downtown, aviation, economy and 200 w. washington … council meeting files...phoenix city hall 200...

Downtown, Aviation, Economy and

Innovation Subcommittee

Agenda Meeting Location:

Phoenix City Hall

200 W. Washington St.

Phoenix, AZ 85003

First Floor Assembly Rooms A, B & C10:00 AMWednesday, December 6, 2017

CALL TO ORDER

CALL TO THE PUBLIC

MINUTES OF MEETINGS

1 For Approval or Correction, the Minutes of the Downtown, Aviation,

Economy and Innovation Subcommittee Meeting on Nov. 1, 2017

Responsible Department

This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich.

CONSENT ACTION (ITEMS 2-5)

2 (Continued from Nov. 1, 2017) Request to Issue Revenue Contract

Solicitation (RCS) for Common-Use Airport Lounge

This item requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation

Subcommittee recommend City Council approval to issue a Revenue

Contract Solicitation for common-use airport lounge(s).

THIS ITEM IS FOR CONSENT ACTION.


This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich and the

Aviation Department.

City of Phoenix Printed on 11/29/2017

of 110

Page 8

Page 22

December 6, 2017Downtown, Aviation, Economy and


Agenda

4

5

Cutter Aviation Deer Valley, Inc., New Ground Lease and Amended Lease for Combined Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Agreements

This report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation

Subcommittee recommend that the City Council authorize the City

Manager to enter into a 30-year ground lease for land at Phoenix Deer

Valley Airport upon which Cutter Aviation Deer Valley, Inc., will construct

aircraft storage hangars. This report further requests the Subcommittee

recommend that the City Council authorize the City Manager to amend

two current fixed base operator (FBO) agreements with Cutter at

Phoenix Deer Valley Airport to extend the term of the agreements 23

years and to combine the agreements into one agreement.





Airline Rates and Charges Update

This report presents a potential change to the Phoenix City Code that

would establish a new cap on airline rates and charges at Phoenix Sky

Harbor International Airport.





Authorization to Enter into a Development Agreement for Public

Parking

This report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee recommend City Council approval to enter into a


3

of 110

Page 25

Page 27

Page 30



Agenda

development agreement, and other agreements as necessary, with

Hines Interests, LP, or its City-approved designee to purchase structured

public parking spaces. This action will have no impact to the General

Fund. The $500,000 is available in the Community and Economic

Development Capital Improvement Program budget using Downtown

Community Reinvestment Funds.



This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich and

the Community and Economic Development Department.

INFORMATION ONLY (ITEM 6)

6 Key Phoenix Economic Indicators Quarterly Report

This report transmits the first quarter report on Key Phoenix Economic

Indicators for fiscal year 2017-18 to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy

and Innovation Subcommittee.

THIS ITEM IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY.


This item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Budget and

Research Department.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION (ITEMS 7-10)

7 Taxicab Services Contracts Award RequestThis report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee recommend to the City Council that it authorize the City


of 110

Page 32

Page 46



Agenda

8

9

Manager to enter into separate contracts with four companies to provide

taxicab services at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. The City

estimates that it will receive annual revenue totaling approximately $1.9

million.

THIS ITEM IS FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.




Transdev Rental Car Center Shuttle Bus Contract

This item requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation

Subcommittee recommends City Council authorization for the Aviation

Department to negotiate an extension to the term of the contract with

Transdev Services, Inc., and amend the business terms for the Rental

Car Center shuttle bus services. Annual expenditures for the contract are

approximately $14 million.





Proposed Amendment to the 2012 International Building Code Section

105.3.1 - Demolition Permit Process to Add Residential Single Family

and Duplex Homes Located Within the Downtown Code Area

This report provides information to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and


of 110

Page 48

Page 50



Agenda

Innovation Subcommittee and requests recommendation for City Council

approval for the proposed amendments to the 2012 International Building

Code Section 105.3.1 - Demolition process for residential single family

and duplex homes located within the Downtown Code area.



This item is submitted by Deputy City Managers Mario Paniagua and

Deanna Jonovich, and the Planning and Development and Community

and Economic Development departments.

10 (Continued from Oct. 4, 2017 and Nov. 1, 2017) Downtown Code

Provisions and Clarification Text Amendment - Z-TA-10-13

This report provides the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation

Subcommittee information about a proposed text amendment to the

zoning ordinance, Z-TA-10-13, regarding Amending Chapter 12

Downtown Code of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify language, clean up

clerical issues, and to add new provisions.



This item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the

Planning and Development Department.

INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION (ITEMS 11-12)

11 West Ground Transportation Center Update

This report provides an update on a potential development opportunity

at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport associated with the future

West Ground Transportation Center of the PHX Sky Train extension.

THIS ITEM IS FOR INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION.


of 110

Page 55

Page 107



Agenda




12 FAA Flight Path Update

This report provides an update to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and

Innovation Subcommittee on progress made by the Aviation Department

in addressing noise issues created by the Federal Aviation

Administration’s (FAA) implementation of new flight paths at Phoenix Sky

Harbor International Airport.





CALL TO THE PUBLIC

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

ADJOURN

For further information or to request reasonable accommodations, please call Jennifer Wingenroth, Management Assistant II, City Manager's Office at 602-262-7526. 7-1-1 Friendly

Persons paid to lobby on behalf of persons or organizations other than themselves shall register with the City Clerk prior to lobbying or within five business days thereafter, and must register annually to continue lobbying. If you have any questions about registration or whether or not you must register, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 602-262-6811.

Members:


of 110

Page 109



Agenda

Councilman Daniel Valenzuela, ChairVice Mayor Laura Pastor

Councilman Michael NowakowskiCouncilwoman Thelda Williams


of 110

Downtown, Aviation, Economy and InnovationSubcommittee

City Council Report

Agenda Date: 12/6/2017, Item No. 1

For Approval or Correction, the Minutes of the Downtown, Aviation, Economyand Innovation Subcommittee Meeting on Nov. 1, 2017

SummaryThis item transmits the minutes of the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and InnovationSubcommittee Meeting on Nov. 1, 2017, for review, correction or approval by theDowntown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee.

The minutes are attached.

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich.

of 110

Phoenix City CouncilDowntown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee

Summary MinutesWednesday, Nov. 1, 2017

City Council Subcommittee Room Phoenix City Hall, Assembly Rooms A, B and C 200 W. Washington St.Phoenix, Ariz.

Subcommittee Members Present Subcommittee Members Absent Councilman Daniel Valenzuela, ChairVice Mayor Laura PastorCouncilwoman Thelda WilliamsCouncilman Michael Nowakowski

Call to Order Chairman Valenzuela called the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee meeting to order at 10:12 a.m., with Councilwoman Williams, and Vice Mayor Pastor present. Councilman Nowakowski was present telephonically.

Call to the Public None.

1. For Approval or Correction, the Minutes of the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee Meeting on Oct. 4, 2017Councilwoman Williams made a motion to approve the minutes of the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommittee Meeting on Oct. 4, 2017. Councilwoman Pastor seconded the motion which passed 3-0.

2. Request to Issue RFP for Custodial Services

3. Request to Issue RFP for Security Guard Services

4. Request to Issue Revenue Contract Solicitation (RCS) for Common-Use Airport Language

5. Deer Valley Airport – DVT Aviation Park, LLC, Ground Lease

6. Extend Clean Energy Lease and Fuel Purchase Agreement

7. Request to Issue a RFP for Audio-Visual Services

8. Authorization to Enter into Contracts with True North Holdings, LLC, for the Sale and Disposition of City-Owned Knipe House Properties

of 110

9. Request for Change of Grant Terms for Historic Dud R. Day Motor Company –Phoenix Motor Company Building, 401-447 W. Van Buren St.

10. Density Regulating Map – Modify Density Allowed on Parcel within Townsend Park Character Area in the Downtown Cod -Z-TA-1-17-4Councilwoman Williams made a motion to approve item 2-10 and continue item 4. Vice Mayor Pastor seconded the motion, which passed 3-0.

11. (Continued from Oct. 4, 2017) Key Phoenix Economic IndicatorsItem 11 was for information only; no briefing or discussion was necessary.

12. Unsolicited Development Proposal Policy for City-Owned PropertyCommunity and Economic Development Director Christine Mackay introduced the item, explaining the unsolicited proposal process would allow the City a different way to initiate the disposal of City-owned properties and buildings. Currently the City disposes of property though City-contracted brokers, a sealed bid process, or a request for proposals (RFP). She stated in working with other cities across the country they had learned other cities have added the unsolicited proposal process. She then introduced Procurement Manager Gretchen Wolf to explain the process.

Ms. Wolf stated the unsolicited development proposal policy was a written proposal for City-owned property not in response to an RFP and could not be a proposal for land said to be used in an RFP. She commented on the benefits of the process highlighting transparency, competition and community input, and consistency across departments. She noted the City had the right to reject any proposal determined not to be in its best interest.

Vice Mayor Pastor asked who had the right to reject the proposal. Ms. Mackay stated the Council had that right. Vice Mayor Pastor stated from her understanding there were two prior unsolicited proposals and staff had rejected the first. Ms. Mackay explained the City had received a request for City property through the downtown RFP processwhich is only meant to be used for privately owned land. She stated because it was an improper mechanism it wasn’t rejected; the City had instead informed and given guidance on that being the improper mechanism for publicly owned land. Vice Mayor Pastor asked what the proper mechanism would be for that case. Ms. Mackay stated the City currently did not have an outlined mechanism for that process.

Ms. Wolf continued, discussing the draft process. She stated after receiving an unsolicited proposal, staff would notify the Council and concurrently remind the proposer about the Solicitation Transparency Policy. Staff would then review the proposal for consideration and provide staff recommendation to Council seeking authorization before advertising any proposal. Should Council approve, she stated staff would then advertise the proposal for competition while providing instructions to the proposers, she gave a hypothetical example using the Madison Street Jail. She stated once the proposals came in they would be reviewed and formal Council authorizationwould be sought.

of 110

Councilwoman Williams asked for clarity on the process and assigning criteria to proposals. Ms. Wolf stated they would discuss specifications beforehand on usage of the land and could post instructions along with the proposal of how they would like the land to be used. She stated the evaluation criteria would be written to assign the highest points to the proposals that were the best fit. Councilwoman Williams asked what would happen if no one were to submit an additional proposal. Ms. Wolf stated the original submitter of the unsolicited proposal could then update their proposal with the considerations specified by Council. Regardless of whether the proposer chose to update the proposal or not, the Council could reject the proposal if it did not meet the City’s needs. Councilwoman Williams asked if the proposal could be rejected from the beginning. Ms. Mackay confirmed.

Vice Mayor Pastor referred to the first unsolicited proposal stating she felt staff could have come to the Council for direction on how to move forward with the unsolicited proposal. Ms. Mackay responded criteria needed to be met through the downtown RFP process that were authorized by the Council. She stated if there were another mechanism in place they could have brought the proposal to Council, but through guidance from the Law department, it was determined the unsolicited proposal could not be accepted. Vice Mayor Pastor agreed but still felt staff could have come to Council and explained the situation under the current mechanism and explained the options available if they were to consider an unsolicited proposal process.

Councilwoman Williams clarified the unsolicited proposal process was an additional tool to what the City currently has. Ms. Mackay confirmed. She asked if the City had the resources to know the value of the land so the information could be given to Council when reviewing the proposals. Ms. Mackay confirmed, as part of the policy they would recommend a $7,500 application fee to cover research costs and bring forward to Council information on the land. Councilwoman Williams stated she thought the process would be a good idea.

Chairman Valenzuela went over the proposed process stating it was another tool the City could use. He complimented staff on their work. He stated this process would be a good opportunity and commented on opening the door for competitors so it would be a fair and transparent process.

Vice Mayor Pastor asked what the RFI process was. Ms. Mackay explained an RFI was a request for interest. She stated sometimes before taking a property out for a RFP they would do a RFI to gain insight on how people would want to use the property. Vice Mayor Pastor then asked about the cost to do an RFI in regards to man power, wondering if it would be more than $7,500. Ms. Mackay stated the process of creating a RFI was roughly 80-90 hours of staff time, with a bit more for a RFP. She stated she would have to research the specific cost calculations.

Vice Mayor Pastor stated many of her colleagues in other cities were unaware of the unsolicited proposal process and asked what other cities Ms. Mackay and her staff had

of 110

looked at. Ms. Mackay responded they had done research on Denver, Los Angeles, New York, San Diego, Washington D.C., and the federal government. Vice MayorPastor asked for details on how the policy was written. Ms. Wolf stated the draft policy was based on the federal government process also incorporating the existing development RFP process the City currently has.

Vice Mayor Pastor asked about transparency in the unsolicited proposal process. Ms. Wolf provided details of the transparency process and policies in place.

Vice Mayor Pastor asked why not just automatically go into an RFI or RFP. Ms. Mackay responded stating they could and explained that when an unsolicited proposal was received it would be under Council direction which way the City moved forward.

Vice Mayor Pastor described the process commenting on the unfair advantages and concerns she had. Ms. Mackay responded that when an unsolicited proposal comes forward to Council, they would have the option of guiding staff to give more time to competitors to form their proposals considering the size and complexity of the project.

Councilwoman Williams made a motion to approve the item. Chairman Valenzuela seconded the motion which passed 3-1, with Vice Mayor Pastor opposed.

13. Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport Land Reuse Strategy (Phase I)Aviation Director Jim Bennet introduced the item and his fellow presenters Deputy Aviation Director Jordan Feld and Project Manager Courtney Carter.

Mr. Feld began the presentation noting the land reuse strategy represented the area west of the airport with approximately 743 noise land parcels in the area. He stated the strategy was about a community-driven land use planning process that began in 2015.He discussed the extensive public outreach effort along with the meetings and feedback they received which included strengthening and revitalizing the neighborhoods,bringing in economic opportunities, and most importantly, recognizing the cultural heritage in the area. He spoke about the planning areas and went over the recommended land use and community suggestions. He went over the process moving forward which included FAA review while concurrently beginning to look at Phase II implementation. He presented staff recommendation to recommend to full Council that staff forward the community's land reuse strategy to the FAA for review and comment.

Councilwoman Williams asked about the noise level at the outer circle. Mr. Feld explained within the planning area it was about 65 DNL. Councilwoman Williams asked if they had limited what could be built under the area. Mr. Feld responded the zoning in place was a mixture of residential and non-residential and stated the plan designation considered compatible uses for the land parcels. He said likely proposing non-compatible use within the area would be a nonstarter for the FAA. He stated the information was explained at the meetings and was also on the website. Councilwoman Williams asked if the flight patterns were considered in the process. Mr. Feld confirmed.

of 110

Councilwoman Williams asked if there was a benefit to the airport. Mr. Feld stated yes as the land today represented a cost, with maintenance in order to ensure it was kept in a suitable, safe condition as a vacant lot. He stated bringing in any development removed that cost and likely some of the parcels are valuable and could expect to get fair market value lease revenue. Councilwoman Williams asked if the money would come back to the City or go to the FAA. Mr. Feld stated the money would go back into the aviation fund to offset maintenance costs.

Brent Kleinman stated some concerns and asked what the benefit was in giving the Aviation department the power to negotiate directly with the FAA rather than have everything go through the City Council. He also asked how any change to the flight paths would affect the decisions being made. He stated he thought this was something needed to be monitored by an entity other than the Aviation department.

Councilman Nowakowski arrived in person at 10:52 a.m.

Councilwoman Williams asked Mr. Bennet to respond to Mr. Kleinman’s question regarding the negotiations. Mr. Bennett responded negotiations would include thecommunity's recommendations and then they would process it through their criteria todetermine the compatible questions. Councilwoman Williams clarified that they wouldnot be negotiating the sale just talking to the FAA to understand what is being proposed. Mr. Feld confirmed also noting in Phase II they would have the same robust public process for the community to take the next steps and for the Subcommittee to provide oversight.

Abe Arvizu Jr. stated as long as the community was involved throughout the process he did not see any problem in having the Aviation department move forward.

Councilman Nowakowski said he had been made aware of some community membersnot knowing about the meetings and then discussed the strong effort the Aviation department put in after he spoke to them on the matter.

Reginald Watton voiced his support for the plan and stated he was grateful for the inclusivity of the neighborhoods throughout the process.

Carlos Avila went over what was presented at the previous subcommittee meeting and asked the Aviation department include the Nuestro Barrio proposal in the plan to be submitted to the FAA.

Patricia Gurule spoke about cultural heritage and its importance commenting on transplanted residents and the history of the area. She stated the current land reused document was limited in its approach to preserving the community and felt it diminishedand fragmented the barrios, the sacred heart parish and neighborhoods on the Salt River flood plain.

of 110

Juan Gurule spoke about the previous meeting and their presented proposal, stating the amendments he passed out provided a vision of interactive memorialization of the central land use.

Councilwoman Williams asked staff about the selection process for including ideas in the plan. Mr. Feld stated there were many different ideas and perspectives that came forth and because there wasn't a clear consensus they decided to use Phase II to develop those specific ideas.

Councilwoman Williams asked for clarification on eventual private ownership of the parcels after approval. Mr. Feld responded there was a range of potential sites and different land use designations which could bring in a variety of private, public/private, or public interest. Councilwoman Williams asked if any future airport money was anticipated to be used in the development of the land. Mr. Feld stated no, the grant was to set up the land so the market and community could then step in.

Dr. Ruth Ann Marsten stated she had been involved in the planning process for various projects and stated she had never seen one done so well in including as many people and stakeholders as possible. She then introduced Dr. Rosanna Hidalgo, Assistant Superintendent for Business and Finance for the Phoenix Elementary School District.

Dr. Hidalgo stated she strongly supported the project moving forward as they were tired of the blight and vacant lots. She stated there were several former neighbors that support the Phase I process but would like to see them do something to honor the Hispanic community.

Christina Garcia stated she currently lives next door to the Sacred Heart church and while she does not like the vacant lots next to her, she would not like to see industrial buildings come in.

Councilwoman Williams made a motion to approve the item. Chairman Valenzuela seconded the motion.

Councilman Nowakowski asked the Council be provided the list of meetings that hadbeen held including details noting the project which would bring major change for the community. He also asked if there was still a chance to incorporate some of the ideas brought forward involving cultural and historic preservation. Mr. Feld responded it would not be difficult to amend the plan or create an addendum that provided additional details of Mr. Gurule’s plan. Councilman Nowakowski suggested the maker of the motion add language to incorporate the addendum. Councilwoman Williams amended the motion to include the addendums.

Vice Mayor Pastor asked what the addendum would look like and if they could provide two separate frameworks to the FAA. Mr. Feld confirmed stating they would show both to the FAA.

of 110

Chairman Valenzuela restated the motion and called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously 4-0.

14. (Continued from Oct. 4, 2017) Downtown Code Provisions and Clarification Text Amendment – Z-TA-10-13Councilwoman Williams made motion to continue item 14. Chairman Valenzuela seconded the motion which passed unanimously 4-0.

18. Group Home Working Committee Monthly Update – November Councilwoman Williams made a motion to take item 18 out of order. Vice Mayor Pastorseconded the motion which passed unanimously 4-0.

Vice Mayor Pastor left the meeting at 11:24 a.m.

Director of Planning and Development Alan Stephenson introduced the item and his fellow presenters, Special Projects Administrator Tricia Gomez, and Planner III Racelle Escolar. He discussed the schedule of past and future meetings with the working committee noting they would be returning to the Subcommittee and then Formal Council in December. He went over the discussion at the October 9 meeting stating they had discussed transaction privilege tax license, operation standardsand regulations and good neighbor policies and parking standards with the working group committee pointing out the involvement of the Finance department and the Arizona Recovery Housing Association (AZRHA).

Ms. Gomez discussed the upcoming November 9 meeting in which they planned to discuss data compilation and tracking, state and federal policy constraints and considerations as well as the beginning discussions on staff proposed recommendations. She also informed staff was working on implementing a reasonable accommodation public notification requirement.

Ms. Escolar stated staff from Planning and Development, City Clerk, Neighborhood Services and the Law department were working together to develop potential licensing options that could range anywhere from an enhanced registration process to simplified licensing all the way up to more comprehensive licensing programs. She stated they had added an additional meeting on November 20 where staff will present final proposals for discussion.

Mr. Stephenson discussed the reasonable accommodations process noting concerns from neighborhood groups on public input limitations. He stated they would return to the subcommittee with more information as the details were worked out.

Councilwoman Williams asked about the licensing and notification process. Mr. Stephenson stated they were proposing two things; a short-term address of the need to have a better reasonable accommodation process under the existing ordinance, and along-term approach that will include a license program that would apply for all group homes administered by the City Clerk department. He stated they would bring forward a

of 110

package to get direction from the Council in December and staff would work to implement as quickly as possible to meet legal requirements and the soonest they could get something back to Council with the final language would be March 2018.Councilwoman Williams inquired if that included any group home and not just sober living. Mr. Stephenson confirmed.

Wallace Graham stated he supported the passage of a new regulation but would like to hear more about a timetable.

William Culbertson expressed the need for an agreement that allowed for a brief respite from granting group homes until there were rules and regulations in place to protect those in treatment and the neighbors.

Dennis Kirk stated they had opened the doors to the Council to see their houses. He stated they would like to help support those who need the help and make a difference in their lives.

Jeff Taylor spoke about Mr. Kirk’s personal story remarking on how work needed to be done to eliminate the bad players and continue helping those like Mr. Kirk. He believed the solution to prevent relapse and drug related crime was to create a standard or certification for group homes that included drug testing and daily breathalyzer tests to hold individuals accountable along with daily intensive outpatient therapy.

Councilman Nowakowski asked if they could include any of the ideas brought up by Mr. Taylor. Mr. Stephenson stated elements like those could be included as a condition of a licensed program. Councilwoman Williams recommended drug testing also be included for the operators of the group homes along with the participant.

Mark Lewis commended staff for their work and inclusion of various stakeholders. He spoke about the reasonable accommodation provision stating it would be the test everybody would use to determine if there was discrimination occurring. He believed the current ordinance was not liberal enough and should be reviewed.

John Mendibles spoke about military members and the lack of inclusion of veterans and other groups. He voiced support for the item because it was better than before but felt it was still lacking.

Chairman Valenzuela thanked staff for their work. He remarked on the importance of the program and the impact on the community and the City of Phoenix.

15. 2018 State Legislative AgendaGovernment Relations Director Frank McCune introduced the item explaining the process of meeting with all the Councilmembers and Departments to create the agendas for both the federal and state. He then introduced John Wayne Gonzales, Government Relations Manager.

of 110

Mr. Wayne introduced the state guiding principles to oppose unfunded mandates, preserve local control, protect shared revenues, and protect water resources. He stated the biggest issue identified was the state budget with about a $100 million deficit which he said his team would focus on ensuring the City is not negatively impacted.

Councilwoman Williams asked if City of Phoenix Auditors could be involved to ensure accuracy. Mr. Wayne stated they could do the audit with the approval of the Department of Revenue. He reminded the committee about the City being assessed and now helping to pay for their own collection of money to the Department of Revenue, about $4 to $5 million a year to pay for the staffing time and to rebuild state technology. He relayed concerns in the timing of receiving revenues from the Department of Revenue stating there would be an attempt to make that turn around quicker. Councilwoman Williams remarked if the state was holding the revenue and gaining interest they should share with the City.

Councilwoman Williams stated the protection of Sky Harbor Airport, Luke Airforce Base and Gateway Airport in the federal agenda should also be done at the state level. Shewould the legislation on sober living to be fully supported by the City. She remarked on wanting to see the old process in which a report was sent to the Council updating on new legislation and progress. Mr. McCune stated they would be returning to the previous process.

Councilman Nowakowski stated he would like the redevelopment zones, especially in the downtown area, to be monitored and for the Council to be updated.

16. 2018 Federal Legislative Agenda Government Relations Manager Clark Princell presented on the federal agenda. He reviewed the two guiding principles of promoting fiscal sustainability and protecting local authority. He went over some key issues they planned to focus on including the FAA NextGen and airspace management noise issue and the FAA reauthorization. He discussed several policies within Aviation they would work on such as unfunded federalmandates, airport security requirements, TSA staffing levels, airport planning and environmental policy, unmanned aircraft systems drones and the protection and success of Luke Airforce base.

Councilwoman Williams asked the drone issue also be reviewed at a local level.

Mr. Princell continued pointing out two items in the Community and Economic Development sector they would be working on which were the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and the warehouse district parking. The last issue he discussed was group homes stating they would continue to track, provide input and pursue legislation that would give local governments options to regulate structured and unstructured homes.

of 110

Councilman Nowakowski asked for the issue of air traffic control potential reauthorization to be monitored. He also asked for research to be done on funding options that could be used in the future designs for the Sacred Heart property.

Brent Kleinman brought up the FAA reauthorization issue and the possibility of doubling the person fee from $4 to $8 on flights and stated the increase should be discussed. Mr. Princell responded the increase going into effect would allow airports or cities to implement the increase and would still have to be requested at the local level. Chairman Valenzuela asked if it was based on capacity. Mr. Princell confirmed.

Councilwoman Williams asked if Phoenix was a partner with the Mesa Gateway airport. Mr. Princell confirmed. Councilwoman Williams stated Mesa Gateway would be working to get funding for a new tower and wanted to see the City support that effort because it could have positive financial implications for Sky Harbor in the future.

Councilwoman Williams made a motion to approve items 15 and 16. Councilman Nowakowski seconded the motion which passed unanimously 3-0.

17. FAA Flight Path UpdateNo update.

Call to the Public None.

Future Agenda Items None.

Adjournment Chairman Valenzuela adjourned the meeting at 12:11 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, Sarah Moratto Management Intern

of 110

of 110


City Council Report


(Continued from Nov. 1, 2017) Request to Issue Revenue Contract Solicitation(RCS) for Common-Use Airport Lounge

This item requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteerecommend City Council approval to issue a Revenue Contract Solicitation forcommon-use airport lounge(s).


SummaryThe Aviation Department is seeking a vendor to develop, operate, and manage acommon-use airport lounge in Terminal 4. The current vendor's agreement will expirein April, 2019. The Revenue Contract Solicitation (RCS) will be issued to ensure a fairand competitive process. The goals of the Common-Use Airport Lounge solicitation areto optimize sales and revenue over the term of the lease, improve the quality anduniqueness of the lounge facility, emphasizing local culture and Arizona destinations inthe design of the facility and in food and beverage offerings, and to select arespondent with experience operating successful common-use airport lounges in theUS and/or abroad.

The total lease space in Terminal 4 is 5,346 square feet. In addition, approximately5,000 square feet will be made available to respondents to develop, operate, andmanage a common-use airport lounge in Terminal 3, at their mutual agreement withthe Aviation Director.

The successful respondent will be required to create and operate a lounge that:· Offers access to customers flying on any airline, regardless of class of ticket, for a

fee;· Offers access to customers belonging to partner organizations (airlines, credit card

companies, etc.) with complimentary lounge membership benefits;· Offers complimentary, high-speed wi-fi access to customers;

· Has a variety of seating options, including desk workspaces, tables, at least onebar, and lounge chairs;

· Offers a variety of food options, including hot and cold items;

of 110


· Offers a variety of beverage options, including hot and cold tea, soft drinks, wine,beer, and liquor;

· Offers complimentary local and national newspapers;

· Offers television service, including local and national news and live sporting events;and

· Offers personalized customer service.

Throughout the term of the lease, the successful respondent shall pay a MinimumAnnual Guarantee (MAG) or Percentage Rent derived from gross sales, whichever isgreater. Percentage Rental Rate will be set at 13 percent of gross sales.

Respondents must meet the following Minimum Qualifications:· At least three years of experience operating and managing an airport lounge within

the last five years;· Minimum annual gross sales receipts in excess of $500,000 per lounge;

· Provide three business references;

· Provide evidence of financial capacity to design, construct, operate, and maintainconcept(s) submitted in response;

· Provide evidence of ability to obtain required insurance; and

· Provide response guarantee.

Procurement InformationResponsive and responsible responses will be evaluated by committee according tothe following evaluation criteria:Business Operations (0-300 points available), Qualifications/Experience (0-250 pointsavailable), Concept Design (0-250 points available), and Financial (0-200 pointsavailable). The highest-scored response will be recommended for contract award.

Contract TermThe initial term shall be five years, with two, one-year extension options, which may beexercised at the sole discretion of the Director of Aviation Services.

Financial ImpactEach respondent must propose a Minimum Annual Guarantee, which shall be greaterthan $350,000.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionThe Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board unanimously recommended approval on Oct. 19,2017.

of 110


Location3400 E. Sky Harbor Blvd., Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.Council District: 8

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich and the AviationDepartment.

of 110


City Council Report


Cutter Aviation Deer Valley, Inc., New Ground Lease and Amended Lease forCombined Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Agreements

This report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteerecommend that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a 30-yearground lease (Lease) for land at Phoenix Deer Valley Airport upon which CutterAviation Deer Valley, Inc. (Cutter) will construct aircraft storage hangars. This reportfurther requests the Subcommittee recommend that the City Council authorize the CityManager to amend two current fixed base operator (FBO) agreements with Cutter atPhoenix Deer Valley Airport to extend the term of the agreements 23 years and tocombine the agreements into one agreement.


SummaryCutter is currently a FBO of two operations at Phoenix Deer Valley Airport andprovides aircraft storage, fuel sales, maintenance services, and avionics and aviationsupply sales. Cutter intends to grow the services offered to local and transient aircraftoperators through a new hangar development and improvements to its FBO facilities.

Cutter will invest not less than $5 million to construct new aircraft storage hangars thatconsist of approximately 60,000 square feet at Phoenix Deer Valley Airport. Cutter willalso make an investment of not less than $2 million to upgrade and improve its FBOfacilities. In order to allow Cutter to amortize these investments, the term of the FBOagreements will be extended 23 years. Upon expiration, ownership of all of Cutter'sinvestments and improvements will be conveyed to the City. The FBO agreements willbe combined into one agreement and the rental rate will be based on a ground leaseat fair market value versus the current methodology of a minimum annual guarantee.The area of the current FBO leased premises is approximately 20 acres.

Upon completion of the improvements, a legal survey will be completed. If the squarefootage of the leased premises is reduced, then rent will be adjusted to reflect thechange and Cutter will receive a credit from the rent commencement date for thedifference. If the square footage is increased, Cutter will pay to the City the differencefrom the rent commencement date.

of 110


Contract TermThe terms of the Lease and FBO agreement will be 30 years with no options to extendthe terms. If the leased premises are needed for airport expansion purposes, the Citymay terminate the Lease by giving Cutter at least 12 months' prior written notice andthe City will pay Cutter for its unamortized investment. All other terms and conditions ofthe Lease and all prior amendments not in conflict with the amendment will remain infull force and effect.

Financial ImpactThe ground rental rate for the Lease will be $0.54 per square foot per year, plusapplicable taxes, adjusted annually by Consumer Price Index (CPI).

The ground rental rate for the FBO leasehold and agreement will be $0.138 per squarefoot in the first year and adjusted incrementally through year seven. At the beginning ofyear eight, the rate will be $0.49 per square foot per year, plus applicable taxes. At thebeginning of years nine through 30, the rate will be adjusted annually based on theCPI and will not be less than the rental rate in year nine.

Currently, revenue to the City is approximately $122,000 per year. Revenue to the Cityover the term of the new agreements will be approximately $11.8 million.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionThis item was recommended for approval by the Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board onNov. 16, 2017.

LocationPhoenix Deer Valley Airport is located at 702 W. Deer Valley Road.Council District: 1


of 110


City Council Report


Airline Rates and Charges Update

This report presents a potential change to the Phoenix City Code that would establisha new cap on airline rates and charges at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport(Airport).


SummaryThe airline rates and charges program generates revenue needed to fund the ongoingoperations and maintenance of the Airport. The Phoenix City Council established thebasic framework for the Airport's rates and charges program in 1981, and approves anew schedule each year based on the Airport's projected operating and capital costs.

Airline rates and charges are regulated by the FAA to achieve cost recovery (and nomore) from the airlines, proportionate to their use of the Airport facilities. The AviationDepartment calculates these rates each year, consistent with the FAA's revenue usepolicy, and recommends City Council approval to amend the City Code with the newairline rates and charges to be effective on July 1st of each fiscal year. These includethe terminal rate, cargo rates, common use rate, Federal Inspection Services (FIS)charge, Explosive Detection Service (EDS) charge, landing fee, and Remain Overnight(RON) fee.

The airline Cost per Enplanement (CPE) is a common airport metric used to measurethe airlines' cost for each passenger who travels from a given airport. This metric addsall of the airlines' costs at an airport, and divides the sum by the number of passengerswho board a plane there. The attached graph to this report shows the 30 U.S. airportsdesignated as Large Hub Airports by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), alongwith their respective CPE as reported on the FAA's Operating and Summary Report(FAA Form 5100-127).

The current annual code amendment approach to rate making at the Airport requiresnumerous levels of approval prior to being scheduled and voted on by the City Council.This process is viewed as a credit risk by Moody's Investors Service as it preventstimely responses to airline actions. Staff recommends a CPE cap as a more efficient

of 110


alternative to the annual code amendment. This solution would comply with FAApolicies, facilitate nimble management of the rates and charges, and continue tomaintain Sky Harbor as an affordable airport for airlines to provide service.

If approved, this approach would replace the existing rate language in the City Codewith a simple not-to-exceed CPE. The CPE cap would be set at the Large Hub Airportmedian. As shown in the attached chart, the Large Hub Airport median is currently$10.48. The Aviation Director would be authorized to set airline rates and chargeseach year, in accordance with FAA regulations, provided that the rates and chargesresult in a CPE less than the Large Hub Airport median. If, at the fiscal year's end, theCPE is determined to have exceeded the Large Hub Airport median, the AviationDepartment would reduce airline billings to bring the CPE within the authorizedamount. City Council approval of the airline rates and charges would only be requiredto amend the City Code in the event the CPE were projected to exceed the Large HubAirport median value.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionA staff recommendation regarding an alternative to the annual rates and charges codeamendment was requested by the City Council at the May 31, 2017 formal meeting.

Public OutreachThis recommendation was presented to the Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board'sBusiness and Development Subcommittee on Oct. 5, 2017, to the Airline AffairsFinance Subcommittee on Oct. 16, 2017, and to the full Phoenix Aviation AdvisoryBoard on Oct. 19, 2017.

LocationSky Harbor International Airport, 3400 E. Sky Harbor Blvd.Council District: 8


of 110

Atta

chm

ent A

- Ai

rline

Cos

t Per

En

plan

emen

t for

30

U.S

. Lar

ge H

ub

Airp

orts

$-

$5.

00

$10

.00

$15

.00

$20

.00

$25

.00

$30

.00

Med

ian

Larg

e Hu

b CP

E$1

0.48

Sou

rce:

F

AA

Com

plia

nce

Act

ivity

Tra

ckin

g S

yste

m (

CA

TS

) O

pera

ting

and

Fin

anci

al S

umm

ary

Rep

ort

127,

for

eac

h ai

rpor

ts fi

scal

yea

r en

ding

201

6.

of 110


City Council Report


Authorization to Enter into a Development Agreement for Public Parking

This report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteerecommend City Council approval to enter into a development agreement, and otheragreements as necessary, (collectively, the “Agreements”) with Hines Interests, LP, orits City-approved designee (“Developer”) to purchase structured public parking spaces.This action will have no impact to the General Fund. The $500,000 is available in theCommunity and Economic Development Capital Improvement Program budget usingDowntown Community Reinvestment Funds.


SummaryThe Developer has proposed to develop the undeveloped pad at Colliers Center with ahigh-rise multi-family residential rental project. The pad is located at the southeastcorner of the Colliers Center, near the corner of 3rd Street and Jefferson Street. Whilethe Collier Center already has underground structure parking spaces for theresidences, the Developer and the City has identified there is a need for additionalpublic parking in the vicinity, and the developer has agreed to build at least 40additional parking spaces. The Developer will then sell half of those spaces to the Cityand these approximately 20 spaces will be under total City ownership, which will assistin bringing new tenants into Downtown Phoenix. The proposed key business termsinclude:

· Developer will enter into a Development Agreement within six months.

· Developer shall commence construction within 36 months of City Councilauthorization.

· Developer shall have an option to extend the commencement date by no more thansix months.

· City shall pay the developer the cost of constructing the City parking spaces, not toexceed $500,000, upon transfer of title.

· City and Developer shall enter into an operating and revenue sharing agreement tomanage the spaces through a qualified third-party operator.

Developer will comply with Arizona Revised Statutes title 34 requirements for the

of 110


construction of this new parking area in addition to other terms and conditions asrequired by the City. This project will provide additional public parking in DowntownPhoenix, immediately adjacent to office, retail, convention and arena uses, in areawhere parking has become constrained.

Contract TermThe total term of the development agreement is four years.

Financial ImpactThis action will have no impact to the General Fund. The $500,000 is available in theCommunity and Economic Development Capital Improvement Program budget usingDowntown Community Reinvestment Funds.

LocationColliers Center 201 E. Washington St.Council District: 7

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Deanna Jonovich and the Communityand Economic Development Department.

of 110


City Council Report


Key Phoenix Economic Indicators Quarterly Report

This report transmits the first quarter report on Key Phoenix Economic Indicators forfiscal year 2017-18 to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and InnovationSubcommittee.

THIS ITEM IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY.

SummaryAs part of efforts to continuously improve budget forecasting and reporting, the Budgetand Research Department compiles 19 key Phoenix economic indicators into theattached quarterly report. The data is collected with the assistance of the Aviation,Planning and Development, Public Works and Water Services Departments. Theattached report provides insightful data that, when reviewed collectively, can reveal ahelpful overall picture of recent economic activity trends specifically within Phoenix.Although outside sources of economic data are also available, most of that informationcovers the entire Greater Phoenix region or the State of Arizona. However, with theexception of two statewide measures, the indicators in the attached report relate todata specifically within City of Phoenix boundaries, which may differ from the region orstate. The indicators attached to this report (Attachment A) are for review by the DAEISubcommittee.

The 19 Phoenix data measures include:

Sky Harbor International Airport Passengers: This measure indicates regionaltourism and business activity.

Phoenix Water Service Accounts: This measure may indicate changes in Phoenixpopulation and commercial and residential property development.

New Phoenix Single Family Home Construction Permits Issued: This measuremay indicate Phoenix population growth and shifts in housing preferences ordemographics, as well as spill over benefits to other economic sectors such asconstruction, retail, manufacturing, and utilities.

of 110


New Phoenix Multifamily Units Permitted: Like single family permits, this measuremay indicate Phoenix population growth and shifts in housing preferences ordemographics, as well as spill over benefits to other economic sectors such asconstruction, retail, manufacturing, and utilities.

Total Value of Permitted Phoenix Activity: Along with other factors, this measuremay provide an indication of Phoenix property market values and development, as wellas overall strength for commercial and residential markets.

Phoenix Solid Waste Total Tonnage Collected: This measure may indicatechanges in Phoenix population, development, economic activity or environmentalfactors.

Phoenix Solid Waste Recycling Tonnage Collected: Although significantly affectedby shifts in consumer behavior, this measure may also indicate changes in Phoenixpopulation, development, economic activity or environmental factors.

City of Phoenix Overall Sales Tax: This measure indicates overall economic activityrelated to all categories of taxable sales within Phoenix.

City of Phoenix Retail Sales Tax: This measure indicates economic activity relatedto taxable retail sales and consumer spending levels within Phoenix.

City of Phoenix Hotel/Motel Sales Tax: This measure indicates economic activityrelated to tourism within Phoenix.

City of Phoenix Restaurants/Bars Sales Tax: This measure indicates economicstrength, population changes, and tourism activity within Phoenix.

City of Phoenix Contracting Sales Tax: This measure indicates economic activityrelated to taxable commercial and residential construction in Phoenix. However, theeffectiveness of this measure as an economic indicator may be lessened due to thestate's recent Transaction Privilege Tax reform measures relating to contracting.

State Overall Sales Tax: This measure indicates economic activity related to allcategories of taxable sales within the state of Arizona.

State Vehicle License Tax: This measure indicates vehicle sales activity within thestate of Arizona.

Phoenix Assessed Property Valuation: This measure is based on the Primary Net

of 110


Assessed Valuation, which provides the basis for City of Phoenix property tax revenue.

Phoenix Full Cash Property Value: This measure indicates the market value ofresidential and commercial property within Phoenix and is an important economicindicator relating to the overall commercial and residential property markets.

Phoenix Median Household Income: This annually updated measure provides themid-level household income within Phoenix, an important indicator of job and wageactivity levels.

Phoenix Unemployment Rate: This annually updated measure shows thepercentage of the active labor force currently unemployed within Phoenix, an importantindicator of overall economic health.

Phoenix Labor Force Participation: Another measure of employment levels, thisannually updated measure shows the percentage of the population aged 16 and oldercurrently in the Phoenix labor force, which can help account for "discouraged workers"not captured in the unemployment rate.

Each measure provides the year-to-date totals and year to date growth ratescompared to the prior year; prior three-year average, and peak year (when the peakyear differs from the current year).

The current quarterly report is also prominently posted online on the Budget andResearch webpage at phoenix.gov/budget.

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by City Manager Ed Zuercher and the Budget and ResearchDepartment.

of 110

Phoenix Economic Indicators Report

First Quarter FY2017-18

Table of Contents

Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport Total Passengers …. 1 City Sales Tax - Restaurants/Bars ….………………… 6

Water Service Accounts ……………………………..….. 1 City Sales Tax - Contrac$ng …….………………………. 6

New Home Construc$on Permit Issued ………….. 2 State Sales - Total ….…………………………………….. 7

New Mul$family Units Permi/ed …………………..... 2 State Vehicle License Tax ………………………………. 7

Total Valued of Permi/ed Ac$vity …………………... 3 Phoenix Primary Net Assessed Value …….….….. 8

Solid Waste -Total Tonnage Collected ...…...…….. 3 Phoenix Full Cash Value …………………….…………… 8

Solid Waste - Recycling Tonnage Collected ……... 4 Phoenix Median Household Income ……………… 9

City Sales Tax - Total .…..………………………………… 4 Phoenix Unemployment Rate ……….………….…… 9

City Sales Tax - Retail ………………………………………. 5 Phoenix Labor Force Par$cipa$on …………….….. 10

City Sales Tax - Hotel/Motel ……………………………. 5

Executive Summary

Economic indicators, such as those included in this report, provide measurements for

evaluating the health of our economy, the latest business cycles, and how consumers are

spending and generally faring. Included in this report are aviation, utility, new develop-

ment, state and local sales tax, vehicle sales, property values, and employment statistics.

Each statistic is shown through a graph presenting current year-to-date data (for data

available on a monthly basis), prior year-to-date, prior three year average of year-to-date

data, and peak year data (if current year is not the peak year) for a quarter of the current

fiscal year (July 1 - June 30). Each indicator has its own peak year where performance

was at its highest since 2000. Each graph is accompanied by a description of the signifi-

cance of the measure as an economic indicator, and a statement about the current year

data in relation to prior years. Many of the statistics are measures on a monthly basis, but

a few are only available quarterly or annually.

Attachment A

of 110

Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport Total Passengers

Current YTD Compared to:

Prior Year - 1.8%

3 Year Avg. + 0.1%

Peak Year

FY2015-16

- 3.8%

Totals

CYTD 10,410,000

PYTD 10,228,000

3YRAVG 10,397,000

Peak Year

FY2015-16 10,822,000

Water Service Accounts


Prior Year + 0.4%

3 Year Avg. + 1.0%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD 423,530

PYTD 422,011

3YRAVG 419,406

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

Significance: The number of passengers utilizing the Phoenix Sky Harbor airport can be an indicator for regional tourism and business activity.

Current Year: Passenger Traffic for the month of September decreased 1.8% as compared with September of the previous year, but is 0.1% higher than the three year average. Industry data lags two months.

Significance: The number of water service accounts can be an indicator of changes in population and development.

Current Year: Although the trend continues upward, this month's increase was slight. Peak year is N/A because the current fiscal year is the peak year for September data.

400,000

405,000

410,000

415,000

420,000

425,000

430,000

JUL AUG SEP

Current YTD Prior YTD 3YR AVG YTD

JUL AUG SEP

2,500,000

4,500,000

6,500,000

8,500,000

10,500,000

12,500,000

Current YTD Prior YTD 3YR AVG YTD Peak Year

of 110

New Home Construction Permits Issued


Prior Year + 39.6%

3 Year Avg. + 60.9%

Peak Year

(FY2004-05)

- 76.9%

Totals

CYTD 850

PYTD 609

3YRAVG 528

Peak Year

(FY2004-05)

3,672

New Multifamily Units Permitted


Prior Year + 53.3%

3 Year Avg. + 148.6%

Peak Year

FY2006-07

- 3.4%

Totals

CYTD 1,263

PYTD 824

3YRAVG 508

Peak Year

FY2006-07

1,308

Significance: New single family homes are a key economic indicator, reflecting local population growth as well as spill over benefits to other sectors of the economy such as demand for construction labor/materials, retail, manufacturing and utilities.

Current Year: Planning and Development is projecting continued strength in residential construction permits in 2017-18, based on projections of 2% population growth for Maricopa County and increased single family lots in the planning stage.

Significance: New multi-family construction is a key economic indicator of local population growth or shifts in housing preferences and its spill over benefits to other sectors of the economy such as demand for construction labor/materials, retail, manufacturing and utilities.

Current Year: Planning and Development is projecting continued strength in multi-family residential permits in 2017-18, based on state projections of 2% population growth for Maricopa County and interest in urban and infill residential development.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

JUL AUG SEP

Current YTD Prior YTD 3YR AVG YTD Peak Year (FY2004-05)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

JUL AUG SEP


of 110

Total Value of Permitted Activity


Prior Year - 8.2%

3 Year Avg. + 1.0%

Peak Year

(FY2006-07)

- 17.3%

Totals

CYTD $916,438,295

PYTD $998,321,424

3YRAVG $907,039,217

Peak Year

(FY2006-07)

$1,107,527,633

Solid Waste - Total Tonnage Collected


Prior Year - 14.1%

3 Year Avg. - 8.5%

Peak Year

FY2015-16

- 14.1%

Totals

CYTD 210,197

PYTD 244,675

3YRAVG 229,624

Peak Year

FY2015-16

244,675

Significance: The valuation of new construction can be an indicator of one facet of Phoenix's economic strength because it reflects the permit value of new construction projects.

Current Year: Planning and Development is projecting a slight decrease in overall construction permit valuation for 2017-18 versus the prior year due to the large number of major projects started in 2016-17. Valuations are predicted to remain above the three year average based on state projections of 2% population growth in Maricopa County and continued recovery of the residential market.

Significance: Tonnage is an indicator of growth within the City of Phoenix or environmental factors such as storms. Total tonnage includes landfill materials and green waste material that is not landfilled. Recyclable material is not included in this measure.

Current Year: The tonnage for trash and green waste is decreasing compared to prior year data. Recent focus has been to increase waste diversion by incentivizing residents to participate in the Green Organics and Recycling programs. Peak year is 2015-16 due to more residents participating in diversion programs in 2017-18.

$100,000,000

$300,000,000

$500,000,000

$700,000,000

$900,000,000

$1,100,000,000

$1,300,000,000

JUL AUG SEP


30,000

80,000

130,000

180,000

230,000

280,000

JUL AUG SEP


of 110

Solid Waste - Recycling Tonnage Collected


Prior Year - 1.7%

3 Year Avg. + 15.4%

Peak Year

FY2016-17

- 1.7%

Totals

CYTD 36,680

PYTD 37,317

3YRAVG 31,795

Peak Year

FY2016-17

37,317

City Sales Tax - Total


Prior Year + 3.2%

3 Year Avg. + 11.2%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD $211,854,000

PYTD $205,197,000

3YRAVG $190,500,000

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

Significance: City sales tax (all funds including: General Fund, T2050, Public Safety, 3PI, Convention Center, Sports Facilities, and Capital Construction) represents overall local economic activity related to taxable sales.

Significance: Recycling tonnage is one measurement of Solid Waste revenue generated through diversion and increased understanding by residents about how or what to recycle. Recycling tonnage includes materials processed at the materials recycling facility (MRF).

Current Year: Recycling tonnage for the month of September decreased 1.7% as compared with September of the previous year due to a recent vendor merger, but is 15.4% higher than the three year average due to adding new partners who previously were not providing recycling material to the City in prior years as well as the filling of vacant homes resulting from the recovery of the economy.

Current Year: The three year average includes revenue from the sales tax on food. The sales tax on food was reduced from 2% to 1% effective January 2014, which began impacting reported revenue in February 2014. The sales tax on food was eliminated effective April 2015, which began impacting reported revenue in May 2015. Peak year is N/A because the current fiscal year is the peak year for September data which represents the highest total without sales tax on food. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

JUL AUG SEP


JUL AUG SEP

$0

$50,000,000

$100,000,000

$150,000,000

$200,000,000

$250,000,000


of 110

City Sales Tax - Retail


Prior Year + 6.8%

3 Year Avg. + 21.9%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD $86,311,000

PYTD $80,813,000

3YRAVG $70,830,333

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

City Sales Tax - Hotel/Motel


Prior Year - 0.2%

3 Year Avg. + 10.2%

Peak Year

FY2016-17

- 0.2%

Totals

CYTD $6,794,000

PYTD $6,809,000

3YRAVG $6,164,333

Peak Year

FY2016-17

$6,809,000

Significance: Retail sales tax represents retail sales, not including the sales tax on food.

Current Year: Peak year is N/A because the current fiscal year is the peak year for September data. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

Significance: Hotel/Motel sales tax revenue represents taxable sales for these businesses and is an indicator of tourism activity.

Current Year: There is a slight current YTD decrease (-.2%) compared to previous year, but 10.2% higher than three year average. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

JUL AUG SEP

$0

$10,000,000

$20,000,000

$30,000,000

$40,000,000

$50,000,000

$60,000,000

$70,000,000

$80,000,000

$90,000,000

$100,000,000


JUL AUG SEP

$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000


of 110

City Sales Tax - Restaurants/Bars


Prior Year + 1.1%

3 Year Avg. + 16.1%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD $18,101,000

PYTD $17,908,000

3YRAVG $15,589,667

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

City Sales Tax - Contracting


Prior Year + 6.1%

3 Year Avg. + 7.0%

Peak Year

(FY2006-07)

- 46.5%

Totals

CYTD $13,120,000

PYTD $12,362,000

3YRAVG $12,256,333

Peak Year

(FY2006-07)

$24,532,000

Significance: Restaurants/Bars sales tax revenue represents taxable sales for these businesses and is an indicator of economic strength, population growth, and tourism.


Significance: Contracting sales tax revenue presents activity in the commercial, retail and residential construction markets.

Current Year: Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

JUL AUG SEP

$0

$10,000,000

$20,000,000

$30,000,000


JUL AUG SEP

$0

$10,000,000

$20,000,000


of 110

State Sales Tax - Total


Prior Year + 6.6%

3 Year Avg. + 11.9%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD $36,417,000

PYTD $34,150,000

3YRAVG $32,536,333

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

State Vehicle License Tax


Prior Year + 11.4%

3 Year Avg. + 15.7%

Peak Year

FY2017-18

0.0%

Totals

CYTD $16,762,000

PYTD $15,045,182

3YRAVG $14,490,715

Peak Year

FY2017-18

N/A

Significance: State Vehicle License tax accounts for approximately 15.4% of Total State Shared Revenues based on the FY 2017-18 Budget. Total State Shared revenue is approximately 35.8% of total General Fund Revenue. The Peak Year (2005-06) reflects a time when the City received a higher percentage share (46.1%) of state-shared revenues. State shared vehicle license tax revenues are distributed to cities and towns in Maricopa County based on their relative population share of Maricopa County. The city of Phoenix's population share in FY 2000-01 was 48.5%, and the current population share in FY 2017-18 is 41.0%.

Significance: State Sales Tax accounts for approximately 36.5% of Total State Shared Revenues based on the FY 2017-18 Budget. Total State Shared revenue is approximately 35.8% of total General Fund Revenue. State shared sales tax revenues are distributed to cities and towns based on relative population share in Arizona. The population share in FY 2000-01 was 33.7% and the current population share in FY 2017-18 is 29.4%.

Current Year: September year-to-date 2017-18 State sales tax was $36.4 million, representing 6.6% growth over 2016-17. Peak year is N/A because the current fiscal year is the peak year for September data. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.


JUL AUG SEP

$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

$30,000,000

$35,000,000

$40,000,000


JUL AUG SEP

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

$18,000,000


of 110

Phoenix Assessed Valuation

Calendar Year Compared to:

Prior Year + 6.7%

3 Year Avg. + 5.7%

Peak Year

(TY2010)

- 27.0%

Totals

2017 $11,721,385,399

2016 $10,982,150,871

3YRAVG $11,093,522,665

Peak Year

(TY2010)

16,063,200,689

Phoenix Full Cash Value


Prior Year + 8.5%

3 Year Avg. + 14.4%

Peak Year

(TY2010)

- 10.4%

Totals

2017 $152,048,146,858

2016 $140,141,257,980

3YRAVG $132,892,217,712

Peak Year

(TY2010)

169,661,389,554

Current Year: Tax Year 2017 (FY 2017-18) Primary NAV grew by 6.7% over the prior year; 2.6% is attributable to new property, and 4.1% is attributable to appreciation in previously-taxed property. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

Significance: Phoenix's assessed valuation is based on the Primary Net Assessed Value (PNAV) which beginning in FY2015-16 is the single value used for calculating both Primary Property Taxes and Secondary Property Taxes. The assessed valuation provides an indicator of the basis for City property tax revenue.

Significance: Full cash value is an indicator of both commercial and residential property values, an important indicator of one facet of economic health. This statistic is updated once per year in February and lag market conditions by approximately one year. Due to assessed valuation growth limits and statutory changes in assessment ratios, however, trends in full cash value do not correlate to trends in the tax base for property taxes.

Current Year: Tax Year 2017 (FY 2017-18) Full Cash Value grew by 8.5% over the prior year. Single and multi-family residential property values grew by 8.5%, commercial property values by 10.5%, and other property values by 6.0%. Prior year values have not been adjusted for inflation.

$0

$4,000,000,000

$8,000,000,000

$12,000,000,000

$16,000,000,000

$20,000,000,000

3YR AVG TY 2016 TY 2017 Peak Year(TY2010)

Series1TY = Tax Year

0

40,000,000,000

80,000,000,000

120,000,000,000

160,000,000,000

200,000,000,000

3YR AVG TY 2016 TY 2017 Peak Year(TY2010)

Series1TY = Tax Year

of 110

Phoenix Median Household Income


Prior Year + 7.5%

3 Year Avg. + 5.2%

Peak Year

(CY2008)

- 9.5%

Totals

2016 $52,062

2015 $48,452

3YRAVG $49,481

Peak Year

(CY2008)

$57,507

Phoenix Unemployment Rate


Prior Year - 2.5%

3 Year Avg. - 12.0%

Peak Year

(CY2016)

0.0%

Totals

2016 3.9%

2015 4.0%

3YRAVG 4.4%

Peak Year

(CY2016)

3.9%

Significance: This measure includes the income of the householder and all other individuals 15 years old and over in the household. Median income is the amount that divides the income distribution into two equal groups, half at income levels above that amount, and half at income levels below that amount. This statistic is updated once per year in November.

Current Year: The increase in 2015 over prior years is an indication of the slow to moderate recovery from the 2008 recession. Data is from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) and reflects the highest since 2005 (the oldest readily available data set).

Significance: This measures the percentage of the labor force that are unemployed. People are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. This statistic is updated once per year in November.

Current Year: The decrease in the unemployment rate over prior years may indicate growth in jobs and/or that fewer people who are available to work have been actively looking for work in the prior 4 weeks of the survey. Data is from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) and reflects the highest since 2005 (the oldest readily available data set).

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

3YR AVG CY 2015 CY 2016 Peak Year(CY2008)

Series1CY = Calendar year

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

3YR AVG CY 2015 CY 2016 Peak Year (CY2016)


of 110

Phoenix Labor Force Participation


Prior Year - -3.4%

3 Year Avg. - -1.8%

Peak Year

(CY2005)

- 5.1%

Totals

2016 66.9%

2015 64.7%

3YRAVG 65.7%

Peak Year

(CY2005)

70.5%

Significance: This measures the percentage of the population (16 and older) that is in the labor force. The labor force is defined as the total population of employed and unemployed people (16 and older). People are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. This statistic is updated once per year in November.

Current Year: The labor force participation rate slightly decreased from 2014 indicating an decrease in the percentage of the population that is either employed or unemployed and actively looking for work. Data is from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau) and reflects the highest since 2005 (the oldest readily available data set).

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

3YR AVG CY 2015 CY 2016 Peak Year(CY2005)


of 110


City Council Report


Taxicab Services Contracts Award Request

This report requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteerecommend to the City Council that it authorize the City Manager to enter into separatecontracts with four companies to provide taxicab services at Phoenix Sky HarborInternational Airport. The City estimates that it will receive annual revenue totalingapproximately $1.9 million.


SummaryThe Aviation Department at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport contracts withtaxicab service providers to ensure on-demand transportation is available for travelersat all times. Over the last four years, taxicab companies have provided nearly 3 millionsafe, reliable rides.

The Aviation Department requests authorization to enter into four revenue contracts fortaxicab services after conducting a competitive revenue contract solicitation (RCS).Two contracts will be awarded to large companies that have a base fleet of 70 vehicleseach. Two contracts will be awarded to small companies that have a base fleet of 30vehicles each. The two large companies will be required to maintain a minimum of 15percent of vehicles operated by franchises or owner-operators. One small companywill be 100 percent owner-operator. All companies will pay a trip fee (currently $3.25)for each passenger pickup. The trip fee will not be passed on by the companies to thecustomer or the driver.

Procurement InformationThis procurement was conducted using a competitive RCS process. The processbegan with significant industry outreach and did not allow respondents to submit bids,but instead used an evaluation of each respondent's qualifications for ranking andrecommendation. Each eligible respondent was given the opportunity to interview withthe evaluation panel.

A protest and appeal was filed with and reviewed by the Office of AdministrativeHearings (OAH). The OAH administrative law judge recommended that the City

of 110


Manager dismiss the appeal, and the recommendation was upheld by the CityManager.

The Aviation Department recommends awarding taxicab services at Phoenix SkyHarbor International Airport to the following respondents in each category:

Large CompanyAAA Cab Services, Inc., dba Yellow CabTotal Transit Enterprises, LLC

Small Company (100 Percent Owner-Operator)Mayflower Cab Company, LLC

Small Company (Not 100 Percent Owner-Operator)VIP Taxi, LLC

Contract TermThe term of each contract will be four years and includes one two-year option toextend the term, which may be exercised at the Aviation Director's sole discretion.

There was a delay in the solicitation schedule because an unsuccessful proposer fileda protest and appeal. The current services contracts with AAA Cab Services, Inc., dbaYellow Cab, and Apache Taxi LLC will expire on Feb. 1, 2018 and will need to beextended on a month-to-month basis not to exceed six months. The current servicescontract with Mayflower Cab Company, LLC will expire on June 1, 2018 and will notneed to be extended.

Financial ImpactThe City estimates that it will receive annual revenue totaling approximately $1.9million.

LocationPhoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, 3400 E. Sky Harbor Blvd.Council District: 8


of 110


City Council Report


Transdev Rental Car Center Shuttle Bus Contract

This item requests the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteerecommends City Council authorization for the Aviation Department to negotiate anextension to the term of the contract with Transdev Services, Inc., (Transdev) andamend the business terms for the Rental Car Center (RCC) shuttle bus services.Annual expenditures for the contract are approximately $14 million.


SummaryPhoenix Sky Harbor International Airport currently has a contract with Transdev toprovide shuttle bus service for RCC passengers. In 2016, over 6.5 million passengerswere transported between the terminals and the RCC. Transdev currently provides theday-to-day operations and management of the RCC shuttle bus services. Transdevstores, fuels, cleans, operates, and maintains 108 City-owned buses that provide theshuttle service.

Authorization to negotiate an extension of the term of the contract with Transdev isrequested in order to provide RCC shuttle bus services through the end of the Phase 2construction and testing of the PHX Sky Train. The PHX Sky Train Stage 2 extensionis expected to be operational for passengers in early 2022. Extending the term of thecontract will maintain continuity of bus services until the extension is complete andminimize risks and costs associated with transitioning to another bus operator. Uponcompletion of the negotiations with Transdev, Aviation Department staff will submit acontract change recommendation for consideration by the City Council.

Contract TermThe original contract term was four years beginning on Jan. 3, 2009 and expiring onDec. 31, 2013. The contract contained five, one-year renewal options that wereexercised by the Aviation Director. The last one-year renewal option will expire on Dec.31, 2018.

Financial ImpactAnnual expenditures for the contract are approximately $14 million.

of 110




of 110


City Council Report


Proposed Amendment to the 2012 International Building Code Section 105.3.1 -Demolition Permit Process to Add Residential Single Family and Duplex HomesLocated Within the Downtown Code Area

This report provides information to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and InnovationSubcommittee and requests recommendation for City Council approval for theproposed amendments to the 2012 International Building Code Section 105.3.1 -Demolition process for residential single family and duplex homes located within theDowntown Code area.


SummaryThis proposed amendment would extend the current 30-day hold for demolition tosingle family and duplexes located within the Downtown Code District that are 50years of age or older. There are fewer than 100 properties that would be impacted bythis amendment. Commercial properties 50 years of age or older or properties thathave been identified as individually eligible for historic designation are already coveredby the existing code that was approved by City Council last November.

Financial ImpactThis recommendation will utilize the existing new Planner I position in the HistoricPreservation Division to review each application, follow notification procedures andcover the costs of implementing the additional review area. A $300 fee is currentlybeing charged to the commercial applicants to cover the administrative costs of thereview and would be expanded to include applicants of property owners in theexpanded areas.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionThe Historic Preservation (HP) Commission recommended approval of thisamendment on Sept. 18, 2017. The Development Advisory Board (DAB) AdministrativeCommittee recommended approval by a 3-0 vote on Nov. 16, 2017. The DevelopmentAdvisory Board (DAB) recommended approval by a 9-0 vote (1 abstained - Carson) onNov. 16, 2017.

of 110


LocationDowntown AreaCouncil Districts: 7 and 8

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by Deputy City Managers Mario Paniagua and DeannaJonovich, and the Planning and Development and Community and EconomicDevelopment departments.

of 110

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CODE CHANGE PROPOSALProposed Amendments to 2012 IBC

Section 105.3.1.1

Submitted by: Staff at the request of the Historic Preservation Commission

Code Section Proposed Information:

[A] 105.3.1 Action on application. The building official shall examine or cause to be examined applications for permits and amendments thereto within a reasonable time after filing. If the application or the construction documents do not conform to the requirements of pertinent laws, the building official shall reject such application in writing, stating the reasons therefor. If the building official is satisfied that the proposed work conforms to the requirements of this code and laws and ordinances applicable thereto, the building official shall issue a permit therefor as soon as practicable.

[A] 105.3.1.1 Action for demolition permit. Application for exterior demolition permits for buildings identified as individually eligible for historic designation and commercial buildings 50 years of age or older as well as all properties located in the Downtown Code District (Chapter 12 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance) that are either 50 years of age or older OR deemed eligible shall require public notice and shall be held for 30 calendar days from the date of application and evidence of such notice.

Reasons:Since implementation of the provision of the code amendment for the 30 day hold that went into effect December 2, 2016, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) has expressed concern with loss of single family and duplex properties within the Downtown Code District.

Although not individually eligible for the Phoenix Historic Property Register, the loss of these important buildings without notice to the public has caused concern given the scarcity of building stock within the Downtown. Prior to the implementation of the 30-day hold, there had been a policy for the three day hold for all properties within the Downtown Code District. The Commission would like to see the hold within notice apply to all properties located within the Downtown Code District.

Cost Impact:Implementation of this new amendment would impact fewer than 100 properties within the Downtown Code District. The $300 fee would apply to these properties for demolition.

Attachment A- IBC Section 105.3.1 Proposed Code Change

of 110

Approved in previous Code Adoption process: YES NO

ACTION TAKEN:Code Committee Date: 10/19/17

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken

Development Advisory Board Administrative Subcommittee Date: 11/16/17

Approved as submitted Modified and approved Denied No action taken Development Advisory Board Date: 11/16/17


Downtown, Aviation, Economy, and Innovation Subcommittee Date:


City Council Action Date:


of 110

Centr

al Ave

1st St

2nd S

t3rd

St4th

St

1st St

2nd S

t

Centr

al Ave

Portland St1st

Ave

8th Av

e Council District 8Coun

cil Dis

trict 7

Council District 8Council District 7Council District 4

!"a$

5th Av

e

Buchanan St

Polk St

4th Av

e

Portland St

Roosevelt St

Van Buren St

Washington St

Centr

al Ave

Sherman St

Moreland St

Fillmore StPierce St

Mckinley St

1st Av

e

Garfield St

Yavapai StBuckeye Rd

Jefferson St

Jackson St

6th St

Lincoln St

Madison St

7th Av

e

3rd Av

e

Taylor St

Adams St

Tonto St

Grant St

Hadley St

7th St

Grand Ave

5th St

Willetta St

Palmcroft Dr

Culver St

Lynwood StMcdowell Rd

Coronado RdAlmeria Rd

Granada Rd

3rd St

2nd A

ve

6th Av

e

Monroe St7th

St

5th St

Fillmore St

3rd Av

e

Grant St

Jackson St

Washington St

Roosevelt St

4th St

5th St

Portland St

7th Av

e6th

Ave

5th Av

e4th

Ave

3rd Av

e2n

d Ave

3rd St

4th St

6th St

1st St

2nd S

t

1st Av

e Van Buren St

2nd A

ve

4th Av

e

7th Av

e

9th Av

e10t

h Ave

[email protected]

Unprotected Single-Family or Duplex Property (92)

Commercial Use (2)

Commercial Use (5)

Listed, Pending, or Eligible

Downtown Code

Parcel

Data Sources: Maricopa County Assessor (2017)City of Phoenix (2017)

I0 1,000500

Feet

Unprotected Single-Family and Duplex 50 Years or Older

(Commercial COFO on file)

(Commercial COFO not on file)

of 110

034894

Typewritten Text

Attachment B- Downtown Code Area Map

034894

Typewritten Text


City Council Report


(Continued from Oct. 4, 2017 and Nov. 1, 2017) Downtown Code Provisions andClarification Text Amendment - Z-TA-10-13

This report provides the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation Subcommitteeinformation about a proposed text amendment to the zoning ordinance, Z-TA-10-13,regarding Amending Chapter 12 Downtown Code of the Zoning Ordinance to clarifylanguage, clean up clerical issues, and to add new provisions.


SummaryThe intent of this proposed text amendment is to revise Chapter 12 (Downtown Code)of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to address several improvements to the code,including removal of redundant text; reorganization or relocation of items intoappropriate sections; clarification of terminology; update the code to add new land useprovisions as per adopted ordinances, include public utility facilities and buildings asan allowed use; add new frontage types to match those of the Walkable Urban (WU)Code, and to add flexibility language for public utility conflicts.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionCentral City Village Planning Committee were briefed on April 10, 2017 and heard theitem on Aug. 14, 2017 and approved, with additional changes by a 12-0 vote (1abstained). The Planning Commission heard the item on Sept. 7, 2017 and approvedper the Central City Village Planning Committee recommendation, with a modificationto Section 1204.C.28.D as read into the record by staff as the following: THE PUBLICUTILITY FACILITIES AND BUILDINGS MUST HAVE A MINIMUM 8-FOOT HIGHDECORATIVE FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER, IF THE FACILITY IS NOTWITHIN AN ENCLOSED BUILDING STRUCTURE by a 5-1 vote.

Responsible DepartmentThis item is submitted by Deputy City Manager Mario Paniagua and the Planning andDevelopment Department.

of 110

Attachment A - Proposed Language TA-10-13

1201 Code Administration.

A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the Code is to implement the vision, goals and policies of the Downtown Phoenix Plan and provide the physical environment necessary to create a pedestrian-oriented, dynamic urban center with an authentic sense of place. The intent of the Downtown Code is to address design that impactsthe public realm by establishing standards and guidelines that will allow projects to develop over time in a scale and character consistent with the Downtown Phoenix Plan AND WITH THE VISION AND GOALS OF PLANPHX.

B. Applicability. The Downtown Code applies to all land uses, subdivisions, and development within the boundary specifically identified in Section 1202.B and generally bounded by McDowell Road on the north, 7th Street on the east, Buckeye Road on the south, and 7th Avenue on the west. This boundary shall be hereafter known as Downtown. If a conflict occurs between requirements of the Downtown Code and the remainder of the City of Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, the requirements of the Downtown Code shall prevail.

C. Approval Requirements. Each structure and land use shall be established, constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, altered, moved or replaced in compliance with the following requirements:

1. The land use or function must be allowed by the Use Matrix in the Character Area where the site is located.

2. Development review approval must be obtained in accordance with Section 507. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance demonstrating compliance with the development standards and guidelines of the Downtown Code with the exception that building additions of more than 500 square feet shall be required to meet the shading requirements in Section 1207.D. Development standards are requirements and development guidelines are equivalent to design presumptions.

3. STANDARDS ARE REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES ARE DESIGN PRESUMPTIONS.

43. Existing structures and land uses established legally at the time of adoption of this Code shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 9, Nonconformities, of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

54. Properties with Historic Preservation (HP) zoning are subject to the provisions of Chapter 8, Historic Preservation, of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance in addition to the provisions of Chapter 12, Downtown Code. In

of 110

the event of a conflict between the provisions of Chapter 8 and Chapter 12, the provisions of Chapter 8 shall prevail.

***1204 Land Use Matrix.

A. Applicability: The land use matrix shall replace all existing allowed land uses in the Downtown.

B. Use Regulations. The regulations governing the uses of land and structures shall be set forth in the Land Use Matrix, Section 1204.D, and land use conditions in Section 1204.C. Any use not specifically listed in the Use Matrix shall not be permitted. All uses listed will be permitted (p), permitted with conditions (pc), permitted with the approval of a special permit (sp), permitted with the approval of a use permit (up) or not permitted (np).

C. The following shall apply to uses that are permitted with conditions (pc) as indicated with a number that corresponds with the Land Use Matrix in Section 1204.D:

Screening:

1. Outdoor uses or activities must be screened by a minimum 6-foot-high solid fence or masonry wall.

2. Outdoor uses or activities must be screened by a minimum 8-foot-high solid fence or masonry wall.

Maximum Height:

3. No outdoor uses shall exceed a height of 10 feet.

Spacing:

14. No use shall be located within 1,320 feet of the same type of use as measured from the exterior walls of the building or portion thereof in which the use is conducted.

Separation:

25. The use shall not be located within 50 feet of a Buffer Alley identified on the map in Section 1202.F as measured from the exterior walls of a building or portion thereof in which the use is conducted to the right-of-way line of the Buffer Alley.

36. The use shall not be located within 25 feet of a Buffer Alley identified on the map in Section 1202.F as measured from the portion of the property on which the use is conducted to the right-of-way line of the Buffer Alley.

of 110

Environmental Quality:

47. Noise, odor, dust, gas, heat, smoke, glare or vibration shall not be emitted at any time by the use that exceeds the general or ambient level by uses immediately off-site as compared at the parcel boundary.

8. No amplified music or loudspeakers may be used outside.

59. No amplified music or loudspeakers may be used outside after 8:00 p.m. on Sundays and after 10:00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays, unless a use permit is obtained.

610. The noise level, measured at any point on the received property, shall not exceed 55 dBa unless a use permit is obtained. An occurrence where the sound level increases up to 60 dBa for five continuous seconds or less shall not be deemed a violation of this section as long as there are no more than five occurrences within an hour-long interval.

Maximum Size:11. The use shall not exceed 650 square feet of building area.

712. The use shall not exceed 2,500 square feet of building area.

813. The use shall not exceed 5,000 square feet of building area per tenant, unless a use permit is obtained.

914. The use shall not exceed 10,000 square feet of building area, unless a use permit is obtained.

105. The use shall not exceed 25,000 square feet of lot area.

116. The use shall not exceed 25% of the total under roof area, unless a use permit is obtained to enlarge to a maximum of 50% of the total under roof area.

127. The use shall not include more than 10 display vehicles.

18. The use shall not exceed 10% of the net floor area of the primary use.

Maximum Persons:

19. The use may not be conducted for more than 5 persons.


of 110


1522. The use may not employ more than 1 nonresident person.

Hours of Operation:

1623. The use is limited to Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays only.

1724. The use may not be conducted between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.

25. The use may not be conducted between the hours of 12 a.m. and 10 a.m. from Sunday through Thursday, and between 2 a.m. and 10 a.m. from Friday through Saturday.

1826. The use may only be conducted between the hours of 10 a.m. and 12 midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and between 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. on Sundays, unless a use permit is obtained to extend the hours.

Location:

1927. The use may only occur on a site that is adjoining an arterial street.

208. Drive-through windows shall not face right-of-way and drive-through queuing must be screened from the view from the right-of-way unless approval is obtained from the Design Review Committee.

219. Used/second hand merchandise cannot be received or processed at a site in the Downtown Code Area for sale at another site. No outdoor sales or displays allowed.

2230. Outdoor crafting of art subject to the following:

a. Must be associated with an enclosed business when the subject parcel abuts an arterial or collector street.

b. Storage of materials associated with the crafting area shall not exceed eight feet in height and shall be limited to the rear or side yard.

c. Storage area shall be fully screened with a solid wall or landscaping.

d. Storage of materials associated with the crafting area exceeding eight feet in height shall be subject to obtaining a use permit in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Administrator section of the Zoning Ordinance.

of 110

231. Outdoor entertainment, subject to the following:

a. Outdoor event or performances are open to the public.

b. The outdoor event or performance must be presented by an existing business on the property.

c. The business’ regularly stocked items may be displayed outdoors and be available for purchase during the event or performance. Payment for all items shall occur indoors. No other items may be displayed for sale outdoors during the event or performance.

324. The facility shall be licensed by the State as a producer, domestic microbrewery or domestic farm winery.

2533. Drug, alcohol, other substance abuse or mental health rehabilitation programs shall not be allowed as part of the shelter services.

26. FARMERS MARKETS, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:

A. OBTAINING AN ADMINISTRATIVE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT (ATUP) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 708 IF NO FOOD OR BEVERAGE IS DISPENSED FROM A VEHICLE.

B. OBTAINING A USE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 307 IF FOOD OR BEVERAGE IS DISPENSED FROM A VEHICLE.

C. ON-SITE OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTSMAY BE STIPULATED AS A CONDITION OF AN ATUP OR USE PERMIT APPROVAL

27. SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:

A. HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGNATED PROPERTIES OR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION DISTRICTS CANNOT USE THE SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DEVELOPMENT OPTION.

B. INDIVIDUAL UNIT LOT: MINIMUM 20’ WIDTH, NO MINIMUM DEPTH.

C. PERIMETER STANDARDS: MAXIMUM 10' FOR UNITS FRONTING STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY; MINIMUM 15' FOR UNITS SIDING STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY. THIS AREA IS TO BE IN COMMON

of 110

OWNERSHIP OR MANAGEMENT. 10' ADJACENT TO PROPERTY LINE.

D. BUILDING SETBACKS, INDIVIDUAL UNIT LOT: NONE.

E MAXIMUM STORIES: AS PER HEIGHT MAP, SECTION 1202.C.

F. LOT COVERAGE PER DWELLING UNIT: 100%

G. COMMON AREAS: MINIMUM 5% OF GROSS AREA

H. ALLOWED USES: SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED AND HOME OCCUPATIONS PER SECTION 608

I. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PER SECTION 507

J. DESIGN: FRONT OF UNITS SHOULD FACE RIGHT OF WAY. NO GARAGES ALLOWED TO FACE PEDESTRIAN OR SIDE STREETS.

28. PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:

A. PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED WHEN NECESSARY FOR SERVING THE SURROUNDING TERRITORY.

B. AN ALTERNATIVE FRONTAGE TYPE PER SECTION 1205.B. AND WHICH MIMICS AN ALLOWED FRONTAGE TYPE PER THE CHARACTER AREA STREETSCAPE STANDARDS FOR THE SITE’S LOCATION, IS REQUIRED, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF, OR AN APPEAL IS APPROVED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC).

C. THE USE CANNOT BE LOCATED ON A TRANSIT STREET OR ADJACENT TO HANCE PARK.

D. THE PUBLIC UTILITY FACILITIES AND BUILDINGS MUST HAVE A MINIMUM 8-FOOT HIGH DECORATIVE FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER, IF THE FACILITY IS NOT WITHIN AN ENCLOSED BUILDING STRUCTURE.

D. Land Use Matrix.

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Residential Uses

Assisted Living Home

pc14

pc14

pc14,20

pc14,1320

pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14

pc14

***

Group Home

pc14

pc14

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pC,14

pc14

Live-Work

x p p pc116, 1522

p p p p p p p np p p p p

SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED

NP NP PC27 NP NP PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27

PC27

Assembly Uses

***

Day Care,

x p p pc1320,

1522

p p pc1320,

1522

p p p p pc1320,

1522

pc1320,

1522

p p p

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Nursery School

***

General Retail Sales and Related Service Uses

Artist Studio/Gallery

x p p Pc 47, 610, 1724

p p* Pc 47, 610, 1724

p* p* p Pc 47, 610, 1724

np Pc 47, 610, 1724

p p p

***

ACCESSORY ONLY TO BAR/LOUNGE/NIGHT CLUB

***

Brew Pub, Domestic Microbrewery, Domestic Farm Winery

x Up2432

Up2432

np Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

np Up2432

Up2432

Up2432

p2432

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

***

Farmers Market

x PC26up

PC26up

np PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

np PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

PC26up

***

Restaurant

x p p np p* p* pc712 p* p* p p* np pc25* p p p

ACCESSORY ONLY TO RESTAURANT/BREW PUB

***

-Outdoor Cooking

x up Pc 47, 162

3

np up up np up up up up np np up up up

-Outdoor Dining

x p p np pc36* p* np p* p* p p* np pc25* p pc35

p

***

Retail Sales

x p p np pc105 p pc712 pc914

pc105

pc105 pc914 np pc914 pc813 p p

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Second Hand/Used Merchandise Sales

x pC219

pC219

np pc105, 219

pC219

pc 712, 219

pc 914, 219

pc105,

219

pc105, 219

pc 914, 219

np pc 914, 219

pc 813, 219

pC219

pC219

***

Services

Appliance Repair

x pc 47,

610, 172

4

np np pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

np pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

np np pc 47, 610, 1724

p p

***

UTILITY AND Transportation Uses

- Motor Vehicle Rentals

x up pc127

np up pc127

np sp sp sp sp np np sp up up

- Motor Vehicle

x sp pc127

np pc127 pc127

np sp sp sp sp np np sp pc127

pc127

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Sales (new) and Leasing

- Motor Vehicle Service Station, Fuel Sales

x np sp np up1927 np np np np up1927

np np np np sp np

PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

PC28

PC28

PC28 PC28 PC28

PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28

PC28

***

Accessory Uses and Facilities

***

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Dependent Care Facility

up p up p p pc 214

p p p p up pc 214

p p p

Drive-Through

np np np pc1927, 208

np np np np pc1927, 208

np np np np np np

***

Home Occupation AS PER SECTION 608.E.3

p p pc22 p* p* pc22* p* p* p* p* pc22 p* p p p

Outdoor Crafting of Art

up up up p* 2230

up* up p*2230

p*2230

p2230 p*2230

up np* up up p2230

***

Outdoor Entertainment

x up pc 47, 16,

np up* pc 59, 16, 23,

up pc 59, 16, 23,

pc 59, 16, 23,

up up* np up* up pc 47, 16,

pc 47, 16, 23,

31

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

23, 31

1826*,31

1826*,31

1826*,31

23, 31

Pocket Shelter (accessory to Religious Assembly only)

pc 1320,

2533

pc 1320,

2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320

, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320,

2533

pc 1320, 2533

REPAIR AND/OR STORAGE FACILITIES (ACCESSORY TO PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDI

UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central

Park

Commercial Corrid

or

Dntn Gateway

East Evergreen

Evans

Churchill East

Evans

Churchill West

McDowell Corridor

Roosevelt East

Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

NG AND FACILITIES ONLY)

***

of 110

1205. Frontage STANDARDSTypes.

A. Intent: The Frontage STANDARDS AND Types IN THIS SECTION regulate the area between the property line and the front facade of a building IN ORDER TO SUPPORT AN URBAN, PEDESTRIAN AND TRANSIT-ORIENTED ENVIRONMENT Building frontages require that building entrances and seating areas face toward the street in order to meet the intent of activating the public realm.

B. BUILDING FAÇADE GENERAL STANDARDS.

1. THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MAY CONSIDER A FRONTAGE DESIGN ALTERNATIVE WHEN THE DESIGN MEETS THE INTENT OF PEDESTRIAN AND TRANSIT-ORIENTED FRONTAGES AND FAÇADES.

2. BUILDING FACADES MAY INCLUDE MULTIPLE FRONTAGE TYPES ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE PROJECT.

3. BUILDING ENTRANCES SHALL FACE TOWARD THE STREET IN ORDER TO MEET THE INTENT OF ACTIVATING THE PUBLIC REALM.

4. BUILDING FACADES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A SENSE OF HUMAN SCALE AT THE GROUND LEVEL BY PROVIDING A CLEAR ARCHITECTURAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE GROUND FLOOR AND ALL ADDITIONAL STORIES.

A. SIDE AND REAR BUILDING FACADES SHOULD HAVE A LEVEL OF TRIM AND FINISH COMPATIBLE WITH THE FRONT FACADE, PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

5. FENCE STANDARDS FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION (HP) OVERLAY DISTRICT. FENCES OR FREESTANDING WALLS IN THE FRONT SETBACK MAY NOT EXCEED A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THREE FEET, AND ARE CONDITIONED UPON OBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR NO EFFECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 812 OF THE PHOENIX ZONING ORDINANCE. THIS HEIGHT LIMITATION EXTENDS TO A POINT THREE FEET BEYOND THE FRONT CORNER(S) OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

C. PROJECTIONS IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY

1. WHERE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS, WATER/SEWER LINES OR IRREGULAR LOT LINES CAUSE CONFLICTS WITH SPECIFIC FRONTAGE TYPES AND FRONTAGE SETBACK TYPES, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STAFF MAY MODIFY NUMERIC SETBACK AND

of 110

LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS UP TO 20 PERCENT AND ALLOW BUILD TO DIMENSIONS TO BE TAKEN FROM THE BACK OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT.

2. ANY PROJECTIONS INTO PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOULD BE PERMITTED ONLY UPON ISSUANCE OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AS ADMINISTERED BY THE CITY OF PHOENIX, AND IF APPLICABLE, APPROVAL FROM AFFECTED PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES.

3. A MINIMUM 16-FOOT HEIGHT CLEARANCE SHOULD BE PROVIDED FROM PUBLIC WATER/SEWER LINES, UNLESS SHADE IS RETRACTABLE OR AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS SECURED FROM THE CITY OF PHOENIX.

DB. FRONTAGE TYPE: Active Front Yard.***

2. Single-family residential units. No vehicle parking or maneuvering shall be permitted within the Active Front Yard with the exception of a driveway no greater than 16 feet in width to provide access to the rear of the property.

***23. A permanent hardscaped or landscaped area shall be provided in

accordance with the following standards: ***

34. Fences. Maximum height 40 inches. For properties located within an Historic Preservation (HP) Overlay District, fences or freestanding walls in the front yard, meaning the space between the structure and the street right-of-way line, may not exceed a maximum height of three feet, and are conditioned upon obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Effect in accordance with Section 812 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. This height limitation extends to a point three feet beyond the front corner(s) of the primary structure.

45. A minimum of one primary entrance shall be provided along each frontage that directly connects to the street, unless a corner entrance is provided.

56. The area between the property line and main facade of the building which is not improved with permanent hardscape shall be landscaped in accordance with Section 1207.E, Landscaping Standards.

***EC. FRONTAGE TYPE: Dooryard.

***3. Fences. Maximum height six feet.

For properties located within an Historic Preservation (HP) Overlay District, fences or freestanding walls in the front yard, meaning the space between the structure and the street right-of-way line, may not exceed a maximum

of 110

height of three feet, and are conditioned upon obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Effect in accordance with Section 812 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. This height limitation extends to a point three feet beyond the front corner(s) of the primary structure.

***FD. FRONTAGE TYPE: Stoop/Door Well.

***3. Fences. Maximum height 40 inches.

For properties located within an Historic Preservation (HP) Overlay District, fences or freestanding walls in the front yard, meaning the space between the structure and the street right-of-way line, may not exceed a maximum height of three feet, and are conditioned upon obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Effect in accordance with Section 812 of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance. This height limitation extends to a point three feet beyond the front corner(s) of the primary structure.

***GE. FRONTAGE TYPE: Storefront Standards.

1. Definition: A Storefront means the area between the property line and main facade of the building when the building is located within 10 feet of the property line and which includes a ground floor elevation with a high percentage of transparent windows to create visual interest from the adjacent public sidewalk. THIS A Storefront FRONTAGE is traditionally used for retail, LIVE/WORK, AND OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE USES frontage and MAY typically includes a cantilevered canopy or awning.

***

H. FRONTAGE TYPE: COMMON ENTRY. THIS FRONTAGE TYPE IS APPROPRIATE WHEN AN ENTRANCE ON THE GROUND FLOOR IS REQUIRED AS THE MAIN ACCESS TO UPPER FLOOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL UNITS. THIS TYPE SHOULD BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER FRONTAGE TYPES TO ACHIEVE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR ACTIVE USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

REQUIREMENTS

of 110

1. A COLLECTIVE ENTRY TO A MULTI-TENANT LOBBY IS REQUIRED AT THE PRIMARY BUILDING ENTRANCE FACING THE STREET.

A. ENTRY SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A CLEAR ARCHITECTURAL DISTINCTION FROM THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

2. ENTRY GRADE: UP TO 60-INCH MAXIMUM FROM SIDEWALK GRADE.

3. IF THE FRONTAGE INCLUDES A STOOP ENTRANCE:

A. STOOP MINIMUM DIMENSION: 6-FEETB. MINIMUM AREA: 36 SQUARE FEET

4. STOOPS AND RELATED STRUCTURES MAY PROJECT INTO FRONTAGE SETBACKS NO MORE THAN 10 FEET.

I. FRONTAGE TYPE: FORECOURT. THE FORECOURT FRONTAGE TYPE IS APPROPRIATE FOR EITHER RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE FORECOURT MAY BE USED AS AN ENTRY COURT ANDSHARED GARDEN SPACE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES, OR AS ADDITIONAL SHOPPING OR RESTAURANT SEATING AREAS FACING THE STREET.

REQUIREMENTS

1. FORECOURTS ARE ALLOWED TO SETBACK FROM MAXIMUM SETBACK STANDARDS IN ALL CHARACTER AREAS.

2. FORECOURT AREAS SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 500 SQUARE FEET WITH A MINIMUM DIMENSION OF 20-FEET PARALLEL TO THE STREET.

3. A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 40-INCH OPEN VIEW FENCE PERMITTED AT OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS AND AT BUILDING SETBACK LINES.

4. VEHICULAR PARKING, LOADING AND MANEUVERING WITHIN THE FORECOURT ARE NOT PERMITTED.

5. A MINIMUM OF 50 PERCENT OF FORECOURT AREA SHALL BE SHADED, OF WHICH 50 PERCENT OF THE SHADE SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY TREES OR TRELLISED VINES.

6. RIGHT-OF-WAY SHADE REQUIREMENTS AS PER SECTION 1207.E.

of 110

ACTIVATION AND GLAZING

7. NON-RESIDENTIAL FORECOURTS: FORECOURT GROUND FLOOR SHOULD BE LINED WITH ACTIVE USES. 75 PERCENT MINIMUM GLAZING REQUIREMENT FOR FRONTAGES WITHIN THE FORECOURT.

8. GLAZING AT STREET FRONTAGE: MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF THE STOREFRONT AREA ALONG A PRIMARY STREET GROUND FLOOR FRONTAGE AND 50 PERCENT ON SECONDARY STREET GROUND FLOOR FRONTAGE.

J. FRONTAGE TYPE: PORCH. THIS FRONTAGE TYPE INCLUDES A COVERED STRUCTURE ENCLOSING AN OUTDOOR AREA DEEP ENOUGH TO ENSURE USABILITY. THE PORCH PROVIDES A TRANSITION BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACE, AND CREATES OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERACTION BETWEEN NEIGHBORS.

REQUIREMENTS

1. ENTRY GRADE: MAXIMUM OF FIVE FEET ABOVE ADJACENT GRADE

2. A PORCH IS REQUIRED AT THE PRIMARY BUILDING ENTRY.

3. A PRIMARY BUILDING ENTRANCE PER UNIT IS REQUIRED WHEN FRONTING A STREET.

4. MINIMUM DEPTH: 6-FEET5. MINIMUM WIDTH: 50 PERCENT OF THE

FAÇADE.6. PORCHES AND RELATED STRUCTURES

MAY PROJECT INTO FRONTAGE SETBACK NO MORE THAN 10 FEET.

***KG. Side Street Standards.

***

1206 Parking and Loading Standards and Guidelines.

A. Applicability. The following standards shall apply to all property within the Downtown Area unless modified by the Character Area.

B. DRIVEWAY STANDARDS. DRIVEWAY WIDTH: MAXIMUM 24 FEET.

CB. Parking AND LOADING Standards

1. VEHICLE PParking shall be provided in accordance with the following standards: with the exception that no parking is required for nonresidential uses in the Business Core and Warehouse Character Areas.

of 110

***2. No parking shall be allowed between the front of the building and sidewalk.

A. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS. NO VEHICLE PARKING OR MANEUVERING SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE FRONT YARD WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A DRIVEWAY NO GREATER THAN 16 FEET IN WIDTH.

***DC. Loading Standards. On-site loading bays shall be a minimum of ten feet in width

and 30 feet in length and be used for the standing, loading and unloading of vehicles.

***D. Driveway Standards. Driveway width: maximum 24 feet.

E. Parking and Loading Guidelines.

31. Parking and loading placement.

Off-street parking and loading should be provided in accordance with the following standards:

Parking and loading should only be allowed in the shaded area as shown in the diagram below, unless subterranean.

(1) FRONT SETBACK FROM STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY: MINIMUM 30 FEET OR BEHIND BUILDING (WHICHEVER IS LESS RESTRICTIVE)

(2) SIDE LANDSCAPE SETBACK FROM STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY: TEN FEET

(3) INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK: ZERO FEET

(4) REAR SETBACK: ZERO FEET

Key code for surface parking diagram: (1) front setback from street right-of-way: 30 feet or behind building (whichever is less restrictive), (2) side landscape setback from street right-of-way: ten feet, (3) interior side yard setback: zero feet, and (4) rear setback: zero feet.

42. Parking and loading access.

a. Pedestrian Streets should not have Pparking ANDor loading access if SHOULD BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: an alley or Side Street access is available.

of 110

PARKING AND LOADING ACCESS TABLE

CONDITIONS PRIMARY ACCESS SECONDARY ACCESS

COMPATIBLE ALLEY ANDCOMPATIBLE SIDE STREET(S)

ALLEY SIDE

COMPATIBLE ALLEY ANDPEDESTRIAN STREET

ALLEY ONLY PER SECTION 1224

COMPATIBLE SIDE STREET AND PEDESTRIAN STREET

SIDE ONLY PER SECTION 1224

2+ COMPATIBLE SIDE STREETS AND PEDESTRIAN STREET

SIDE SIDE OR PER SECTION 1224

PEDESTRIAN STREET ONLY SHARED ACCESS OR ONEPEDESTRIAN STREET.

PER SECTION 1224

***b. Driveways.

***Access may be from one of the Pedestrian Streets for projects with multiple Pedestrian Streets and no Side Street.

***(5) Site vehicular access should be provided according to the

following table:

Conditions Primary AccessSecondary Access

Compatible Alley and Compatible Side(s)

Alley Side

Compatible Alley and Front Street

Alley Only None

Compatible Side and Front Street

Side Only None

2+ Compatible Side Streets and Front Street

Side Side

of 110

Conditions Primary AccessSecondary Access

Front Street Only Shared Access or Refer to Section 1206.E.2.b.3

***53. Subterranean parking guideline. Subterranean parking may extend to a

height of five feet above finished grade; provided, that the garage perimeter wall either aligns with the face of the building, or becomes part of a stoop or dooryard frontage.

1207 General Standards and Guidelines.***

E. Shade Standards. All buildings over 5,000 square feet shall provide the following:

1. ALL BUILDINGS OVER 5,000 SQUARE FEET SHALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: A minimum of 75 percent of public sidewalks shall be shaded.

(A) A MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF PUBLIC SIDEWALKS SHALL BE SHADED.

2. A minimum of 50 percent of all accessible public and private open space areas shall be shaded, of which 50 percent of the shade shall be provided by trees or trellised vines. (B) A MINIMUM OF 50 PERCENT OF ALL ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC AND

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AREAS SHALL BE SHADED, OF WHICH 50 PERCENT OF THE SHADE SHALL BE PROVIDED BY TREES OR TRELLISED VINES.

3. Shade calculations shall be based on the summer solstice at 12:00 p.m. (C) SHADE CALCULATIONS SHALL BE BASED ON THE SUMMER

SOLSTICE AT 12:00 P.M.

4. Shade cast from a building shall count towards shade calculations. (D) SHADE CAST FROM A BUILDING SHALL COUNT TOWARDS

SHADE CALCULATIONS.

2. BUILDING ADDITIONS OF MORE THAN 500 SQUARE FEET SHALL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE SHADING REQUIREMENTS.

***1208 Biomed.

***

Streetscape Standards Matrix

of 110

Street Section

Minimum Building Setback

Maximum Building Setback

Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width

Minimum Streetscape Zone Width

***

4th StreetGarfield St. to Fillmore

St.

5' 10'Minimum

75%SD, S, GA,

FC6' 8'


St.

0' 5'Minimum

75%S, GA, FC 10' 10'

***


St.

5' 10'Minimum

75%SD, S, GA,

FC10' 10'

***

(AFY) Active Front Yard, (SD) Stoop/Door Well, (DY) Dooryard, (S) Storefront, (GA) Gallery/Arcade, (SY) Side Yard, (CE) COMMON ENTRY, (FC) FORECOURT, (PO) PORCH, (ALL) All Frontage Types

*ALTERNATIVE FRONTAGE TYPE MAY BE SELECTED AS PER SECTION 1205.B.

1209 Business Core.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


***

Taylor Street1st St. to 3rd St.

5' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, SY 8' 6'

Polk StreetCentral Ave. to 2nd St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, SY 8' 6'

of 110

***

Adams Street87th Ave. to 7th Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

ALL 5' 810'

Adams Street7th Ave. to 3rd Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Adams Street3rd Ave. to 2nd St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 10' 6'

Washington Street8th Ave. to 2nd St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 10' 6'

Washington Street2nd St. to 7th St.

0' 5' Minimum75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Jefferson Street8th Ave. to 3rd Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Jefferson Street3rd Ave. to 5th St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 10' 6'

Jefferson Street5th St. to 7th St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Madison Street8th Ave. to 7th Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Madison Street5th Ave. to 1st St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

of 110

Jackson Street7th Ave. to 5th Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Jackson Street4th Ave. to 1st Ave.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 8' 6'

Jackson Street1st St. to 4th St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

S, GA, CE 10' 6'

***

3rd AvenueFillmore St. to Van Buren St.

5' 10' Minimum 75%

SD, DY, S, GA, FC,

PO

8' 6'

***

8th AvenueAdams St. to Madison St.

5' 10' Minimum 75%

S, GA, SY 8' 6'

***

3rd AvenueFillmore St. to Van Buren St.

5' 10' Minimum 75%

SD, DY, S, GA, FC,

PO

8' 6'

***

5th StreetVan Buren St. to Jefferson St.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

S, GA, SY 8' 6'

***


(1) Per plans approved by Street Transportation Department.


of 110

1210 Central Park.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


Tonto StreetAlley west of 1st St. to 4th St.

5' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, POSY

5' 7'

Hadley StreetAlley west of 1st St. to 1st St.

5' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 7'

Hadley Street1st St. to 2nd St.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 7'

Hadley Street2nd St. to 4th St.

5' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, CE,

PO

5' 7'

1st StreetSouth of Grant St. to north of Buckeye Rd.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, PO

5' 7'

2nd StreetSouth of Grant St. to north of Buckeye Rd.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 7'

3rd StreetSouth of Grant St. to north of Hadley St.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 15'

4th Street 15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' None Required*

of 110

South of Grant St. to Hadley St.

AFY) Active Front Yard, (SD) Stoop/Door Well, (DY) Dooryard, (S) Storefront, (GA) Gallery/Arcade, (SY) Side Yard, (CE) COMMON ENTRY, (FC) FORECOURT, (PO) PORCH, (ALL) All Frontage Types

*Seven-foot front yard landscape required for developments with a net area greater than 20,000 square feet.

**ALTERNATIVE FRONTAGE TYPE MAY BE SELECTED AS PER SECTION 1205.B.

1211 Commercial Corridors.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


7th Avenue Corridor

***

Roosevelt StreetAlley east of 7th Ave. to alley west of 7th Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, SY

5' 6' or greater if

established

McKinley StreetAlley east of 7th Ave. to alley west of 7th Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, SY

5' 5' west of 7th Ave.

9' east of 7th Ave.

Pierce Street7th Ave. to alley west of 7th Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, SY

5' 5'

of 110

Fillmore StreetAlley east of 7th Ave. to alley west of 7th Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, SY

5' 7' or greater if

established

Central Avenue South Corridor

***

Grant Street2nd Ave. to 2nd St.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, SY

5' 10'

Sherman Street2nd Ave. to 1st Ave. crossover

5' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, SY

5' 6'

Hadley Street1st Ave. to alley east of Central Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, SY

5' 7'

Tonto Street1st Ave. to alley east of Central Ave.

5' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, SY

5' 7'

***

4th StreetTonto St. to Buckeye Rd.

10' 20' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, SY

5' 5'


*Seven-foot front yard landscape required for developments with a net area greater than 20,000 square feet.


of 110

1212 Downtown Gateway.***

Street Section

MinimumBuilding Setback


Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


***

McDowell Road1st Ave. to Alvarado Rd.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

SD, GA, S 8' 8'

***

1st AvenueAlley north of AlmeriaRd. to McDowell Rd.

5' 20' N/A SD, SY 8' 8'

1st AvenueRoosevelt St. to McKinley St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

SD, GA, S ALL

8' 8'

1st AvenueMcKinley St. to Fillmore St.

0' 5' Minimum 75%

SD, GA, SALL

8' 8'

***(AFY) Active Front Yard, (SD) Stoop/Door Well, (DY) Dooryard, (S) Storefront, (GA) Gallery/Arcade, (SY) Side Yard, (CE) COMMON ENTRY, (FC) FORECOURT, (PO) PORCH, (ALL) All Frontage Types


1213 East Evergreen.***

Building Standards Matrix

Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


of 110

Lynwood StreetWest of 7th St. to 4th St.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, PO 5' 5' North4' South

Willetta StreetWest of 7th St. to east of 3rd St.

15' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, PO 5' 14'

5th StreetSouth of McDowell Rd. to I-10 Freeway

5' 15' Minimum 50%

AFY, PO,DY, SY

5' 14'



1214 Evans Churchill East.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


Moreland Street3rd St. to 7th St.

10' 20' Minimum 75%

AFY, SD, DY, PO,

FC

5' 15'

Portland Street3rd St. to 7th St.

10' 20' Minimum 75%

AFY, SD, DY, PO,

FC

5' 15'

***


of 110


1215 Evans Churchill West.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


Moreland Street1st St. to 3rd St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, GA, SY

5' 15'

Portland StreetAlley east of Central Ave. to 3rd St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, GA, SY

5' 15'

***

Garfield StreetAlley east of Central Ave. to 4th St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, GA, SY

5' 15'

McKinley StreetAlley east of Central Ave. to 4th St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, GA, SY

5' 15'

Pierce StreetAlley east of Central Ave. to 2nd St. and 3rd St. to 4th St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, GA, SY

5' 10'

Fillmore Street

5' 15' Minimum 50%

DY, S, GA, SY

8' 6'

of 110

Alley east of Central Ave. to 5th St.

Fillmore Street1st St. to 2nd St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

DY, S, GA, SY

5' 10'

Fillmore Street2nd St. to 3rd St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

DY, S, GA, SY

5' North8' South

5' North7' South

Fillmore Street3rd St. to 5th St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

DY, S, GA, SY

8' North5' South

7' North10' South

***


(1) Per plans approved by Street Transportation Department.


1216 McDowell Corridor.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


***

Lynwood StreetEast of 7th Ave. (north side only)

15' 20' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 10'

Lynwood Street5th St. to west of 7th St.

15' 20' Minimum 75%

AFY, SD, DY, PO

5' 10'

of 110

***

5th AvenueAlley north of McDowellRd. to alley south of McDowell Rd.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, S, SY 5' 11'

3rd AvenueAlley north of McDowell Rd. to alley south of McDowell Rd.

5' 15' Minimum 75%

SD, S, SY 5' As Established

***

5th StreetMcDowell Rd. to Lynwood St.

5' 15' Minimum 50%

SD, S, SY 5' 15'

***


*Five-foot street side landscape setback required for developments greater than 20,000 square feet net area.


1217 Roosevelt East.***

Building Standards

Street Section

Minimum BuildingSetback


Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


of 110

***

McKinley Street3rd Ave. to alley west of 1st Ave.

0' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, SY

5' 10'

Fillmore Street3rd Ave. to alley west of 1st Ave.

0' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, SY

5' 10' North Side

6' South Side

***

2nd AvenueRoosevelt St. to McKinley St.

20' 20' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, S, PO,

FC

10'(1)

2nd AvenueMcKinley St. to Fillmore St.

10' 20' Minimum 75%

AFY, SD, S, PO, FC

10'(1)

3rd AvenueLatham St. to Roosevelt St.

0' 10' Minimum 50%

SD, DY, S, SY

6' As Established

3rd AvenueRoosevelt St. to McKinley St.

20' 20' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, S, PO, FC

6' 14'

3rd AvenueMcKinley St. to Fillmore St.

10' 20' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, S, PO, FC

6' 14'

of 110

(AFY) Active Front Yard, (SD) Stoop/Door Well, (DY) Dooryard, (S) Storefront, (GA) Gallery/Arcade, (SY) Side Yard, (CE) COMMON ENTRY, (FC) FORECOURT, (PO) PORCH, (ALL) All Frontage Types (1) Per plans approved by the Street Transportation Department


1218 Roosevelt North.***



1219 Roosevelt South.***


Street Section



Building Frontage

Allowed Frontage

Types

Minimum Sidewalk

Width


***

6th AvenueRoosevelt St. to Fillmore St.

20' 25' Minimum 50%

AFY, SD, DY, PO, FC, S

5' 6'


20' 25' Minimum 50%


5' 14'


20' 25' Minimum 50%


5' 15'

3rd AvenueRoosevelt St. to Fillmore St.

20' 25' Minimum 50%


5' 15'

of 110



1220 Townsend Park.***


*Five-foot street side landscape required for developments with a net area greater than 20,000 square feet.


1221 Van Buren.***



1222 Warehouse.***



***

of 110

Attachment B - Staff Report

Staff ReportZoning Ordinance Text Amendment

Z-TA-10-13

Application No Z-TA-10-13: A request to amend Chapter 12 Downtown Code of the Zoning Ordinance to address revisions to and elimination of conflicts, clean-up clerical issues, and to add new provisions.

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-10-13 as shown in the recommended text in Attachment A.

Purpose and Summary

The intent of the text amendment is to revise Chapter 12 (Downtown Code) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to address several improvements to the code, including removal of redundant text, reorganization or relocation of items into appropriate sections, clarification of terminology; to update the code to add new land use provisions as per adopted ordinances, add new frontage types to match those of the Walkable Urban (WU) Code, and to add flexibility language for public utility conflicts. The proposed language to be modified is contained in Attachment A.

Background

The Downtown Form-Based Code went into effect on April 3, 2010. Since the effective date and with the increase in development in downtown, staff and developers identifieda number of corrections that need to be made in order to address oversights andimprove clarity.

Description of the Proposed Text

Section 1201. Code Administration

Incorporate reference to PlanPHX as part of the intent for downtown

Remove and relocate shade requirement to Section 1207 (more appropriate placement)

Clarify language regarding standards and guidelines

of 110

Section 1204. LAND USE MATRIX

Remove eight land use conditions that are not applicable to any land uses in the Downtown Code

Add Single-family Attached (SFA) development option and conditions. The SFA development option was approved by the City Council within a specific area outside of downtown (2014 adopted ordinance)

Incorporate Farmers Markets provisions regarding Administrative Temporary Use Permit (ATUP, 2016 adopted ordinance) to match the remainder of the city

Outdoor Dining and Buffer Alley - correct land use condition for Van Buren Character Area in the Land Use Matrix

Land Use Matrix: Revise the numbering for land use conditions

Remove redundant land use condition for properties within the Arts, Culture, and Small Business Overlay.

Section 1205. FRONTAGE STANDARDS

Clarify the intent of this section and relocate general standards language for building frontages to this section

Add Flexibility language for Alternative Frontages, consistent with the adopted WU Code

Fence Standards (Historic Preservation properties and districts) - reduced redundancy by relocating provision from individual frontage types to the general standards section since this provision applies to any historic properties and districts

Add flexibility language for Projections in the Right-of-Way when development faces conflict with Public Utility Easements

Add Public Water/Sewer language regarding minimum height clearance (already in WU Code language, as per Public Works request)

Incorporate additional Frontage Types and descriptions (Common Entry, Forecourt, Porch). These frontages were not originally included in the Downtown Code but have been included in the adopted WU Code

Clarify definition for storefront frontage to include live-work

Section 1206. PARKING

Clean up and relocation of language

Parking diagram: Change the key code to a table format next to diagram for easier understanding (no new language added)

Parking and Loading Access Table: Delete original table and create a new table with headers, provide clarification for additional options and for secondary access; and replace the term ‘front’ street with pedestrian street (the term frontisn’t used in the DTC).

Section 1207. GENERAL STANDARDS

of 110

Relocate existing shade standard to this section and renumber items.

Sections 1208-1222. CHARACTER AREAS

Remove Side Yard frontage from the table and footnotes (there is no such frontage)

Incorporate the new Frontage Types (Common Entry, Forecourt, Porch) to the Streetscape Matrix under the “Allowed Frontage Type” column and add footnotes

Add foot note regarding Alternative Frontage type provision

of 110

ADDENDUM A

Staff Report: Z-TA-10-13 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment

August 8, 2017

Application No Z-TA-10-13: A request to amend Chapter 12 Downtown Code of the Zoning Ordinance to address revisions to and elimination of conflicts, clean-up clerical issues, and to add new provisions.

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Z-TA-10-13 as shown in the proposed text in Exhibit A.

Purpose and Summary

The intent of the text amendment is to revise Chapter 12 (Downtown Code) of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance to address several improvements to the code, including removal of redundant text, reorganization or relocation of items into appropriate sections, clarification of terminology; to update the code to add new land use provisions as per adopted ordinances, add new frontage types to match those of the Walkable Urban (WU) Code, and to add flexibility language for public utility conflicts. The proposed language to be modified is contained in Exhibit A.

Background

The Downtown Form-Based Code went into effect on April 3, 2010. Since the effective date, and with the increase in development in downtown, staff identified a number of corrections that need to be made in order to address oversights and improve clarity.

Reason for Addendum

Staff is proposing that public utility buildings and facilities be added as a land use to the Downtown Code. The Zoning Ordinance allows this use in other districts of the City and this addition to the Downtown Code will provide consistency with the rest of the Zoning Ordinance. As development continues to occur in the Downtown Code area, the public utility needs have increased and many current facilities are near capacity. The inclusion of this use in the Downtown Code will allow that public utility needs to be met for future development.

Attachment C

of 110

Staff has included conditions that must be met to ensure that the public utility building or facility is designed in a way that is cohesive and scaled with the surrounding neighborhood and character area.

Description of the Proposed Text Section 1204. LAND USE MATRIX

Add conditions under which public utility buildings and facilities may develop.

Include public utility buildings and facilities as an allowed land use to match the zoning ordinance and meet current and future utility needs.

Exhibits A: Proposed Language

of 110

Exhibit A

Proposed Language

1201 Code Administration.

A. Purpose And Intent. The purpose of the Code is to implement the vision, goalsand policies of the Downtown Phoenix Plan and provide the physical environmentnecessary to create a pedestrian-oriented, dynamic urban center with an authenticsense of place. The intent of the Downtown Code is to address design that impactsthe public realm by establishing standards and guidelines that will allow projects todevelop over time in a scale and character consistent with the Downtown PhoenixPlan AND WITH THE VISION AND GOALS OF PLANPHX.

B. Applicability. The Downtown Code applies to all land uses, subdivisions, anddevelopment within the boundary specifically identified in Section 1202.B andgenerally bounded by McDowell Road on the north, 7th Street on the east,Buckeye Road on the south, and 7th Avenue on the west. This boundary shall behereafter known as Downtown. If a conflict occurs between requirements of theDowntown Code and the remainder of the City of Phoenix Zoning Ordinance, therequirements of the Downtown Code shall prevail.

C. Approval Requirements. Each structure and land use shall be established,constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, altered, moved or replaced in compliancewith the following requirements:

1. The land use or function must be allowed by the Use Matrix in the CharacterArea where the site is located.

2. Development review approval must be obtained in accordance with Section507. of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance demonstrating compliance with thedevelopment standards and guidelines of the Downtown Code with theexception that building additions of more than 500 square feet shall berequired to meet the shading requirements in Section 1207.D. Developmentstandards are requirements and development guidelines are equivalent todesign presumptions.

3. STANDARDS ARE REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES ARE DESIGNPRESUMPTIONS.

43. Existing structures and land uses established legally at the time of adoptionof this Code shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 9,Nonconformities, of the Phoenix Zoning Ordinance.

54. Properties with Historic Preservation (HP) zoning are subject to theprovisions of Chapter 8, Historic Preservation, of the Phoenix Zoning

of 110

Ordinance in addition to the provisions of Chapter 12, Downtown Code. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of Chapter 8 and Chapter 12, the provisions of Chapter 8 shall prevail.

*** 1204 Land Use Matrix. A. Applicability: The land use matrix shall replace all existing allowed land uses in

the Downtown. B. Use Regulations. The regulations governing the uses of land and structures shall

be set forth in the Land Use Matrix, Section 1204.D, and land use conditions in Section 1204.C. Any use not specifically listed in the Use Matrix shall not be permitted. All uses listed will be permitted (p), permitted with conditions (pc), permitted with the approval of a special permit (sp), permitted with the approval of a use permit (up) or not permitted (np).

C. The following shall apply to uses that are permitted with conditions (pc) as

indicated with a number that corresponds with the Land Use Matrix in Section 1204.D:

Screening: 1. Outdoor uses or activities must be screened by a minimum 6-foot-high solid

fence or masonry wall. 2. Outdoor uses or activities must be screened by a minimum 8-foot-high solid

fence or masonry wall. Maximum Height: 3. No outdoor uses shall exceed a height of 10 feet. Spacing: 1 4. No use shall be located within 1,320 feet of the same type of use as

measured from the exterior walls of the building or portion thereof in which the use is conducted.

Separation: 25. The use shall not be located within 50 feet of a Buffer Alley identified on the

map in Section 1202.F as measured from the exterior walls of a building or portion thereof in which the use is conducted to the right-of-way line of the Buffer Alley.

of 110

36. The use shall not be located within 25 feet of a Buffer Alley identified on the map in Section 1202.F as measured from the portion of the property on which the use is conducted to the right-of-way line of the Buffer Alley.

Environmental Quality: 47. Noise, odor, dust, gas, heat, smoke, glare or vibration shall not be emitted at

any time by the use that exceeds the general or ambient level by uses immediately off-site as compared at the parcel boundary.

8. No amplified music or loudspeakers may be used outside. 59. No amplified music or loudspeakers may be used outside after 8:00 p.m. on

Sundays and after 10:00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays, unless a use permit is obtained.

610. The noise level, measured at any point on the received property, shall not

exceed 55 dBa unless a use permit is obtained. An occurrence where the sound level increases up to 60 dBa for five continuous seconds or less shall not be deemed a violation of this section as long as there are no more than five occurrences within an hour-long interval.

Maximum Size: 11. The use shall not exceed 650 square feet of building area. 712. The use shall not exceed 2,500 square feet of building area. 813. The use shall not exceed 5,000 square feet of building area per tenant,

unless a use permit is obtained. 914. The use shall not exceed 10,000 square feet of building area, unless a use

permit is obtained. 105. The use shall not exceed 25,000 square feet of lot area. 116. The use shall not exceed 25% of the total under roof area, unless a use

permit is obtained to enlarge to a maximum of 50% of the total under roof area.

127. The use shall not include more than 10 display vehicles. 18. The use shall not exceed 10% of the net floor area of the primary use. Maximum Persons: 19. The use may not be conducted for more than 5 persons.

of 110

1320. The use may not be conducted for more than 10 persons. 1421. The use may not be conducted for more than 12 persons. 1522. The use may not employ more than 1 nonresident person. Hours of Operation: 1623. The use is limited to Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays only. 1724. The use may not be conducted between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. 25. The use may not be conducted between the hours of 12 a.m. and 10 a.m.

from Sunday through Thursday, and between 2 a.m. and 10 a.m. from Friday through Saturday.

1826. The use may only be conducted between the hours of 10 a.m. and 12

midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and between 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. on Sundays, unless a use permit is obtained to extend the hours.

Location: 1927. The use may only occur on a site that is adjoining an arterial street. 208. Drive-through windows shall not face right-of-way and drive-through queuing

must be screened from the view from the right-of-way unless approval is obtained from the Design Review Committee.

219. Used/second hand merchandise cannot be received or processed at a site

in the Downtown Code Area for sale at another site. No outdoor sales or displays allowed.

2230. Outdoor crafting of art subject to the following: a. Must be associated with an enclosed business when the subject

parcel abuts an arterial or collector street. b. Storage of materials associated with the crafting area shall not

exceed eight feet in height and shall be limited to the rear or side yard.

c. Storage area shall be fully screened with a solid wall or landscaping. d. Storage of materials associated with the crafting area exceeding eight

feet in height shall be subject to obtaining a use permit in accordance

of 110

with the provisions of the Zoning Administrator section of the Zoning Ordinance.

231. Outdoor entertainment, subject to the following: a. Outdoor event or performances are open to the public. b. The outdoor event or performance must be presented by an existing

business on the property. c. The business’ regularly stocked items may be displayed outdoors and

be available for purchase during the event or performance. Payment for all items shall occur indoors. No other items may be displayed for sale outdoors during the event or performance.

324. The facility shall be licensed by the State as a producer, domestic

microbrewery or domestic farm winery. 2533. Drug, alcohol, other substance abuse or mental health rehabilitation

programs shall not be allowed as part of the shelter services. 26. FARMERS MARKETS, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: A. OBTAINING AN ADMINISTRATIVE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT

(ATUP) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 708 IF NO FOOD OR BEVERAGE IS DISPENSED FROM A VEHICLE.

B. OBTAINING A USE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

PROVISIONS OF SECTION 307 IF FOOD OR BEVERAGE IS DISPENSED FROM A VEHICLE.

C. ON-SITE OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS

MAY BE STIPULATED AS A CONDITION OF AN ATUP OR USE PERMIT APPROVAL

27. SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: A. HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGNATED PROPERTIES OR

PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION DISTRICTS CANNOT USE THE SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DEVELOPMENT OPTION.

B. INDIVIDUAL UNIT LOT: MINIMUM 20’ WIDTH, NO MINIMUM

DEPTH.

of 110

C. PERIMETER STANDARDS: MAXIMUM 10' FOR UNITS FRONTING STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY; MINIMUM 15' FOR UNITS SIDING STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY. THIS AREA IS TO BE IN COMMON OWNERSHIP OR MANAGEMENT. 10' ADJACENT TO PROPERTY LINE.

D. BUILDING SETBACKS, INDIVIDUAL UNIT LOT: NONE. E MAXIMUM STORIES: AS PER HEIGHT MAP, SECTION 1202.C. F. LOT COVERAGE PER DWELLING UNIT: 100% G. COMMON AREAS: MINIMUM 5% OF GROSS AREA H. ALLOWED USES: SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED AND HOME

OCCUPATIONS PER SECTION 608 I. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PER SECTION 507 J. DESIGN: FRONT OF UNITS SHOULD FACE RIGHT OF WAY. NO

GARAGES ALLOWED TO FACE PEDESTRIAN OR SIDE STREETS.

28. PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES, SUBJECT TO THE

FOLLOWING: A. PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED

WHEN NECESSARY FOR SERVING THE SURROUNDING TERRITORY.

B. AN ALTERNATIVE FRONTAGE TYPE PER SECTION 1205.B. AND

WHICH MIMICS AN ALLOWED FRONTAGE TYPE PER THE CHARACTER AREA STREETSCAPE STANDARDS FOR THE SITE’S LOCATION, IS REQUIRED, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF, OR AN APPEAL IS APPROVED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC).

C. THE USE CANNOT BE LOCATED ON A TRANSIT STREET OR

ADJACENT TO HANCE PARK. D. Land Use Matrix.

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central Park

Commercial Corridor

Dntn Gatewa

y

East Evergree

n

Evans Churchill East

Evans Churchill West

McDowell

Corridor Rooseve

lt East Roosevelt North

Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

Residential Uses

Assisted Living Home

pc14 pc14 pc14,20 pc14,1320 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14 pc14

***

Group Home pc14 pc14 pc14,1320

pc14,1320 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14 pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pc14,1320

pC,14 pc14

Live-Work x p p pc116, 1522

p p p p p p p np p p p p

SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED

NP NP PC27 NP NP PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27 PC27

Assembly Uses

***

Day Care, Nursery School

x p p pc1320, 1522

p p pc1320, 1522

p p p p pc1320, 1522

pc1320, 1522

p p p

***

General Retail Sales and Related Service Uses

Artist Studio/Gallery

x p p Pc 47, 610, 1724

p p* Pc 47, 610, 1724

p* p* p Pc 47, 610, 1724

np Pc 47, 610, 1724

p p p

***

ACCESSORY ONLY TO BAR/LOUNGE/NIGHT CLUB

***

Brew Pub, Domestic Microbrewer

x Up2432

Up2432

np Up2432 Up2432 Up2432 Up2432 Up2432 Up2432 Up2432 np Up2432 Up2432 Up2432

p2432

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central Park

Commercial Corridor

Dntn Gatewa

y

East Evergree

n



McDowell

Corridor Rooseve


Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

y, Domestic Farm Winery

***

Farmers Market

x PC26up

PC26up

np PC26up PC26up PC26up PC26up PC26up PC26up PC26up np PC26up PC26up PC26up

PC26up

***

Restaurant x p p np p* p* pc712 p* p* p p* np pc25* p p p

ACCESSORY ONLY TO RESTAURANT/BREW PUB

***

- Outdoor Cooking

x up Pc 47, 1623

np up up np up up up up np np up up up

- Outdoor Dining

x p p np pc36* p* np p* p* p p* np pc25* p pc35 p

***

Retail Sales x p p np pc105 p pc712 pc914 pc105 pc105 pc914 np pc914 pc813 p p

Second Hand/Used Merchandise Sales

x pC219 pC219 np pc105, 219 pC219 pc 712, 219

pc 914, 219

pc105, 219

pc105, 219

pc 914, 219

np pc 914, 219

pc 813, 219

pC219 pC219

***

Services

Appliance Repair

x pc 47, 610, 1724

np np pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

np pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

pc 47, 610, 1724

np np pc 47, 610, 1724

p p

***

UTILITY AND Transportation Uses

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central Park

Commercial Corridor

Dntn Gatewa

y

East Evergree

n



McDowell

Corridor Rooseve


Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

- Motor Vehicle Rentals

x up pc127 np up pc127 np sp sp sp sp np np sp up up

- Motor Vehicle Sales (new) and Leasing

x sp pc127 np pc127 pc127 np sp sp sp sp np np sp pc127 pc127

- Motor Vehicle Service Station, Fuel Sales

x np sp np up1927 np np np np up1927 np np np np sp np

PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28 PC28

***

Accessory Uses and Facilities

***

Dependent Care Facility

up p up p p pc 214 p p p p up pc 214 p p p

Drive-Through

np np np pc1927, 208

np np np np pc1927, 208

np np np np np np

***

Home Occupation AS PER SECTION 608.E.3

p p pc22 p* p* pc22* p* p* p* p* pc22 p* p p p

Outdoor Crafting of Art

up up up p* 2230 up* up p*2230 p*2230 p2230 p*2230 up np* up up p2230

of 110

LAND USE CATEGORIES

CHARACTER AREAS

ACTIVE USE

BioMed BC

Central Park

Commercial Corridor

Dntn Gatewa

y

East Evergree

n



McDowell

Corridor Rooseve


Roosevelt South

Townsend Park

Van Buren

Warehouse

***

Outdoor Entertainment

x up pc 47, 16, 23,

31

np up* pc 59, 16, 23, 1826*,3

1

up pc 59, 16, 23, 1826*,3

1

pc 59, 16, 23, 1826*,3

1

up up* np up* up pc 47, 16, 23,

31

pc 47, 16, 23, 31

Pocket Shelter (accessory to Religious Assembly only)

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

pc 1320, 2533

REPAIR AND/OR STORAGE FACILITIES (ACCESSORY TO PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING AND FACILITIES ONLY)

UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP UP

***

of 110


City Council Report


West Ground Transportation Center Update

This report provides an update on a potential development opportunity at Phoenix SkyHarbor International Airport (Airport) associated with the future West GroundTransportation Center (West GTC) of the PHX Sky Train (Train) extension.


SummaryThe East Economy lot and garages contain nearly 9,500 of the Airport's 11,000economy parking spaces. The East Economy parking facility is served by the Train andoffers affordable parking rates and convenient access to the Airport terminals. Thefacility regularly fills to capacity due to high demand. By contrast, the West Economylot has just over 1,500 surface parking spaces with neither bus nor Train service. With86 percent of the parking inventory, the Airport's economy parking options are heavilyweighted to the east end of the Airport. This disproportionality causes approximatelyhalf of the 800,000 economy parkers living on the west side of the Airport to drive pasttheir terminal each year in order to park. This condition will be further magnified by theclosure of Terminal 2 and the associated West Economy lot by 2021.

In October 2016 the Phoenix City Council authorized the airport to proceed with thecompletion of the Train. Construction of this final stage of the Train will extend thesystem's transit access to the Rental Car Center, a future West GTC, and makeprovision for a station at a future west terminal location.

It is anticipated that new commercial development opportunities will be created aroundthe new West GTC station. This station is expected to provide an opportunity to betterserve the parking and ground transportation needs of Phoenix residents who live westof the Airport. With its strategic location near 24th Street and Buckeye Road, the WestGTC station could potentially be a dense, multi-modal hub including a new WestEconomy parking garage, commercial ground transportation options, and othercommercially viable development. This location would be particularly convenient forPhoenix residents in the central and western parts of the city who could easily accessa West Economy parking garage using Interstate-10, or Buckeye Road. With itsconnection to the METRO Light Rail at 44th Street and Washington, the first stage of

of 110


the Train leveraged the public's investment in mass transit. The second stage willfurther leverage the Airport's close proximity to the downtown area and freeway accessto the rest of the city.

A Request for Information (RFI) was issued on May 5, 2017 to developers interested indevelopment on the West GTC station site. Six responses were received by the July14, 2017 due date. The respondents supported the need for additional parking on thewest side of the airport, and expressed interest in building a new West Economygarage. Based upon the results of the RFI submissions, staff recommends furtherconsideration of West Economy parking garage options at the West GTC station site. Ifapproved, staff would evaluate these options and report back to the Downtown,Aviation, Economy and Innovation subcommittee regarding potential developmentconcepts.

Concurrence/Previous Council ActionThis report was reviewed by the Business and Development Subcommittee on Oct. 5,2017, and by the full Phoenix Aviation Advisory Board at its meeting on Oct. 19, 2017.

Public OutreachThe Airport held a public pre-response meeting to discuss the RFI process withinterested developers on May 22, 2017.



of 110


City Council Report


FAA Flight Path Update

This report provides an update to the Downtown, Aviation, Economy and InnovationSubcommittee on progress made by the Aviation Department in addressing noiseissues created by the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) implementation of newflight paths at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.


SummaryOn Sept. 18, 2014, the FAA implemented new flight paths without any process forpublic input. The new flight paths caused significant hardship to communities under theflight paths due to aircraft noise. In April 2015, at the direction of the City Council, theAviation Department adopted a strategy to advocate on behalf of the community.

This monthly flight path update specifically recognizes the efforts of the City Council,our federal delegation, and community advocates over the three-year period since theFAA’s implementation of new flight paths.

Community OutreachAviation Department staff continues to attend community meetings and is available todiscuss noise issues with any group. Workshops can be held at any time to exchangeinformation, if residents desire. All information is posted online to keep residentsinformed of all activity.

Legislation/LobbyingAviation Department staff is in frequent contact with Holland & Knight, the City’sfederal public affairs consultant in Washington, D.C., which is continuing to provideinformation to help enable legislation and keeping the City updated on the proceedingsin Washington, D.C.

LitigationNearly three years after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) changed the flightpaths without notifying the community, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District ofColumbia Circuit ruled in favor of the City and the neighborhoods on Aug. 29, 2017.

of 110


The ruling indicates that the FAA will need to return to the routes in place prior toSeptember 2014 until it conducts a new environmental process. Attorneys for the Cityof Phoenix are studying the decision to understand the process moving forwardregarding what changes will be made and when.


of 110

downtown, aviation, economy and 200 w. washington … council meeting files...phoenix city hall 200...

Documents