification

because they have to be well aware to

accommodate

um new development. So typically in my

experience that's what they've done.

They you know they have their own

internal planning. They keep track of

the subdivision plat. keep track of um

who's pulling permits.

>> Those those planners reach out to the

city and to planning staff and ask us

>> what's what's online, what's coming

next, what's been approved, how many

units, where what's their construction

schedule, like

>> so maybe they could provide a little

more clarification.

>> Yeah, I'd like to see more clarification

from the public school system. Okay. You

want to say something?

>> Yeah. And if I can just add, you know,

we've had multiple conversations um

throughout the John Masley Pal even the

specific area planning the road finding

project. We recently met with [name], I think it was, you know, a

year ago and the context of the larger

picture of what's happening in the

planning area. And so this tracks with

the exact information that they've given

us. [staff] can get more clarification from

them, but just to kind of somewhat

address it tonight. I can let you know,

we have had conversations with them

about the whole entire area while this

is just looking at the specific site and

this is tracking what they're even

saying about just the way that

enrollment is going and where student

and younger families are are living

right now.

>> Yeah.

>> And my my biggest concern is of those

young students if they're having to walk

to school, how far of a

>> And that's a different Yeah. I just

wanted to talk how far of a route is

that. So

>> um so another issue that we look at is

economic development.

The applicant provided us information

about this. Um the construction is

projected to support an average of 1,600

jobs per year um in Cookanino County,

including 1,026

direct construction jobs. Um and a total

annual labor income from construction

activity estimated approximately 90.7

million. And a question of that, would

most of the jobs or construction people

be hired from within the community

rather than brought in from a another

community to build here.

>> I don't know that that's something

necessarily the developer knows at this

point. That would be up to. I mean,

typically you bid these things and if

you have a local contractor, they might

use local subs.

Hard to say. Uh but maybe they can

address that.

Um at full buildout, the development is

expected to generate roughly six million

annually in recurring city revenue

through property taxes, state shared

revenues, sales taxes, BBB taxes, and

franchise fees. In addition to a

one-time construction sales tax payment

of 12.3 million,

um the approximately 80,000 square ft of

commercial development uh could generate

an estimated 277 jobs and the lodging

operation um it's projected to produce

41 million annually in revenue. Uh the

residential component approximately 785

households is anticipated to further

stimulate the local economy through

household spending on goods and

services.

Parks and recreation. Um, the

development includes approximately 18

acres of publicly accessible privately

funded neighborhoods scale parks located

within walking distance of most

residential units. Um the internal

system of multi-use trails would connect

to the Arizona trail um the John Wesley

Pow Boulevard trail corridor and other

existing regional routes improving

overall recreational connectivity. Um

the project also has a preservation of

natural open space areas.

So the findings um the planning and

zoning commission shall find that the

proposed STL specific plan meets the

requirements of the general plan and the

subdivision code. Um this is very

similar to that minor plan amendment. So

the minor plan amendment is required to

be approved in order for the specific

plan to be found in conformance with the

regional plan. So that's

one of many interconnected tentacles of

these projects.

Um the regional plan 2030 area types. So

this area in the 2020 2030 plan was

classified as future suburban

neighborhood. is located within the

city's urban growth boundary and is

intended to accommodate new suburban

residential neighborhoods supported by

commercial services and multimodal

transportation corridors. Um a suburban

neighborhood is characterized by

primarily residential development at low

to moderate densities. Um, it serves as

a transition between rural areas and

more intense urban places. It features a

connected street pattern and access to

parks and open space and local trail and

sidewalk networks that support walking

and biking. It's designed to function as

a complete livable community that relies

on nearby activity centers and corridors

for services, employment, and higher

density housing opportunities.

Uh for place types, um a suburban

activity center is a mixeduse focal

point within the suburban area type.

It's planned to include a combination of

commercial employment, public

facilities, and higher density

residential uses organized in a compact,

walkable pattern. These centers are

intended to serve surrounding

neighborhoods by providing daily goods

and services within short travel

distances. Development within an

activity center typically includes

smaller block patterns, pedestrian scale

design, and multimodal access. Housing

densities are highest closest to the

center with transitions to lower density

residential forms outward into the

surrounding neighborhoods.

Um, a suburban corridor is a linear area

along a major roadway that accommodates

a mix of land uses oriented towards both

[laughter] local and regional travel.

Um, they're intended to support

multimodal transportation. They're often

lined with commercial, mixeduse, or

medium density residential development.

Um, it provides a structure um for

suburban growth by linking neighborhoods

and activity centers and establishing

predictable development intensity along

designated transportation routes. uh

streetscapes and access management

elements are emphasized to balance

mobility with placemaking and safety.

So when we look at goals and policies in

the plan um environmental planning and

conservation

um we're looking at these are just some

of the goals and policies that I pulled

out. Um the applicant also did their own

regional plan analysis. there's no

shortage of goals and policies for you

to consider. Um, so

here, you know, achieving carbon

neutrality for the Flagstaff community

by 2030. A big part of achieving carbon

neutrality is encouraging these walkable

neighborhoods. Um, having commercial

elements near residential development.

Uh we're looking at policies that

encourage um reduction of energy and

material some consumption. Again,

concentrating development and walkable

areas as well as investing in forest

health, watershed protection measures.

Um again, this development is really

trying to work with topography and with

those natural resources in the area. Um

as well as this goal to protect, restore

and improve ecosystem,

native plant and animal community

diversity

um and preserving forests, riparian

areas, wildlife routes, and using native

landscaping. Um the specific plan has a

whole section on landscaping and the

philosophy of of landscaping different

areas of the specific

um looking at open space and recreation.

Um this project meets um this goal OS1.

Um the region has a system of open lands

such as undeveloped natural areas,

wildlife corridors and habitat areas,

trails, access to public lands and

greenway um

etc.

slaughter resources. Um,

satisfying current and future human

water demands and the needs of the

natural environment through sustainable

and renewable water resources and

strategic conservation measures. Um, the

use of reclaim water and rainwater

harvesting wherever appropriate and

practical and incorporating pedestrian

access, trails, walk, watchable,

wildlife opportunities

into natural water courses when

practical.

Community character. Um, one of our

policies is this idea of preserving the

natural character of the region. Um the

specific plan includes architectural

design features and examples of

various um

structures and what some of those

features are that we see repeated

throughout Flagstaff

growth area and land use. um designing

new neighborhoods that body the

characteristics of Flagstaff Flagstaff's

favorite neighborhoods with a mix of

use, a variety of housing types and

densities, public spaces and

connectivity with again these multimodal

trails and transportation.

Um, also increasing the variety of

housing options and expanding

opportunities for employment and

neighborhood shopping within all

suburban neighborhoods.

Transportation

um improving mobility and access

throughout the region. Um, the applicant

has been a partner in the John Wesley

Pal

connection that whole corridor. So by um

constructing their portion of John

Wesley Pal we've

mobility throughout this area of

Flagstaff

um and increasing the availability and

use of pedestrian infrastructure is

including the foots in their development

um maintaining that Arizona trail

throughout the development as well as

their

additional

trail connections the development.

also talks about the cost of development

and part of that is the policy that

requires new development to pay for a

fair and rough proportional share of

public facilities, services, and

infrastructure.

For housing, um we're looking at policy

in H16.

That new development, especially on the

periphery, will contribute to completing

neighborhoods, including connecting to

other neighborhoods, providing parks,

civic spaces, variety of housing types,

and also protecting sensitive natural

and cultural features.

um the specific plan does restrict the

development of single family residential

housing in five areas. So by doing that

they're

showing a commitment to having at least

some diversity in housing types by

saying not everything can just be a

single family

throughout the development. Um they do

say that no affordable housing units are

included in this proposal. Um the app

I'm sure the applicant will discuss this

um but the philosophy being that um by

you can see the allow density in the

area by developing housing any type and

a variety of such that that is helping

address the housing crisis

lack of housing

um economic development. Uh one of our

policies is to support and promote the

diversification and specialization of

the tourism sector with heritage, eco

and adventure tourism. Um I'm not sure

about heritage and adventure, but but

this would definitely to me looks like

ecoourism.

>> I'm sorry because I have to leave.

>> Yes.

>> And so Right.

>> And I'm not going to be able to see the

um presentation.

Could that be

>> You can We can email you the link.

>> Yes. Thank you.

>> Able to watch.

>> Okay.

>> That's right. And then

>> you could rewatch the beginning of it.

[laughter]

>> [staff], as much as I love listening to

you, um probably forward to

five o'clock. But anyhow, um

the last slide had one of my concerns

was, you know, affordable housing and

and my

hope is that by having the different

types of housing that some of it is

affordable without having to say that,

you know, certain percentage and that's

that's just my concern and I can listen

to your presentation because I'm sure

it'll be included. So, thank you. [name]

go for you. Yes. And I tag on to her.

>> Was there discussion at all about I mean

obviously we're reszoning just into a

zone. There's no guarantee of seeing all

these different types of housing. We

know that they can be accommodated but

not necessarily no guarantee that

they're going to

happen. Was there any discussion about

square footage ranges? you know,

minimum, maximums, you know, would that

have been a better way to hone in on the

type of housing that Flagstaff people

that live and work here would really be

interested in? I just I just kind of

wanted to bring it up and ask

>> and I don't know that I have an answer

if that was ever discussed. Um, I know

it's not currently part of the specific

plan

and

the applicant. Thank you.

Okay. So, here's that citizen

participation plan. Um, a few additions

um specifically to specific plans. Um,

specific plans are required to have two

planning and zoning commission hearings.

Um it was also required um to have this

60-day review where we certain

government agencies um are contacted,

it's posted online and we we wait for

comment. Um so

it was posted on June 12th. Um no

comments were received.

Um so the recommendation from staff on

the specific plan is that the planning

and zoning commission forward um

specific plan for adop adoption request

to city council with a recommendation of

approval in accordance with the funding.

Excuse me, [staff]. Do um do we vote on

this? There has to be a second hearing.

>> This will That's what I thought.

>> Voting will happen next time.

>> Next time. So, this is another no vote

today.

>> As well as those zoning

>> next one. Thank you.

Now we get to the concept zoning map

amendments and we have two of these

applications. So this is the first of

the two.

This request is um for a concept zoning

map amendment by the applicant to

reszone approximately

139 acres from the rural residential

zone with the resource protection

overlay to the single family residential

R1 zone with

so this is one of those points where I

want to talk about entitlements. The

specific plan and the reasonzoning

application talk about a target and what

the developer envisions at this point

happening, but I want to make sure that

we're clear about overall entitlements

this development. So, um, if approved,

these two zoning map amendments in in

addition to the specific plan and the

and the regional plan amendment would

allow between 605

and 1,312

units, travel accommodations,

really of unlimited size. And I say this

from a planning standpoint. I would

imagine if if something got so large

that it could trigger additional impact

analyses, but again to be clear, we

don't we don't require an applicant from

a planning standpoint to limit the size

of a hotel or how many rooms.

Um, as well as a range of commercial

uses and those are all listed on that

table two of the specific plan. Um the

applicant and I spent a long time on

that table too. So

deserves your attention. [laughter]

Um of those allowed dwelling units

between 298 and 386 units are prohibited

from being single family dwelling.

>> [staff], is that a percentage of that

range? Is that how you arrived at that?

not a percentage is based on. So that

specific plan took certain development

areas said in that table two you should

pay attention to

in table two it talks about allowed uses

and it prohibits single family dwellings

in certain certain development areas and

those development areas have a density

range. So I looked at the minimums in

those

five I think development areas and the

maximum in those five development areas

and that is how I derived this

>> like you said the minimum development

drives product.

>> Oh I understand the question.

I know, right?

>> And I do want to say we also spend a lot

of time with the activity center and

talking about because activity centers

require a certain density range in

themselves. So again, that specific plan

when I'm talking about how it's bumping

up minimum density, some of that has to

do with with making sure that we're

meeting the required density within that

activity center. So when you see these

minimums of 605 units of 298

nons single family dwelling that those

numbers still meet those minimum density

requirements of all the zones as well as

that activity center.

So the development areas this so re

reszoning to R1 will be development

areas 2 4 6 9 10 11 14 15 17 and 19.

totals is about 139 acres

and it would keep that resource

protection over.

Those areas will accommodate between 315

and 721

dwelling units. Again, the target what

they're proposing is about 443

units. But again, I think it's important

that we think about the range as well as

that intentive target.

I circle all the my little red circles.

And the more time you spend with this,

more of these

will just just come to you and you'll be

able to picture them in your head. Um so

density um development areas 10, 11, 14,

15, 17, 19 will meet the density range

of the R1 zone. Um that's per the zoning

code. And then development areas 2, 4,

6, and nine are required by the specific

plan to have that four to six units an

acre. So again, increasing that minimum

um density requirement.

And then development areas 4, 6, 9, and

10 are located within that pedestrian

shed of the S12 activity center

and contribute to that minimum required

average density of six units per acre. I

believe the target

um based on the target number the

density in that activity center is over

seven units.

Um so phasing just thinking about like

if if these are reszoned

we see development on these. Um so phase

one the light green [clears throat]

includes development areas 14 and 15 and

then um phase three includes development

areas 4 6 9 10 and 11. Phase 4 includes

development area 2 and phase five

includes development areas 17 and 19.

allowed uses. So, development areas 2,

4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, and 19 are

allowed, all residential uses that are

permitted in the R1 zone based on the

zoning code. Um out of the development

areas being reszoned R1 development

areas 14 and 15 which is part of that

phase one um

single that one unit residential

development or single family homes is

prohibited in those those two areas.

Um all of these I won't go through all

the numbers again. Um, all of these

development areas are allowed outdoor

public uses as a commercial use. Um,

this is something that the applicant and

I came up with to make sure that the

parks are allowed use in these areas. We

didn't want to get to a situation where

they're trying to develop a park and

we're realizing, oh, wait, we didn't we

didn't account for that in our in our um

permitted uses.

The concept zoning plan review um

it to be complete on November 24th,

2025,

almost a year ago.

And if this reszoning is approved, the

applicant will still need to submit for

either site plan review or subdivision

plat review um prior to submitting for

permits, both civil plans and building

permits.

So we look at resource protection in um

reszones. The resource protection

overlay zone on the subject site

protects flood planes, steep slopes, and

native trees. Um, typically in the R1

zone, um, based on provisions in the

zoning code now requires 50% of the tree

resources to be saved. The applicant is

electing to be part of our tree resource

pilot program um which will have them

working with city planning and fire

staff uh to determine where areas of

tree resources shall be protected. Uh

the concept natural resource protection

plan was submitted as part of this

resoning application. It shows general

areas the applicant intends to maintain

as undisturbed. Um, if this is approved,

the natural resource protection plan

will be required again as part of any of

those site plans or preliminary plat. Um

again thinking about this development

certain development areas the

residential development areas will be

part of that um planned residential

development that enables us to again

look at this in a more holistic way that

instead of saving a couple trees in

random places, we can save lots of trees

and keep in mind um fire safety in the

area

that here's that plan. So purple is

areas um envisioned to be developed

disturbed and you see all the green

areas as places where the intent is to

have all those resources protected.

uh common space and civic space. Uh the

Flagstaff zoning code requires that a

PRD provide a minimum of 15% of the

development area to be common space. Um

as I just talked about the specific plan

u would allow these um this more

holistic look at this. Um the plan does

identify certain development areas um

that will use the PRD standards. Um it

also calls out development areas that

are planned to have these parks. Um so

there are four community parks proposed.

Um, I highlighted development area 19

because that is one of the development

areas that is being proposed to be

reszoned to R1.

>> A question for you.

>> Yes. Um, with regard to common space,

civic space, well, maybe it's not civic

space, but open space, how does the the

golf course from the lower section, does

that is that counting on anything?

>> That does not count towards the

development included in the specific

plan. that that was part of the

previously approved subdivision in that

development area 16. So it doesn't it

doesn't count towards the

>> So we're getting sort of a full bang for

our buck in this area with the 15%.

>> Yes.

>> Thank you.

>> We also look at pedestrian bicycle

circulation systems. Um

so everything needs to meet city

engineering standards. Um the proposed

road network and trail plan has been

provided um to show how those internal

site connections are intended. Uh final

determination of these connections will

be determined during that site plan

subdivision

application review. Uh the Flagstaff

Urban Trail System trails will be

provided along John Wesley Pal Boulevard

and then as I've mentioned the Arizona

Trail currently crosses the property. Um

it'll be realigned

um as the site develops but it will also

the applicant will also be maintaining

public access to that trail

>> on the foots trail.

>> Yes. Um, in some of the fine print it

said that there would be a foots trail

along

that correctly. Um, but I didn't see

like the long, you know, the trail line

on the map. Um, I just wanted to make

sure like where that connectivity goes

as it goes north in the development. You

know, I obviously see it on JW Pel.

That's understandable, but I didn't

quite see how it um works further north.

I'm assuming that'll be part of the

applicant's presentation.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> And architectural design standards. Um

specific to R1 zoning, the specific plan

does allow for increased height in

overall in 13 of 20 um development

areas.

As far as the R1 zone, um, development

areas 6, 9, 11, and 17 use maximum

height of 35 ft allowed in the zoning

code, while development areas 2, 10, and

19 have that increased maximum height of

48 feet. And development areas 4, 14,

and 15 have a maximum height allowed of

60 feet. Um the application as I

mentioned before includes these

architectural character images of

proposed style materials and design

elements being used in

also included um include in your packet

as well as in the application this are

the sample residential building

footprints and parking areas. So this um

this element shows different types of

envisioned development types as well as

overall sort of layout um design

elements throughout the development.

>> So [staff], so this is a function of a

concept zoning.

>> Yes. showing since we've been learning a

little bit more in detail what the

difference is about all uh about that

>> concept zoning.

>> This is this is a concept zoning map. So

it's just showing where the the

buildings would be blocked out if they

chose to build any of these different

types of housing within that zone. and

staff has proposed a condition that that

part of the reszoning would be

developing in conformance with the

sample residential building footprints

and the areas.

>> So, they'd have to kind of stick with

this layout. But again, it's still not a

requirement that they, you know, build

it a triplex or a garden.

>> It would not be a requirement that they

build a certain building type.

still just going to be medium density

>> what is allowed in the zone or what more

specifically what is allowed in table

two um and then any development would

also need to be in conformance

um part of that concept zoning map

amendment is looking at the impact

analyses

This is what I deferred to now on our

specific plan. So, one of the impact

analyses that is required is the

transportation impact analysis, which

I'm constantly calling the traffic

impact analysis, and I feel like that is

a a vote paw on my part. Um, so

transportation. Um so city staff

reviewed the STL 290 again earlier

earlier times different slightly

different um acreage but the master TIA

that was sealed on September 15, 2026.

City staff conditioned approval on

specific improvements.

Um part of that TIA was talking about um

at full well it breaks it down into kind

of phases of development. Um, but

looking at full build, the proposed

development could generate 11,882

external trips over the course of a

typical weekday with 582

external trips during the AM peak hour

and 950 external trips during the PM

peak hour.

Um, there's also a requirement that John

Wesley Pal needs to be connected to

South Fourth Street prior to the

issuance of a building permit for any

development within the specific plan

area.

This is recently I was recently made

aware of a slight modification to that.

So, four it needs to connect to Fourth

Street. It does not need to connect in

order to finish that byite development

around the golf course in development

area 16. It also does not need to

connect for that phase one um

development areas 14 and 15 in order to

develop but anything after that. So

starting in phase 2 phase 2b needs to

have that connection completed. Oh,

clarification. So, so that just allows

traffic to be able to go all the way

through to Forest Street, but we don't

have we don't have to it's not

conditioned on those other developments.

>> There's usually two different pieces

that feed into it. One is your traffic

see transportation impact analysis um

looking at how these trips are

distributed. So by having the option of

going both west and east um is a good

thing but it also there's an element of

fire safety involved too of how many how

many dwelling units you can have with

one direction versus two directions. So

it's a combination of both those things

that that then require that connection

to be made.

um the

the

all of those um improvements discussed

in the TIA and in that memo that staff

provided that was also attached um talk

about how the development agreement

shall include required improvements,

timings and proportional shares.

Uh we also completed a water and

wastewater impact analysis or a WHISA.

Um that was completed on September 5th

of 2023.

Um and then in December of 2024, the

applicant requested an extension and

water services approved that request for

an extension in October of 2025.

Um the development proposes tapping into

existing water infrastructure at five

possible locations. Um and then off-site

sewer extensions will be required to

reach the existing public system. Uh the

development proposes to connect to the

existing sewer infrastructure at seven

locations. Um, in the southern region of

the development, an 8 inch sewer within

John Wesley Pow Boulevard is proposed to

extend through the new development.

Um,

I went into the storm water analysis a

little bit more in the staff report. Um,

and

at this point in creating presentations,

I was losing steam. So [laughter] just

so the drainage [clears throat] impact

analysis was reviewed by city staff and

approved. Um honestly at this scale and

at this point in development we're

really they have we know that generally

they will deal with storm water. Um and

we will look at it in more detail as

each of these development areas come in.

All right. So the findings, the first

finding, um, we should probably have

this memorized by now, right? Um, the

proposed amendment must be found to be

consistent with and in conformance with

the goals and policies of the general

plan and any applicable specific plans.

So this means in order for you to to

find that the concept zoning map

amendment needs this finding, it's not

just the general plan, it's the amended

general plan as well as the specific

plan being proposed.

So the Flagstaff regional plan 2030

shows this area within the growth

boundary. It's a suburban land use

classification.

So that supports this mix of uses um

neighborhood scale development that

balance housing, recreation, and

employment opportunities.

Um the request for a minor regional plan

amendment

or needs to be um approved in order to

be found in compliance with the regional

plan and it also needs to be found in

compliance with that specific plan.

So applicable goals and policies. Um you

may see some repetition here. Um so I

pulled out some various goals and

policies. We can go into any of these in

more depth. Um the staff report points

out how certain things are being met.

The applicant did their own um regional

plan analysis

policies. Um but again you know

environmental planning and conservation

absolutely

open space. Yes.

Uh water resources. Um this project

helps to bring necessary infrastructure

into this area for future future

development. Um community character. Um

again all of the architectural design

standards, the proposed building

footprints, um and then maintaining that

that the character of the region is not

just those architectural elements but in

balance with these natural elements as

well.

Uh growth areas and land use. um

developing these new neighborhoods that

have a mix of uses and a variety of

housing types. Um increasing the variety

of housing options

and planning suburban development to

include a variety of housing options.

um neighborhoods, housing and urban

conservation uh make available a variety

of housing types at different price

points to provide housing opportunities

all economic sectors. Again, um

development areas to be zoned R1. Two of

those development areas do not permit

single family homes. Um together those

allow a maximum of 53 non-s single

family units. Um the remainder of the

units targeting 391 with a maximum of

668

could be developed as single family

units.

as not the

current proposal, but consider um it has

been stated by staff that higher density

uses improve efficiencies in

infrastructure and support lower housing

costs.

Finding number two, um we're looking at

community benefits and the public good.

Um so if we reszone these areas from RR

to R1 um we are able to provide target

443 dwelling units range 315 to 721

dwelling units. Um the proposal it does

not propose to sorry any affordable

housing units but suggests that the

increase in number of units does help

address Flagstaff's housing crisis.

The proposed development transforms

currently undeveloped property within

the urban growth boundary which is type

of development we would like to see. And

the development invests in public

infrastructure helping to deliver new

roadway, trails, and utility

infrastructure.

Finding number three is that the site

needs to be determined to be physically

suitable

um

etc. Staff believes the proposed

application meets this finding. Um this

was reviewed at IDS. Um and IDS based

its conclusion on the review of all

applicable codes and requirements as

well as those impact analyses for the

site.

A development agreement. So we have a

draft development agreement that's been

prepared. Um the primary purpose of the

agreement is to set out roles and

responsibilities in regard to the

following not limited to. So this is my

working list of items that we are

negotiating. One is forest resources and

the participation of the city's forest

resource pilot program.

uh planned residential development

design elements, the phasing of

utilities, infrastructure, parks, common

space, and trails. Um the offsite water

and sewer infrastructure improvements as

required by that WISA. Um the fact that

the Arizona trail shall remain open,

accessible, and safely passable during

construction. Um here's where I updated

um the comment about John Wesley Pal

connecting to Fourth Street. That needs

to happen before issuance of any permit

beyond development areas 14, 15, and 16

and off-site transportation

infrastructure improvements. Um

currently that would include the

construction of roundabouts.

um specifically at Lone Tree and John

Wesley Pal and Lone Tree and Sunni and

looking at when that would be triggered.

So currently looking at the 200th

dwelling unit and then the 370th

dwelling unit. Um the developer is also

required to contribute their

proportional share of off-site

improvements

um or construct those improvements. This

is all still under negotiation

and final points I hope will be

presented to the commission our second

hearing.

>> Question about that.

>> Yes. The roundabouts off of loan tree.

Um and in the the TIA it mentioned there

was you know uh sta stages of 2008 you

know and those were listed under 2028.

So how does those negotiation and what

they said needs to be done by 2028 how

does that

>> so pan out?

>> My understanding is that the the

transportation impact analysis was

written with years as triggers. that

doesn't always really work in the real

world. And so we are working to

translate years into number of dwelling

units which would more realistically

um capture the the impacts of of that

development.

I was very excited about that. Just want

to add that in.

So, which is sooner?

>> Um, Commissioner [name] has a question.

>> Okay. Commissioner [name],

>> go ahead.

>> Hi. Um, does this also include fire

station number seven in some of the

calculations or is that already taken

out the board?

No,

the applicant would not be responsible

for additional fire station. Um,

so I guess it was I'm not sure it was

ever on the board.

Okay.

we had those same neighborhood meetings.

[laughter]

So this is a recommendation. This um

zoning map amendment does have

conditions.

Um, so the conditions at this point are

that the subject property must be

developed in accordance with the

approved STL 290 specific plan as

the building footprints and parking

areas document. All other requirements

of the zoning code and other city codes,

ordinances, regulations shall be met by

the proposed development.

All terms, conditions, and restrictions

detailed within the STL 290 development

agreement as amended must be fully

satisfied.

The subdivision of the development must

align with the approved zoning

boundaries.

And our favorite, in the event the

property is reszoned and the developer

fails to obtain final civil plan

approval within two years of the

effective date of the reszoning

ordinance, then the city may schedule a

public hear may schedule a public

hearing before the city council for the

purpose of causing the zoning on the

property to revert the zoning back to

the former classification of rural

residential per section 10-20. 20.50.060

of the code.

Salai pull up. [snorts]

So as I mentioned there are two

reasonzoning requests. So this is the

second one. This request is for a

concept zoning map amendment would

reszone approximately 72.14

acres from rural residential with the

resource protection overlay to suburban

commercial zone, highway commercial zone

and the MR zone. All with resource

protection.

Uh similarly, I just want to point out

those entitlements. Um so granted with

this application again we're looking at

this range of the number of dwelling

units the travel accommodation and a

range of commercial uses as listed in

table two of the specific plan. Um again

of those allowed dwelling units between

298 386 are prohibited from being single

family dwellings.

So the first part of the reszoning

request is to reszone two development

areas 13 and 20 to the SC zone. Um

development area 13 is lovingly referred

to in the as the commercial village.

You could see those highlighted. They're

kind of that reddish pink color and have

Um so phases development area

be developed as part of phase 2B and

development area 20 is in that final

phase of phase 5.

allowed uses in these areas um in

development areas 13 and 20 include

general retail business, bars and

taverns, mixed use work, restaurant or

cafe, general services, indoor

commercial recreation facilities,

outdoor public uses, office and public

parking.

We also included certain accessory uses.

So the idea being that you could not do

a telecommunication facility on its own,

but if you had one of the like a general

retail business or an indoor commercial

recreation facilities, then one of these

accessory uses would be allowed. Those

include this stealth or attached

telecommunication facility, a community

garden, farmers market, or flea markets,

which could be permitted with a

temporary use permit.

Um, development area 20 also includes

additional primary uses of dry cleaning,

a veterinary clinic, automobile service

station, and convenience store,

libraries, and museums.

All residential uses that are allowed in

the SC zone by the zoning code could be

allowed in these areas.

Uh the second part of the reszoning

request is to reszone development area 5

to HC the highway commercial zone. Uh

development area five is the location of

the proposed lodge.

Uh this is planned to be part of phase

three.

The allowed uses in development area

five. The primary use is that travel

accommodations and again these accessory

uses would be allowed to come online

in addition to that primary use of the

travel accommodation. So, restaurant,

bars, and taverns, um, including outdoor

public uses, general retail business

uses, stealth with attached telecom

telecommunication facilities, community.

There's no residential uses proposed in

development.

Uh the third part of this reszoning

request is to reszone development areas

1, seven and 8 to the MR zone.

Um these are part of sorry seven and

eight are part of phase three and then

development area one would be part of

phase 4.

Allowed uses in these areas are all

residential uses in the and

except single that single family house

one unitit residential development is

prohibited. Um outdoor public uses is

the only allowed commercial use in these

development areas.

the concept zoning plan review. Um, this

like the other request was uh deemed

complete in November of 2025.

And like the previous one, if approved,

the applicant still needs to submit for

either site plan review or subdivision

review prior to any permits.

um resource protection, common space and

civic space, pedestrian bicycle

circulation systems,

all discussed in the previous zoning

application, extremely similar if not

identical for this request.

Uh compatibility in architectural design

standards. Again, we're looking at that

increased height allowance um in the

specific plan. So development areas 13

and 20, those SC zoned um parcels would

increase the maximum height from 35 ft

to 60 ft. Um development area five where

the lodge is would increase the maximum

height from 60 to 75 ft. and development

areas 1, 7, and 8, the MR zoned parcels

would increase the maximum height from

35 to 60.

Um, and the application also includes

those same architectural character

images of the proposed style, material,

design elements.

Um similarly we have the same sample

residential building footprints and

parking areas being proposed. Um this

second page includes

uh sample building footprint of the

lodge um indicating that parking would

be located both underground as well as

surface lots. and then that um that SC

zone um in development area 13

on the public systems impact analysis,

the transportation impact analysis, the

water sewer impact analysis and the

drainage impact analysis are the same

ones that we looked at for the previous

concept zoning map amendment and are

also relevant to that specific plan.

Finding number one, it has to be

consistent with and in conformance with

the goals and policies of the general

plan and any applicable specific plans.

Um, just like the last one we're looking

at, we're in the urban growth boundary.

It's a suburban land use. um we need the

minor regional plan amendment to be

approved and we need this to be found to

be in compliance with their specific

plan.

looking at applicable goals and policies

very similar again same development um

so environmental planning conservation

open space policies

uh water resources community character

growth and land use um

again we're looking at um

slight var variations. You know, now

that we are including um the commercial

zoned areas and medium density

residential zoned areas, that does a lot

more to encourage this diversity of uses

and diversity of housing types that the

regional plan would like to see.

and economic development. We have we

have our um tourism sector

finding number two um community benefits

and the public good. So the MR zone

development areas aim to provide the

target of 296 dwelling units. Again,

we're looking at a range there between

280 333.

um they pro these development areas

prohibit single family units. So that

encourages some diversity of housing

type

same issues with there's no proposed

affordable housing units but all housing

units are good. Um the and then

we're developing within the urban growth

boundary and investing in public

infrastructure including the road,

trails and utilities.

And then finding number three that the

site is physically suitable. Um,

again, staff believes they've met this

finding and we determine that by

reviewing this through IDS and looking

at applicable codes and requirements as

well as those impact analyses.

Um, this is the same same slide unless I

made a typo. um for the development

agreement looking at those elements that

will be part of that agreement

including the traffic impacts

the same citizen participation plan

and the recommendation. So um

I want to say identical um conditions.

So, we're looking at, you know, being in

accordance with the approved plan as

well as that building footprints and

parking areas document, other zoning

codes and ordinances and regulations.

um meeting the terms and conditions of

the development agreement

subdivision align with that approved

zoning boundary and that we can always

um revert this back to the previous

zoning.

>> Um the specific plan does the the city

write its own document or

what the what the applicant has provided

that we got on all of our attachments.

>> You would adopt what the applicant has

provided.

>> I had a question about like on on the

maps like the only areas that are being

actually reszoned to medium density or

1, seven, and eight. 14 and 15 are shown

as medium density, but there actually

are one. I understand that maybe the

intent is that they want to do something

more in line with medium density, but I

just wanted to call attention to the

zoning is actually R1. Can you clarify?

>> Yes.

>> Any questions?

>> Because that that map is color coding

things but not according to the zone.

It's color coding it based on various

development types and the specific plan

defines certain types of development

like missing middle type one and missing

middle type two. So those areas are

being proposed to be developed with a

certain housing type that happens to be

the same housing type being proposed in

other locations but it is allowed in

that zone but is not the zone itself.

Does that make sense? It

>> does. I just

>> zoning map.

>> It's not a zoning map. So I mean will

there be

>> it's not a zoning map. It is a

>> I just

>> proposed

>> proposed development type

>> and I think like for the purpose of

city's documents and what we all see

what council sees that we should see

what's what a zoning map. So that would

be my that would be my one of my things

for your list.

>> I think I think specific plans are

purposely not zoning maps by by state

statute. Correct.

We could still though as part of the

concept zoning map amendments request a

that's showing what things are being

zoned to. Um, and I think that is why

staff was trying to be very clear about

what is being proposed versus what we

are entitling so that we're clear that

that you know this applicant with the

current plan in this current market is

proposing certain things but we need to

understand that there is some

flexibility about what actually gets

developed and even when you look at the

definition of those certain housing

types. They list a wide range of housing

types. So, um,

and I think it's like

we're using all the the current hot

buzzwords, missing middle, you know, um,

but it's still attached single family

homes, you know, or multifamily. And I

think that, you know, that

just want to be

>> factual about what it is and what it

isn't.

my comment. So if there was a way to

clarify that especially as this moves

forward to council, I think that

so any questions or comments or or

requests

of me or and we can follow up. You can

make additional requests after the

applicant gives their presentation. But

making some of your

be answered.

It's standby.

about

clean bike chairs. There's two of you

here

and commissioners online. [name]

and here on behalf of STL 290,

STL 290,

the applicant, as we said, there's a

variety of different entities that are

involved in this development and it has

changed, right? And and that was great.

[staff] pointed that out and started in the

queue. Uh they purchased this property

in 2020. So this has been six years in

the making and it's been interesting

looking at all the different um analyses

that have been presented at different

times um and different approval dates

and all of that. So this has been a

wellthoughtout

uh worked on plan but it has changed

over the years. Um just a couple notes

I'm gonna hit from the beginning and I

am going as I stated from the beginning

[name] is the most detailed

presenter of anywhere in the state of

Arizona. So I uh I will hit on some of

my notes. I will have some some pictures

uh more pictures than [staff] had on hers.

Um but I will try not to repeat herself.

one thing uh [staff] in terms of the

transportation impact analysis or the

traffic impact analysis.

Oh, it actually references both. I don't

think you've been doing anything

traffic.

>> Yeah, they're both in there, but we're

not going to talk from the audience

because you're not allowed to do that.

Um also, uh [name] asked a

question of Alec as you guys were kind

of discussing,

>> right?

>> Building sizes potentially square

footage on residential units. the goal

of the specific plan and to increase

some of the minimum densities uh and and

to not allow single family

development areas was to do just that

was to was to allow for a diversity of

housing types. We don't know exactly

what's going to be out there uh and what

the market is going to dictate. But by

raising those minimums than what is

allowed by code, that forces a different

product type, right? It just does. You

can't build single family homes and you

need a more dense product to be able to

get the density required on those

parcels. And as for the target, the

reason the target is sitting where it is

kind of in the middle is mostly slope.

You noticed that we kept the RPO on

every parcel. Trees we can work with.

Trees in the pilot program have been

have been great and [staff] has has said on

the record I think for a number of our

projects now um working with the pilot

program we actually can protect greater

swaths of trees. So between the the PRD

option as well as the pilot program, we

get to to protect more substantial

trees. It's the slope in this area and

that's what has us at our target number.

If there are changes, um I have not

changed my slide. I apologize. I'm just

hitting a couple of the of the

questions, but I I'll I'll get into the

presentation here, Commissioner. Um

schools really quickly. Uh the

superintendent who we are in contact

with, yes, is aware of all the different

developments and he is tickled. wants us

to come here in our five-year demand

where they have all Juniper Point and

Kenyon Del Rio. They they do have

planners in the school district. We can

bring additional correspondence, but we

do have correspondence directly from the

superintendent. They're desperate for

more development out there because they

do fear uh your enrollment numbers going

down. If you follow other D other school

districts in the state, they're all

closing.

And so while I I appreciate and you know

I've never had a kindergartener that

could walk to school and now now I've

got kids in university that I think they

walk to school. I hope they go to class.

Uh but they are living on campus and

theoretically they should be able to

walk to school. I've never had that kind

of school opportunity for my kids. And

while that would be ideal, I think the

superintendent is really excited about

the additional homes and the prospect of

of saving because they do see a

five-year downward projection and are

looking forward to more homes there. I

think I hit some of the big ones, but

we'll go through them. Oh, goodness.

Hold on. No, not turn camera.

Oh, perfect. Okay, we have four related

requests. I did split them up, but

again, I'm going to go through them

quickly because I think [staff], I don't

know how how much more information kind

of there is to share. Again, we started

with the original 405 acres, right? And

you guys did see that we gave you more

history when we did as outlined in phase

one currently in development, our buy as

well as the approved conditional use

permit for golf. uh chair [name] to

answer your question that is it's a

private golf course. It is an expansion.

This is a Pine Canyon expansion. Um it

is not counted in the open space for the

balance of the project. This is a Pine

Canyon expansion. Um and that's moving

forward, but that also does include the

development of John Wesley Powell, which

opens up so much more development

opportunities.

Uh again, our phase one uh is in the

southwest corner. Um, and what we're

here talking about today is the balance

of the project. Uh, the original

concept, and we really hit this when we

spoke about the cup, right? So, again,

the the bottom left, the Pine Canyon

expansion does kind of look similar to

our to our uh original proposal. It's an

executive course. So again, as we as we

spoke about when we got the approval for

that, um far less water being used, far

less turf, but the original proposal did

have another championship golf course.

It had way it had larger estate lots and

it had a a mega resort on there. Um and

it did not include the the two

commercial opportunities that we do now

for the citizens, the of Flagstaff

existing and future. and it did not

include the diversity of housing types.

The new proposal is park trail focused

with the community commercial and uh the

lodge.

So we have 20 development areas um

uh 20 development areas. We are

proposing again approximately 785 homes.

As [staff] did point out, the zoning could

allow for additional units, but I'll

tell you as far as the slope resources

um and what's out there today, we can't

get any more out there. If there are any

changes to those codes, we will revisit

that. But our target um is based on both

our our transportation impact study, the

WHISA as well as uh as well as as what

the slope will allow 80,000 uh square

feet of commercial

um and 70 acres of parks, common open

space, and preserved open space. I think

that's really important. I think when

you have the ability to develop all

these together and with the specific

plan, we're able to protect all of that.

We have four parks that are open to the

public and privately funded and

maintained. And then again the 120 key

uh familyfriendly lodge that again as

opposed to relying on a championship

golf course which was the original plan

um it is now Arizona Trail Park system

um and and relying really as [staff] said

taking advantage of in a good way the

natural topography and the beauty in the

area.

Um, we as [staff] said, we're reviewed

under the regional plan 2030. Um, being

that we've been in the queue for for a

long time. So, there may be some

questions about that. I think you guys

all follow the regional plan closely

enough to know that because our

application was in before we are

reviewing it under the 30.

Uh, I don't feel like we really need to

get into this in great detail because

[staff] did such a great job. But again,

we're moving up um S12 and that is to

allow for the lodge and more density um

up there uh just a little northeast of

where it is now. Realign the map for

John Wesley Showl. We've all followed

that that process. I think it is much

better the current alignment um

homes and having to condemn multiple

single family homes and and so that's

kind of a cleanup item because JWP is

now you know well in area and then again

the removal of activity area 17 the

biggest issue with that was is the

topography in the area um and just again

being able to find the balance both

commercial development and that is all

now permitted the commercial development

because we have the John Wesley uh the

JWP corridor in front of it. Uh so yeah,

that allows for our commercial

opportunities as well as some

residential. So these are the three [staff]

went into uh went into them in in great

detail uh so I can answer any questions

but you know

those are the three changes we're asking

for as far as the public outreach.

Again, we had three meetings, 11

attendees. Uh quest, we had a couple

questions, um but no opposition per se.

We did over notice, you know, I think

300

ft is required. We did a thousand um as

well as the HOAs, the daily sun, the

posting, and we posted off of our

property, which we don't normally do,

but again, if we were to post on the

property, you'd have to be an avid hiker

and trespasser uh to to have seen our

sign. Uh so again working with staff uh

again we overnoticed in this way which I

think is great

and and [name] got grief from me on the

one night when we over noticed something

and there were people who waited all

night and they're like wait now I know

what this is it has nothing to do with

me and they were able to to take

themselves off. Um but we did overnotice

in this situation. I do believe

appropriate.

Um do believe that this is consistent

with the regional plan policies again

3.8

miles of trails um seven types of of

housing that are going to be permitted

and and chair [name] to your question I

mean does it guarantee all those housing

types and all those parcels? Not

necessarily. But what we are asking for

in the specific plan in terms of

outlining those you know the different

diversity of housing types and the

height gives us more opportunity to get

more density and to get more product

type. So truly we all these are tools in

a toolbox. Um we didn't have the the new

zoning category that you guys have now.

Uh these were you know putting all the

different tools in in the toolbox.

80,000 square foot of neighborhood

commercial. That is something I heard

from multiple council members.

[name], don't just bring us a mega

lodge for people who are visiting. We

want actually two commercial centers

that can bring us a grocery store that

can bring us a vet that can bring us all

those things for people current and

future. And that is what we did.

[clears throat]

Um, as far as the three uh regional plan

amendments, um, we do believe that we

meet the test. Uh, we believe we fit the

side. It keeps the framework of of what

the the regional plan. I did not go

through all the goals and policies, but

as [staff] said, in our application, there

are many of them. Uh, and we also agree

with all the ones that [staff] brought

forward. So with that uh respectfully

approval of the three regional plan

or I move on to specific plan or reszone

any questions on regional plan that I

didn't hit

>> ask a question and it might not actually

be for you it might actually be for [staff]

um but because that regional plan dealt

with that entire corridor and so besides

the activity centers that fell within

your parcels

There's also U6 that falls into the

bottom of Juniper Point. Um, I know, you

know, just from watching what's on the

calendar and such that there's probably,

you know, maybe some changes to their

plans and their specific plan there.

what I'm concerned about or what I think

we want to see the whole picture of is

you know as far as

know activity centers

um what is you know what there's a lot

changing from the from that regional

plan 2030 um and even from what was

envisioned if there had been a JW PAL

specific plan so do you know if there's

another type of activity center

remaining along the corridor

because now we're just down to basically

one and it's off of JW PAL.

>> So, one thing I think it's nice to note

is that these two activity centers being

moved

all entirely within this property. So,

we're manipulating this and not

necessarily impacting other adjacent

property owners. In the regional plan

2045,

um we no longer have activity centers

like this. We do more um area types and

there are centers either suburban

centers or urban centers um that are

mapped. Um, so

those those are included as part of that

2045.

Um, you could if you want additional

information about the 2045

plan, I could provide that to you, but I

really have to look at

what plan is at place when the

application comes in and make sure that

we're meeting that. Um so future

resonings

um will be looking at 2045 and we'll be

not looking at activity centers will be

looking at those area types as

>> here's a maybe a related question that

does stick within this parcel when you

make that into a suburban corridor and

you have removed an activity center off

of JW PAL. Do you feel that a suburban

corridor in this this type of a case

will serve the same purpose as an

activity center that could have should

have maybe been put at JW Palaba?

>> So I believe that this in the 2030 plan

that this roadway on the map traveling

through a suburban area type was a

suburban court. um the 2030 plan maybe

didn't do the best job of mapping all

the corridor types and kind of

coordinating that, but that's how in

conversations with comprehensive

planning, we've looked at at that

corridor. So, I don't know that we're

necessarily changing the designation at

all. We're just relying more on that

designation

at activity center

17

that

I think also moving the the uh activity

center that we are there's a lot of

right there. So it didn't matter whether

the core was there or not if you're

developing by right. You know I think

moving it allows for the density and the

and the the energy that you were trying

to get from there. I think if we left it

where it was and we're still proposing

commercial along JWP because we can

because of the the commercial corridor.

So, I actually think it it it really

does help fulfill the goals of not the

1acre lots of the Fine Canyon expansion,

but the the higher density residential

as well as the the family lodge as well

as the two commercial opportunities.

>> Yeah. I mean, I I would just

re-emphasize that that corridor allows

under the 2030 plan, the corridor would

allow for higher density, these reszones

to highdensity residential or highway

commercial, the in the same way that the

activity center would. So by moving the

activity center, you're almost now

giving two opportunities for that

increase instead of having them over

overlapped in one.

>> Although I guess my concern would be is

along JW pal except for where the

commercial pieces are, it all is either

RR1. So there's not really the density

there, you know. But anyway, just a

comment. Yes. And I think that I mean I

know I tend to look at it in the context

of so what could we develop there now by

right and are we closing the door or are

we enabling other opportunities in the

future. So by keeping that as this

commercial corridor, who's to say that

in 10 years, 20 years, we don't reszone

it again to something even higher or

redevelop it to actually increase

density. And now we have a plan that

supports that.

>> And sure, the last thing I'd add is

along there, one of the biggest issues

or benefits is the topography, right?

It's part of what makes Flagstaff so

beautiful and you know are the trees and

the topography and so it really has been

a huge balancing act of trying to get

the density and I'll tell you kind of we

there's a little watermelon piece but

some of that residential development

truly with the slope resources that need

to be protected uh we just can't get any

more density and so that's why shifting

things around we really have tried to

get the greatest amount of density on

these parcels as we could.

Okay, carrying on. Okay, specific plan.

And again, I'm true to I I don't I'm not

a fiber. I told you I'm moving a little

faster than [staff] because I knew [staff]

would say all the words. Um

[clears throat]

so again, and these four do work in

conjunction. At my third presentation, I

do take both resoning together. Um but

as far as the specific plan again we are

producing or proposing five phases and

20 development areas with the target of

785

homes um with the 80,000 square ft of

commercial. Again we have kept that RPO

on every parcel.

The trees we're working with it's it's

the slopes um that that that make things

harder yet at the same time, you know,

it's it's it's what the code wants. So

we're trying to truly um have our cake

and eat it to uh eat it too in this in

this situation. So it is a governing

document for approximately 290 acres. It

provides a greater level of detail than

the regional plan and allows us to

cluster some of our development to allow

for additional building heights right in

the in the MR as as uh as [staff] took you

through. And the reason for that is

again we can't get any more density on

those but we want additional height so

that we have a uh more building types

and more building types that are

appropriate. Um the allowed use table

again table two uh allows custom custom

uses um and as well as write the the

primary uses as well as the accessory

uses as [staff] got into. Here is the

illustrative uh document of the specific

plan. Um,

and chair, another question you had on

there was the foots. We do have the

foots along JWP. We also have the foots

going up along Panava Boulevard. Um,

there is a pre-plat in for that right

now. Show the foots on the west side of

the of the street. So, it's going in

with the byite development and then the

foots is going to exit out into Bowen uh

bow and arrow wash. So the foots is

going both north south as well as as

well as east west.

>> So does it need to be shown on if this

is the map that's being submitted with

it does it need to be shown going up

ponava? No, because we've taken Ponava

out of here. Okay.

>> Ponavivera is being developed with the

byite development right now.

>> Is it when Juniper points?

>> Okay. So, Juniper Point will be

responsible.

>> It's on their pre-plat that is

submitted.

>> That's what I was looking for. Thank

you.

>> No, perfect. No, these are all very very

good questions. Again, um the total

shift right in this development from

more high-end estate lots to a diversity

of housing options with a focus on open

space. We've got our four parks as well

as you see in all of these uh different

bubbles, different opportunities

um for density as well as the the lodge

um to commercial building

parks, a central park like that. You

guys are going to have a central park

here stuff. Uh North, Plaza, and East

are the four names. Um [staff] had the

exact same exhibit. So again, taking us

through uh the phasing of it. This is

what we believe is the phasing or

you don't think it's going to change,

but as you know, sometimes things

change, but this is the phasing. Then

the phasing in both the development

agreement and the specific plan have

very specific details and regulations

that a certain amount of open space and

Arizona trail will be constructed with

each residential home. your staff was

very very good at arm wrestling us and

we were going to do it anyway but making

sure that it's in all the documents that

you can't move forward with all the

residential that as we move forward with

different phases that the open space

opportunities are there uh as [staff] said

there will be a temporary alignment

as we're doing our construction um but

it will there will always be an Arizona

Arizona trail that is open and safe to

the public um and we also do have, as I

said, the foots trail, um, north, south,

east, west, as well as a ton of trails

interior to the development.

Again, without this specific plan, we

wouldn't be able to dedicate 15 acres of

public parks and 70 acres of common open

space.

>> On this on this slide, can you talk

about the water features and the ponds

that are the parks and the water?

>> Absolutely. and and [name]. So,

that's a good question and I did have

written down the reclaimed water. I

didn't bring any of our reclaimed water

information because it's not part of

this application. We can and I'll be

prepared to discuss it at the next

hearing.

>> I just think it's going to be an issue,

you know, whenever you're talking water

features and ponds and things like that.

I think that we should address that.

>> So, yeah, I appreciate that. So, the

contingent on having a water feature,

the open space is the open space. our

goal of asking for additional reclaimed

water resources and

on the record I the 30% that was given

back I I

I'll come back and talk to you about

reclaimed water but I don't believe that

there is a request for that with

additional homes and additional

residential units we will also have more

reclaimed water our goal of giving back

that 30% of the reclaimed water that we

had is for that to go to the and to go

to anyone else who is on the list who

needs the water here. Our goal is for

repairarian habitats um for uh what is

the news said it to me

>> biodiversity and habitat.

>> Yeah, not that but what's the area that

we're trying to

>> uh painted canyon

>> painted canyon. Sorry that was [name] who I was talking to in the

back. [name] is giving me a

nod because I'm always going to say who

I'm talking to. uh our goal is to create

is is to be able to keep the natural

habitats. We think I think we told we

spoke at the cup hearing about the

osprey nests that we have in Pine

Canyon. Any um biodiversity that we that

that we are trying to recreate as our

complete right 180 from what we were

proposing before.

trails, open space, habitats, those do

require a little bit of reclaimed water,

but our development is not contingent on

reclaim

that it can add to the biodiversity to

protect the wildlife in the area

preserved open space that we have. But

none of this is contingent on us getting

additional reclaimed water. Are we going

to put in a request for some reclaimed

water infrastructure in the future? Yes.

If it does, if it doesn't get approved,

the open space still stays where it is.

>> Canyon,

>> Picture Canyon,

>> Picture Canyon Chair, we are trying to

recreate some of kind of the opportunity

at Picture Canyon, what they have there.

That's one of our goals. Again, not

contingent on it.

>> That answer your question?

>> Yes. Thank you.

um trail network. Again, when we were in

the discussions of the John Wesley

Powell realignment, there was discussion

about Arizona the Arizona Trail being

relocated on some of our neighbors

property. Our neighbors said no, at

least that we know of at this time. So,

the alignment has always been on the

Arizona Trail. We are realigning it on

our property. We're very excited about

it. It is now the cornerstone of of our

development.

I ask a question about that. So I always

understood that the ACT was maybe going

to be realigned along the Rio flag.

That's not happening. Is that what

you're saying? Doesn't look like they're

open the other parcels are open to that.

>> Sure. They are not my client, so I can't

speak to it, but from what I understand,

>> they said no. Um are are we open to, you

know, building a trail and then they

want to move the Arizona trail and put

it through there because that's a more

appropriate place for it? Sure. we'll

just have a nice wide trail in our

development that that people were able

to use. We just wanted to make sure that

the Arizona Trail was protected and that

there was somewhere for it to go. If it

gets realigned again, we'll just have a

very intricate trail system that we're

enthusiastic about.

>> Thank you.

>> Um

we also have 3.8 miles off street

trails. again, our trails, our trail

heads, um, and the pedestrian

connectivity is is the most important

part of this development. And chair and

call you vice chair, my favorite,

commissioners online. I I think this is

an interesting time also to address and

and we can get into it as we talk about

the

>> there is no affordable housing component

to this. Every development brings

something different. You know, I have

brought to you some reforms for 60% BMI

affordable housing that had a right

turn, right?

Because that development brought

something different to the community.

This development, I submit to you, is

really focused on and I just feel like

this is a good exhibit to discuss it,

but not only the vehicular connectivity,

right? that John Wesley Powell alignment

that you see there in white with the

enhanced crossings

open up so much development

uh and and and opportunity for this part

of Flagstaff. In addition, our focus on

multimodal of the foots, the Arizona

trail, our trail system, our park

system. This this is what I submit to

you is is the is the beautiful thing

about this development that is our focus

is we are spending a lot of money on

transportation. Um John Wesley Powell

the quotes keep going up.

>> I have a question or a comment. Um

because I sit as a liaison to the open

spaces commission obviously we one of

our priorities is to always have an

activity or access to the forest service

land so that things don't get closed

off. So, I do appreciate those two uh

two accessibility points.

I just wonder like what that might, you

know, maybe could you expand upon what

that might look like? Will other people

that drive into the area, will they be

able to park down there to access the

trails that, you know, end up going to

Fischer Point and things like that?

That's a open space has frankly often

felt ignored. Um, so that's an important

um just want to throw that out there.

and um as you further your plans how

important that is.

>> Chair [name], I appreciate that and and

truly hopefully the open space committee

feels appreciated and loved with this

development as the entire focus is on

multimmodal um connectivity as well as

open space. So yes, we've preserved

those open space. What exactly that

looks like in terms of parking, I don't

know. But it is absolutely important to

us that the public has access to all of

our trails.

>> The greater public, not just the people

that are living there. You know, that if

somebody drives along JW POW, they have

an area to access the forest through

your development.

>> Correct.

>> That's what we're looking for.

>> Arizona Trail will be open to the

public. Um, and you can see it there as

well as Foots trail that goes east west

as well as north south as well as our

our four parks and our integrated trail

network.

Um, housing variety. Again, yes, we are

our target 785.

That is 10%

of the city's um housing plan. Uh, we we

do and and chair, you hit it. their

buzzwords missing middle and medium

density, but truly with the increase of

the minimum density and the parcel size,

um we will have a variety of housing

types. With the current zoning, um

without a specific plan, they'd be all

one to five acre lots, right? And that

certainly doesn't solve any of the

problems. So, with all of these

four applications

melding together, it is the greatest

opportunity for the greatest number of

homes on this acres. Um and again

attainable by design with the different

product types, sizes, all of those

things that you know there is just

different housing opportunities at

different income levels.

Heritage and landscape again preserving

the Ponderosa pine forest, protecting

the Riota flag watershed, extending

trails and the puts um having some

mountain t mountain town parks and uh

and m mountain modern design is our goal

here. really again leaning into

Flagstaff, leaning into what we heard

from the community, leaning into what we

heard uh from your council frankly who

told us to get rid of the other plan and

to do this one or come back with

something better and this is what we

came back with. Uh we've already hit on

these, but I do believe we're in

substantial conformance with the 2030

plan, assuming our

our regional plan amendment is approved.

And uh again, not only homes, but

tourism and economy. [staff] hit on all

those numbers. And I could say there

might be some adventure tourism in our

uh in our hiking trails, but [staff] wasn't

sure about the adventure portion of it.

But I'm sure there'll be adventure up

here. Uh again, this as far as the

goals, it implements the regional plan.

Um we have had enhanced public review as

[staff] uh uh stated with this. Not only

did we have our three neighborhood

meetings, we had everything posted on

the city website. We had our 60-day

comment period um and have notified far

more than what was required by code and

respectfully

request approval.

So, any questions on the specific plan

per se or anything else you'd like me to

come back with at the next hearing?

>> We have any questions uh online of any

of the other commissioners?

>> None. None for [name].

um

>> for me right now.

>> Thank you. Can we just clarify? Um is it

uh Oh, there was a street name San

Francisco Peaks Parkway. Is that what

became Pona Vera? Just wanted to

clarify. I looked all over the maps for

that. Um but that was just in the staff

report. Um any questions?

>> Yeah, I think we would want to do public

comment. Um right now I don't have

anything. Oh, you have one more. Oh,

that's okay. I thought you were

>> I put both together one. Sheriff again.

Still. Sorry about that.

>> Still with the law firm of the applicant.

Still here on behalf of the applicant and

state trust land 401. Uh we have two

concept plan map amendments. I'm hitting

them both at the same time. Um again,

there's the one that is uh our 139 acres

from RR RPO to R1 RPO. Um, and again

then the the other one that has the uh S

C HMR

[staff] went into them in great detail. She

even circled her little red circles I

think are fabulous and probably more um

depictive than than what we have here.

Uh there there are a few parcels that

are not getting reszoned. [name], you

were correct on that. And that is again

mostly because of the topography in the

area. But between the specific the

regional plan amendments, the specific

plan and these two reszone cases um it

it opens up uh again 443 target homes in

the R1 zoning which is 139 acres. Again,

without the reszone, it would be

135 homes at best. And we're targeting

for and that is taking into account all

of the topography.

The second resone case again 296

target

uh homes units as well as the 80,000

square feet of commercial and the family

lodge.

the R1 reszone area again 139 acres 10

development areas R1 will allow for

single family homes but also other

opportunities um we have increased our

some of our minimum densities there and

we'll have a phased delivery but does

allow for a multitude of of housing

types the HC uh SC HCMR reszones that

total 72 acres six development areas

again the goal there is the neighborhood

commercial opportunities, the lodge as

well as some multi-family

housing opportunities.

Uh so what does that look like? Right,

we have both we've got single family

homes and we will we'll have some single

family homes out there. Um we'll also

have some middle housing, some duplexes,

some condos, uh hopefully with some

porches and balconies and a variety of

facades. Commercial opportunities. Um,

again, two different commercial

opportunities. The one right at the at

the, uh, traffic circle, um, will

probably be a little different in terms

of more restaurantbased, those types of

things. The second commercial

opportunity, more, you know, potentially

a grocery store. And then the lodge,

again, leaning into the character, we do

have to go through the site, plant, and

subdivision process. But uh as I've

heard from [staff] multiple times, although

lesson mark uh make it look like

Flagstaff. So again, the goal is to uh

lean to the character and the Rio flag,

the topography in the area, trails and

roads. Again, we've got the John Wesley

Powell uh JWP that will be built along

the foots in phase one. Not only does

that open up our project for

development, but the other parcels for

our neighboring property owners, Arizona

trail realignment.

Um, and uh, the Pontava Boulevard that

yes, chair was San Francisco San

Francisco Peaks, but now we're calling

it Paneava. One thing when projects are

in the queue for six years, we have to

change a few of the names. Uh but we

will have Ponava Boulevard and the Foots

Trail and that is moving forward with

some of the byite development right now.

As I've already said, 70 uh acres of of

open space um mixeduse neighborhoods

with an opportunity 700 opportunity for

more homes. The target is 785 homes

right now and the opportunity of seven

different housing types, 120 key family

lodge uh to work with uh tourism

and economic opportunities.

Finding number one, uh, consistent with

the plans. Finding number two, serves

the public good. [staff] went into this in

much greater detail, but I believe

there's a lot of public good in terms of

uh transportation is is the biggest one.

Miles of of bike trails for both bikes

and pedestrian connectivity and parks

that are open to the public as well as

the 80,000 square feet of neighborhood

commercial. Not only is it the

commercial opportunities, but the

economic benefit

uh we hit onation

site is physically suitable. Yes, I will

say

right now we are squeezing the greatest

number of units we can with the

topography and the slope as it is. Um

it's a slope resource. We do not want to

propose to take the the RPO off of here.

Um but with using the PRD options, the

preservation of the open space, um I do

believe we're getting the best of all

worlds.

Um staff recommends approval. Um, we

this implements all of the all of the

goals that we have in the specific plan.

I do believe all three findings are met.

Um, all of our impact studies have been

reviewed and approved and respectfully

request

a lot of information. So, I'm glad we

all have two weeks to to noodle on it

and uh and come back together.

>> Questions from online?

>> Any other questions? I just have um one

question.

Planning Commission, we've been trying

to look at ways to reduce the cost of

housing and um one of the things we

briefly talked about last planning

commission is like for example, if a

builder buys a lot, they have no idea

what the entitlement costs are. They

have no idea what the pre-development

costs are because the developer usually

bores those costs.

So, um I was curious when you said that

the plan was approved in November of 25

or you are deemed your subittal was

deemed complete and what happened it

we're trying to improve our processes.

what happened in between and maybe you

might want to address that later that we

might be able to improve. I'm glad to

see that um

your um your cases are all at on the on

the same page because before we had them

spread out like six months you had to

wait to refile and stuff like that. You

could do the general plan amendment that

had to be separate. So, I like it that

and plus I think it helps the public and

everybody else you see the whole

project. So, I like that and I think

that hopefully has saved some processing

and um time for developing this. So that

might be something you want to address

later because we're just looking for

ways to improve

um because all that relates to the cost

of housing

>> and and chair vice chair uh you know I

we were deemed complete in November of

last year. We've been working on this.

This hasn't been this isn't an easy

case, right? The same size

infrastructure that's required.

There's a lot that goes into this both

on our side and staff side. I will say

staff worked very very hard and the fact

that [staff] has gotten up to speed and

taken over for [staff] because [staff] knew this

case exceptionally well and so [staff] um

has been working over the weekend to get

up to speed to be able to give the

detail and know it and understand this

projects and the depth that it is. Uh we

were challenged to make it different. It

has been very very expensive. Um, it all

does go into the cost, right? And that's

part of what we talk about and how we're

still, you know, everything

every different department needs wants

different things. I get that. We want a

little bit of everything, but every cost

increases the cost of housing, right?

And that's and that's just what's

tricky, but at the same time, we're

trying to balance all of it to the best

we can.

>> Thank you.

Um, I guess we'll open it up for public

comment.

Is anybody here to comment?

Anybody online?

No public comment.

Okay, I guess we will close the public

hearing for today and reopen it.

And thank you both for the

presentations and um I we also found it

was helpful to have as much as was

overwhelming helpful to have it all

together. Thank you for sending it to us

on Friday [laughter] um a long weekend.

Is there a comment

before I close it out? Um go ahead.

I wasn't sure if now's the right time

just to make it's not really questions,

it's more comments for me. Do you want

those now or later?

>> Whichever you feel comfortable doing.

Sure.

>> Okay. Um, so I just want to thank the

members on planning and zoning that have

so much background because the questions

you are asking are amazing and it's just

great that we have such a depth of

information.

My biggest concern is the reclaim water

contracts. I know you've heard me talk

about these before and I am glad that

they usually limit them to 5 years

because what I see in the future is that

we're going to hopefully

use that reclaim water to recharge lower

Lake Mary groundwater.

Um, so I'm I'm hoping as we move forward

as a city that that's our end goal and

that we are looking at these

developments with that in mind. Um, the

other thing is that whenever we have an

extension of a golf course,

>> my question is why does that always have

to be private? Is there a way to even

have one day a week that's open to the

public? So I know this was an extension

of the Pine Canyon course. I think. But

I'm interested to hear more about that

and if there's any leeway for what could

happen. [remark omitted]

And finally, I would talk about Habitat

for Humanity and their starter homes. I

know that they are really good if you

just give them land. They can build

starter homes um that'll meet that

affordable housing

need. They recently opened up 10 homes.

They had a hundred applications. So, we

still have a need. We are still in a

crisis. And um I hope that will be

something you will consider. I know it's

a long shot. This also is a long shot

always. Uh Trader Joe's. We know we need

a a commercial um grocery store. They'd

only want to locate on Milton, but if

you have some pull and can get Trader

Joe's, you'll be loved by us forever.

And that's it. Thank you.

Thank you.

>> Any other comments, questions?

Um I think I'm going to table any

further comments of mine till the next

time. I'm kind of want to digest some

more of what we, you know, have to kind

of go through. I will just say if if any

of the commissioners

want additional information or have

questions, if you want to email me and I

can work with the applicant and make

sure that we have need for our next

hearing.

>> I was going to offer that. Yes. Any

communication that you could send

through [staff], we're happy to make sure

that we bring you any information you

need.

>> Okay. Um, I think that's that's it then.

Um, we don't have any further comments.

I'll close the public hearing for

tonight for all four of those cases and

then we'll table it to the next meeting.

So,

>> she mentioned 12.

>> Yes. And to make sure everyone's aware,

our next meeting is usually scheduled on

the 11th and stay, but that is Veterans

Day. So, we are rescheduling our meeting

to that Thursday at 4:00 and that will

be at city hall. Let's go back to city

hall for the next one. Okay.

Six was any other miscellaneous items to

and from commission members

and if there no further then I will

adjourn this at 6.

Thank you everyone.

>> Thank you.