Flagstaff Planning Commission approves Miltown zoning amendment reducing project to 265 units despite parking dispute

Can you hear online? Okay. Yes. Thank you. Okay, I'd like to call the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission for Wednesday, February 25th to order. Um, pursuant Excuse me, I always have a runny nose. Sorry.

Pursuant to ARS 38431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the commission and to the general public that at this meeting the commission may vote to go into executive session which will not be open to the public for legal advice and discussion with the commission commission's attorney on any item listed on the follow on this agenda pursuant to ARS 38-431.03A3. 03 A3 it um roll call. Carol Mandino present. Joshua Mayor present. Christine Shehy here. CJ Luki present. Mary Norton present.

Ian Sharp excused. And Megan Weller excused. Thank you. Thank you. It's open call to the public at this time. Any member of the public may address the commission on any subject within our jurisdiction that is not scheduled before the commission today. Due to open meeting laws, the commission cannot discuss or act on items presented during this portion of the agenda. to address the commission on an item that is on the agenda.

Please wait for me to call um for public comment at the time the item is heard. Is there any um open call um from the public? Yeah. Seeing nothing here and nothing online, we will move on to approval of the minutes of the regular meeting from February 11th, 2026. If I can move to approve. Um there was a motion made by um Commissioner Luki to approve the minutes. Is there a second? Second. And um Commissioner Maher has seconded the motion. Is there any discussion, corrections to the minutes?

Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Hearing none. The motion carries. Now we'll move on to um item 5A which is the public hearing for a direct ordinance zoning map amendment. Um and I'll ask oh Alex to present. All right. We're here tonight to talk about Miltown. This is a direct to ordinance zoning map amendment. Um I'm Alexandra Puchelli, current planning manager. Um this is a request to amend the 2018 zoning map amendment with a revised site plan.

So because that zoning map amendment was a direct to ordinance, the ordinance associated with that reszone was tied to a specific site plan and the applicant is requesting to amend that site plan. Um the 2018 uh amendment was approved. It permitted mixeduse development consisting of 23,200 square feet of commercial development in conjunction with a 348 unit 1,186 bed rooming and boarding facility.

Um that's slightly different from multifamily in that you can the leases can be for individual rooms. Um, the current proposal is for a horizontal mixeduse development consisting of a 265 unit multifamily residential development and 19,500 square ft of commercial space on three pads on lot one. So, this is um the vicinity map. It's right on Milton Road. Um, we're really going to focus on that lot one, that biggest lot. Uh, to the west of lot one is tract A.

Um, which is, um, tree resources, open space. There's a path that runs through there. Um, lot two is a second retail um, lot. It has one pad on it. It looks super tiny here, but that's because um eventually it will include the old right ofway from university, a little bit of it. Um that'll allow for for development on that site. And then there's track B, which is the tiniest little sliver that is also some resources as well as some storm water um facilities.

So this proposal, the zoning remains the same. It would be highway commercial with the resource protection overlay. Uh the development proposed is a fourstory multifamily building that's at the west portion of the site. So on this map, it's kind of to the top of that lot one. Um then there's uh surface parking and then down near Milton there are three commercial paths. So I really want to focus tonight on the changes um that are being proposed with this new site plan.

So, first looking at that residential component, there are 63% fewer three, four, and five bedroomedroom units. So, there used to be 266 of these larger units, and the new proposal has 95. Um, there are also 24% fewer units overall. So there were 348, now we're looking at 265. Uh, another big change is the bedrooms because we got rid of those bigger units. There's now 56% fewer bedrooms. So instead of 1,186 bedrooms, it's 669. Um, the residential building has one less story.

So, it went from a fivestory building down to a fourstory building. And even though the eve height is about the same, so um the height of the wall itself before the roof is on top, um the overall building height is about the same. I believe that is due to the roof form itself. I think the prior um the prior proposal had more flat roofs and this has an actual sloped roof over it. Then looking at changes to the commercial component. Um there's now being proposed a second drive-thru on lot one.

Um the previous site plan was just showing one drive-thru. Now we have two on either side of that driveway off of Milton. Um I did say there's elimination of screening at pad 3 and but we may want to talk to the applicant about that because looking at the site plan I'm not seeing the screening but looking at some of their floor plans and elevations of the commercial components there may be um which in my opinion would be a good thing.

Um, another change proposes the elimination of the parking garage. This project will have surface parking only. Um, there were 965 residential garage spaces and 147 commercial surface parking spaces. And the current proposal provides 502 total surface parking spaces on site. and the elimination of that structured parking does a lot to reduce the bulk of that residential building. So looking at the commercial component um pads one and two also eliminated the appearance of a second story.

Um there there is a there is some text in the regional plan that talks about in commercial act in these activity centers that we want twostory buildings. Um the the proposed commercial development has always been proposed as singlestory, but sometimes there is a push to have this I call it like Disneyland, but this sort of faux second story that makes it look like something's going on upstairs when there's not.

Um, this project is trying to be more efficient with their building materials and and cost of construction, whatnot, and just eliminating that kind of fake second story component. Um, there is a slight reduction of commercial space. It the numbers kind of shift around a little bit and I'm not surprised by that. I think that as developers get further in a project and start working with actual possible tenants that they can kind of nail down that specific um square footage.

So overall looking at both lot one and lot two um you know there's a change less than a thousand square feet I think it's really not that big. Um I included here the proposed unit mix. Um so you can see I won't dwell on this too much but um you can see this this positive change for onebedroom two bedrooms and then eliminating these um larger three four five bedrooms and then just the total lowering of the number of units on the site.

Um, as we've as staff has been working with the applicant on their development agreement, um, we've been one of the the items that we've been working together on our affordable housing unit. Um, currently the proposal is for 12 units. Um, they are to be subsidized a minimum of 30% below market rate as measured against comparable units in the project. um that allows a maximum household income limit of 120% of the AMI and would be in effect for 10 years.

Now, keep in mind the applicant is not using any incentives tied to the affordable housing um provision. So that gives us a little more flexibility of what these units can be like, how many um and terms of that that agreement.

Um the 2018 proposal, if anyone was around during that, um originally the large primarily residential building had a comp commercial commercial component in it that was actually eliminated during the hearing process and turned into additional units that were supposed to be marketed towards seniors, if that was legal. little it got a little um a little squirrely there, but um there my understanding is that that old DA had included 22 units.

Um again, subsidized a minimum of 30% below market value. Um it also contained a piece that said tenants could not be full-time undergraduate students. Now, keep in mind I mentioned that was a room and board facility. So, that design was much more focused on student population than the current design, which is a much broader um demographic that might be interested in living in this. Um so, the idea was we'll probably have enough students. Let's not allow students to take advantage of this.

Um, I my understanding is that we're a little more open to why wouldn't you support someone who qualifies for affordable housing to be able to take advantage of that while they put themselves through school. So, um, and it had the same the idea that's in effect for a period of 10 years.

And I also want to note that the development agreement at this point does have a component that says that you know both parties are willing to talk and negotiate after that 10 years and see if we want to extend extend it longer. Uh so the site plan review was approved by staff on October 7th of 2025 and was subject to the approval of this um zoning map amendment. Here I'm showing you the floor plan. Teeny tiny little floor plan. Um but you can see it's four stories.

Those highlighted blue areas are kind of amenities and common space um for the units. And then it also has these courtyards that have further amenities. I'm sure the applicant will will discuss. And here are elevations of this building. I think overall the building has been simplified which is something that our zoning code in our architectural design standards actually encourages the use of less materials and um simpler forms.

So you can see the east elevation facing Milton Road, the west elevation facing where that tract is and all the trees um closer to that the new roundabout that we have. And here are proposed floor plans for the commercial components. I I had to rotate them and lay them out for my brain to match up with what was shown on the site plan.

So you can see both pad one and pad two have this component of a drive-thru option and then pad three which is this larger retailer and that loading dock that's the area where where may or may not have some screening. Um and here are some elevations. I just took the elevations to show you from Milton because I think that's unless we're shopping there and eating there. I think that's kind of the primary view that we'll see. Um so you can see these three examples of that.

Um I imagine that the applicant will have some more beautiful renderings to share with you. uh parking, so on-site parking. Um based on the zoning code in place at the time, um the required parking would be spaces. The applicant did do a parking demand study um to support 52 spaces. And that parking study included things like um how it's so close to transit. There's that new pedestrian underpass that so there's a lot of multimodal um transportation right in the vicinity. It's close to shopping.

So there could be the ability to to park once and do a bunch of errands in the area or to live there and just be able to walk to do errands. Um staff approved the study but also with a condition that the applicant secure 65 additional off-site parking spaces. This was really sort of a safety net of if we start running into problems with parking and people being irresponsible in their parking. Do we know that we have somewhere else that we can that we can put those cars?

Um, so the applicant has been working with a couple different locations um that I'm sure they'll discuss and staff feels comfortable with with um with that agreement. Um, and as I mentioned, that previous proposal did include a fivestory parking garage. So, we have less parking on site. We don't need this giant garage and the the carbon footprint of a giant concrete structure in the middle of this uh looking at public system impact analyses.

Again, I'm we really tried to focus on what was being proposed to be changed. So because this came in previously and did a traffic impact analysis and did a water and sewer impact analysis and this the project as a whole has less of an impact on our infrastructure, there really wasn't a need to make them do go through that all over again. We were able to to use those previous analyses.

storm water went they went ahead and provided a um a drainage statement essentially saying yes, it'll still work. Um so we're all good with storm water. So let's look at the findings. Finding number one is conformance with the general plan. Um this is in an existing suburban activity center. I think technically it's probably in three. Um so definitely an area where we want to see that multimodal and pedestrian activity. Um the regional plan density asks for 14 plus units an acre.

Um and this project has 26 units per acre proposed. Um the high occupancy housing specific plan was adopted after this project got approval after technically sort of concurrently it was it was moving along. Um this proposed project actually this proposed project actually does Thanks Don. Thanks Don. if you can mute yourself or Nancy can. Um, so this project actually does not trigger high occupancy housing. It has less than 30 units an acre. It has um less than 75 bedrooms per acre.

I put greater than because I'm saying that's HOA by definition in the specific plan is greater than and this project is less. So So we have a question. my math right while you're on that note. Yes. Um, but wouldn't it not be triggered by the still having more than 30% of fourbedroom and five bedroomedroom units or the bath count? Well, so if it were understanding so there there's two different components here. One is timing.

Well, the biggest one in both is timing, but also this project when it first came through was was um locked into a certain version of the code and the applicant actually went back to council and asked that they could continue to use that version of code. So, we're actually not looking at what the zoning code says about high occupancy housing. We can only look at the specific plan.

And if you remember the specific plan and its definition of high occupancy housing was actually much different than what what happened eventually with the zoning code and the high occupancy housing. Um so then when we look at goals and policies of the general plan um again because so much of this project remains the same um a lot of that old analysis is still in effect um but to make some general statements this project supports our housing goals.

Um there is this great focus on multimodal transportation goals as well. The applicant um again timing wise um we also had our we had um the climate action plan get um approved and so the applicant has come forward and offered these energy efficiency design components that will be included in that residential component.

So in that because of the inclusion of that in addition to this multimodal it's it's meeting a lot of these new um goals and policies in the regional plan um from that perspective. So finding number one is met. Uh finding number two is community benefits and public good. Um, the project's going to provide 265 units within walking distance of NAU, shopping, dining, transit stops. Um, it advances the general plan's goals for compact growth, housing diversity, and sustainability.

A lot of that's tied to the fact that this is an infill development in an area with a lot of existing infrastructure. Um, and then energy efficiency building materials. um native landscaping, the open space amenities, especially that tract A to the west um is creating a healthy living environment. Um so staff determined that that finding number two was met. And then finding number three is that the site is physically suitable. Um and a lot of this happens with that site plan review.

um staff has determined that meets applicable codes and requirements as well that it mitigates any impacts determined by those impact analyses. Um you know a lot of a lot of the impacts that were determined initially have been resolved through that partnership and the development of the roadway in that area.

And um the development agreement amendment that I sort of alluded to um planning and zoning doesn't have too much of a say, but just as a heads up, um there is that affordable housing commitment component as well as those sustainability um elements. uh for citizen participation. Um the applicant held a neighborhood meeting on August 19th of 2025. One person attended. Um staff waved the requirement for the second meeting and has not received any comments to date. So staff has a recommendation.

I can read through this later. Um, and if you have any questions for me, I'd be happy to. So, um, I do have a question and then I'll ask other commissioners. No. So, um, this is the comment section from commissioner. So, um, on the 12 units that are for affordable housing, usually it's a 30-year period. Is that because they're not using incentives that they're only doing it for a 10-year period? Yes. Okay. So, if you don't do it as an incentive, you can choose your period of time, right?

Because we legally we can't require affordable housing. So the only way to typically the only way we get it is by incentivizing it. So we say, "Oh, you you know, you can't you can't manage to save enough trees. How about some affordable housing? We'll lower that requirement and you you don't want to do as much parking.

Let's we can lower that with affordable units." But when it's not when it's not utilizing those incentives, like I said, it gives us a little more flexibility as far as what those units, you know, how many what the terms of them are, for how long. So, okay. Thank you. My other questions will be for the applicants. Okay. Any other um comments or questions for staff? Mary, I needed to clarify something. Um, on with regard to parking and reduction allowances in the 2016 code.

Was the was there and was it the only reduction allowed was for bike parking and and proximity to public transit? I believe in the previous application um staff did some some studies on parking demand at multifamily primarily student focused um developments and came up with like a percentage of bedrooms to parking spaces that was around.7 something parking spaces. per bedroom. Um, this project may have utilized something similar back then.

Um, so yes, because in the parking configuration right now, they're relying on um the 15% reduction that was for bike parking and and proximity to public transit in 2016 code.

So I just wanted to say so those which is the same it was there and it's here um that's been pretty consistent in code and and just to clarify I'm sure they'll mention it but there is um there's a bike route that runs through through the uh the site um there's al you know the foots trail is nearby the underpass so there's a lot of um infrastructure in place to encourage bike parking as well as I believe they made some commitments for like bike hooks and bike parking and things like that.

Any other comments or questions from commissioners? Then if the applicant has a presentation Chair, Commissioner, so nice to see you. Lindsay Shouy, uh, with Law Firm of Gamage and Burnham, 40 North Central, Phoenix, Arizona 85004. So, thank you so much. Nice to see you again. Some of you in person again online last time, but nice to see you all. So, thanks for this opportunity to to be here.

I was trying to think of jokes to make about Miltown um about you know I I know I I we don't even I don't even I was trying to convince Gamage and Burnham to buy me a house or a condo or something but not yet. U my husband and daughter did come up and ski on Sunday. So yes, you you've got a lot of shoe here all the time. It's a lovely lovely place to be. Uh you know that this has been around for a really long time.

And at the time of the original approval in 2018, I wasn't the attorney of record. It was Carolyn Oberholtzer, but but Walter Crutchfield of Vintage Partners and Carolyn, you know, worked with the the planning commission and the council at the time and and got, you know, a project approved that they believed was right for that time. And I'm going to take you through a little bit more of the history, but as U. Michelle McNelte likes to say, right, the truth changes, right? Everything changes.

sustainability goals change, the demands of the community change, the development in Flagstaff has changed. So, we're really excited to be here in front of you. Again, as Alex mentioned, it's HR to H or HC to HC, right? So, so we're resoning to the same thing. Um, we have come forward with a number of different projects in between 2018 and now. have worked really closely with Alex and Michelle and the rest of their staff to to bring something.

But the minor, you know, because your process is so complicated. Oh, louder. Oh, I'm never Hey, I will be I'm I'm never told to be louder, but I'll do that. Uh, no problem at all. Um, thank you for that, Commissioner Nordon. um because of the minor modification process is is so specific um in order to amend the architecture, amend the unit type that's more appropriate. We really couldn't do Oh, there we go. I we couldn't do the minor modification process.

So that's why we're here in front of you. Again, it's a it's an amendment to the site plan, but we have to go through the reszone process to do that. So, Lindsay Shouy, I've got Sean Craig from Gamage and Burnham here as well. Uh, Walter Crutchfield from Vintage Partners, who many of you know, Germo is in the audience, our great civil engineer. Um, our architecture group is KTGY and Norris Design.

And then as well, we have Don Cardier online who can speak to um traffic and and our parking our parking study. And Commissioner Norton will touch on some of those questions. And and this is some of the lovely architecture, right?

You may remember not remember the last iteration, but we are aiming to bring to you a right-sized development, more sustainable building materials, a more sustainable development, um, and modern architecture that that now is going to align with the rest of the development that has happened along Milton since this was approved in 2018.

So, Vintage Partners, I don't think I have to tell any of you too much about Vintage Partners, but as you know, Arizona based real estate development firm, you know, multi-generational Arizonans who really care about the state of Arizona. Um, dedicated to enhancing communities. Um, as you know, Uptown Plaza down in the valley, the Rise Hotel, right, which was the adaptive reuse of two old office buildings to turn into a really cool, funky hotel at Camelback and Third Avenue.

And then, I mean, the diversity of housing types that Vintage has brought to Flagstaff.

It's really nice to now have seen timber sky build out um market rate rental build to rent big a affordable housing with Sierra on 66 right 221 big a affordable units 40 units of habitat for humanity the tall and skinnies that capstone is putting up uh right we all want to be tall and skinny uh the forale town homes homes that are now you know multi-million dollar homes Who would have guessed for, you know, 2,000 square feet, but the full diversity of housing types and then with the with the addition of Miltown, I think Vintage has brought every housing type that you could ask for um to Arizona uh dark sky compliant um and really worked hard with uh Low Observatory to to have the most stringent dark sky uh parameters on all of their communities.

So again, I'm sure many of you know this, right?

We're all familiar faces in here and you guys have followed the history but this all started with a P3 and not just one public right but two public ADOT right we all remember when AOT was in this location AOT had to relocate so um so they were involved with the city the city wanted to realign Bulan University add the and add a very nice pedestrian underpass that we'll talk about too um and they needed a private developer to come bring it all together. So again, that's how this all started.

In 2018, a site plan was approved. Again, a much larger size, scale, feel, not as sustainable development, but it was approved and that's what's on the site today, right? So, if this reszone doesn't get approved, then we still have those approvals on there and they're still valid. In 2020, ADOT's new headquarters opened.

uh Vintage Partners did uh again adaptive reuse uh and Walter I'm not going to do it justice and explain it as well as you do but you know took the old Harkkins and moved AOT in there and it's one of the greenest government buildings that you guys have here in Flagstaff. So Vintage paid for all that moved AOT into their new headquarters. 2024 University Embula roundabout opens. Thank goodness, right?

I'm sure for city staff who is sick of getting calls of complaints of driving on Milton as well as that unbelievable pedestrian underpass that Vintage contributed for contributed to um and helped make that a reality. Uh oh, the underpass, I guess, didn't open till 2025. Uh and now we're looking, this is the last piece of the puzzle, the last piece of the P3 is the the development of this horizontal mixeduse development. So, Alex did a great job, right? This parcel is now all cut up.

Um, and so you see again, it's approximately 12 acres and the four parcels, some of them are used for open space. Uh, lot one, as as Alex described, is where the bulk of the development is, but there also is an opportunity for another retail pad out there for commercial. Again, we're surrounded by NA, big box retailers, hotel, and restaurants. So, the zoning at HC is compatible with the the balance of the zoning around This is our new building. I love it.

It looks not that I didn't like the old architecture, but new architect. Um, I think this really kind of speaks to the the feel and the flavor of Flagstaff. Again, more sustainable building materials. Uh, smaller scale and scope. We have the same three again speaking to lot one, right? The three commercial pads. Two are kind of restaurant oriented with a drive-through opportunity. Uh, the other the larger Um pad as Alex walked you through is designed for a specialty ger.

Uh again reszone highway commercial to highway commercial. We're just amending the site plan and we have to go through the full direct to ordinance reszone process. We do have less dwelling units. Um however importantly you know uh my a major reduction in the large format units. Um I actually did follow the reszone even though I wasn't representing the case. I I sat at home and watched it as I've told you before. I sit at home and watch these things sometimes. It's very silly.

My family wants me to get a life. Uh but I did watch this and you know the complaints were it's too big, too many large format units. We heard that and that's also what the community wants, right? A major increase in uh the one uh and twobedroom units. Uh yeah, but the three commercial pads are about the same again. Yes. 63% less large format units, which I think is really important. So, again, we're modifying the site plan as you can see here, right? The three commercial pads uh in pink.

Uh the floor plans, I'm not going to show the level of detail that Alex did on the different floor plans. Um but great amenity spaces in there as well. Uh, no. Yeah, just mixeduse developments, still providing the commercial uses and and no requests to deviate any of the development standards. Alex took us through the three findings, but I will do that again and kind of highlight some of the amazing things that we brought. So, the first one uh conform with the regional plan and specific plan.

And Commissioner Norton, that gets to kind of your question about the specific plan, HOH, and I'll touch on that. uh will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare and add to the public good. Um third is physically suitable uh to ensure the the the request or zone is is appropriate um and that we meet all of the impact studies and all of those things as Alex touched on. So we are consistent with the regional plan.

That was a finding of staff and I agree right it's HC to HC. Um we have retail restaurants. Uh we we do have a the accommodation for a specialty ger there. Um and as far as the specific plan is concerned, the only potentially applicable specific plan would be the HOH the high occupancy housing and that is for 30 units uh 30DU or more and we are 26. So we fall under that. uh a distinction. Yes.

If we were under the new zoning code, the bedroom, bath, denominator, bedrooms and it got very tricky as the that was also going through its approval process. Um but you know the crux of it and I think the high level issue was the 30 units an acre and we do not hit that. We're 26 and we have again um largely decreased our large format units to really meet the need of the community up here. So what needs of the regional plan do we meet? Infill development, right?

This is how long have we all been sitting here waiting for something waiting for a shovel on the ground to come here since the ADOT building has been torn down. Um we have 265 units. We are adding to that to the housing. We're adding units. for adding housing when you have a housing crisis and we need all formats of units. Um there is a there is a concern is this is a a student project. Well maybe you know it's across the street from NAU we're going to have bike racks in every unit.

We do that this is would be a great place for some students to live. Um but I'll tell you in Tempe right now and I spoke to this if anyone listened to the development agreement amendment um they are proposing many of these types of development for young professionals. You know Corey Woods the mayor of Tempe is very enthused about this as a diversity of of places for people to live. If you are a traveling nurse if you you know are a new employee at Gore this is a great rental opportunity.

you want to great meet new people. Um well, this is across from NAU and has that pedestrian underp has pedestrian underpass. Um there will likely be students that live here, but this is open to any young professional, anyone who wants to live in a unit like this. Economic development, right? Four commercial pads, one specialty ger and two potential restaurant opportunities as well as another one. sustainability goals. As Alex mentioned, uh the climate action plan was not passed until 2020.

However, we did take it upon ourselves to lean into a lot of those sustainability uh goals. Uh the reduction of the parking structure, the reduction of parking, right, which is kind of a policy direction the council has given. We want to encourage multimmodal use. We are next to transit. We are next to the Foots Trail. We have this pedestrian underpass. Let's use it. Less parking spots hopefully means less cars. Now, we had a parking study. It was permitted in code.

It was approved by council uh or approved by council. Approved by staff. Thank you, Alex. I caught myself there. Uh approved by staff. However, there we do have caveats, right? We are in the client service business. If we need more parking, we've identified uh two major providers where we can get a lot more parking from and have a commitment that we will do that. Uh chair uh Commissioner Norton, as you kind of asked, what are those ratios? Right.

There are other projects that have been developed um using the transct zoning that have much less even less parking than what is required in the 2018 code. This we believe we have found the sweet spot. We believe that, you know, between the transit code, the regular code, the parking reduction, that this is the perfect amount of parking.

If we're wrong, because we are in the client service business, we have identified other parking that we would lease for our residents and uh transportation, right? We're next to public transportation. That's what we want to encourage and we will provide an eco pass for all of our residents. That is part of the development agreement. Again, we want to encourage multi. I had a kid who went to college this year, freshman year, uh, in Oklahoma, not here.

Um, but you you don't want your kids to bring a car to college. You want them to use multimodal, to use their bike, two feet in a heartbeat, right? Stop scrolling on their phones and start walking around. That's what we're hoping here with Miltown. Finding number two, the proposed amendment aligns with the public interest and the public good. We need housing. You guys need housing up here. So we believe the addition housing of adding to the diversity of housing types is important.

Reduce sprawl, improve multimodal connectivity, uh leverage the infrastructure improvements. All right, the city has done the Bula and University. Vintage has put in the underpass. Well, the city did it. We paid for it. um we support transit and we support uh other sustainability goals and we've agreed to again without taking any incentives some sustainability items that I'll get to in just a second. Finding number three uh that the affected site is physically suitable.

Again, this was an approved project in 2018. It's similar just a little different in terms of size and scale. updated unit mix type, updated architecture, and updated sustainability. Uh, yes, just kind of a right-sized version. Again, that P3, all the other elements of the P3 have been delivered, right? Vintage Partners has delivered everything else for AOT, for the city.

The city has done the transportation improvements, and now this is the last piece seeing horizontal mixeduse development on this site. So, housing again, Vintage um through Timber Sky and other development partners has provided a complete diversity of housing types. I actually can't think of any others um that that you can offer, right? We've got the 60% AMI, market rate rental, build to rent, town homes, single family homes, and now here, this is another type of housing type.

Um, Miltown, you know, completes the portfolio of vintage bringing all unit types. We are providing 12 affordable units without taking any incentives. So in the development agreement right now, it's a commitment for 12 units below market rate for a period of 10 years and the language in the development agreement does say both parties will come back to the table and negotiate in good faith an extension of that time. We are not.

Vintage who who I represent here this evening is is not the residential developer. So Vintage is putting itself out there of committing that our residential builder is going to do this. we didn't feel comfortable committing to any more than 10 years without knowing who our residential development partner is. Um, an interesting question too, if you may recall in the last project that I brought forward, which was a 60% AMI or less project that has a prohibition to rent to students.

We purposefully in working with your housing department took that out here. So if there is a student who meets the need, let them live here. Right? Again, we have more flexibility because it is not um we're not getting any type of we're not taking any state funding. We're not taking any city incentives. We're not taking any federal funding. Um these are just 12 units and it can't be required, but we want to make sure that we do that. And it was subject to the other development agreement.

Sustainability and housing. Again, we're part of the old code, right? So, um, you know, the the climate action plan came into play after here. Uh, but we have committed to a bunch of sustainability factors, um, that we're really excited about. Each residential bedroom will have a bicycle hook to encourage that multimodal form of communication. We will have more uh, dualport electric EV charging station than what's required by code.

And now these other I'm going to read some of them but I don't I'm not going to admit if you challenge me on some of them I don't totally understand them all but every the sustainability experts say that these are you know good things right we've got uh exterior residential building walls that'll be insulated to R21 or greater. Uh we're going to be equipped with smart thermostats. Uh we're going to be constructed to exceed bronze level certification standards.

Um, we've got residential buildings will be developed as all electric. I I do know that one. I know the difference between using electric and gas. Uh, we'll use all LED lighting, um, Energy Star appliances and low faucet uh, showerheads and and appliances. So, these are all things that will be in the development agreement. We are committing to this. We know sustainability, housing sustainability, those are the two most important things here.

and we're trying to update Miltown to make sure that you guys have all those things. So, in summary, we're right sizing the residential portion of the development in terms of unit mix and architecture, providing commercial opportunities, right, with the four pads, um the one specialty ger, two restaurants with potential drive-throughs, as well as another opportunity for another pad. We've got a very big focus, we always have on sustainability, um, transportation and housing.

I truly believe, and Don Cardier is on the line, that the the amount of parking we have, it's going to be well managed. It's the amount of parking we need and we've used in other developments. It's more parking than some of your other student housing developments here, but with the additions of the eco pass um and the multimodal opportunities and the location of this infill, this is a great opportunity to try to take people out of their cars if possible.

Um updated uh unit mix and architecture and uh approved impact studies. We're not burdening any of the utilities, right? If anything, it's a bit of a lesser impact, which is great. Miltamp Vintage has met all of their obligations under the P3 and with this approval, we are just respectfully requesting to get this last piece of the puzzle and get development here on site. Uh, and I I like this picture. I know now the roundabout is the pedestrian underpass is there. But, uh, it's very exciting.

It's a it's a really neat opportunity for the first pedestrian underpass or cycling underpass under Milton. So, I stand before you with a recommendation of approval from staff. Minimal public interest. No one is shocked more than me. Um, I got a phone call of someone who's very supportive. He owns commercial property in the area.

The one person that was on our neighborhood meeting asked some in inquisitive questions and said, "Yeah, no, I'm good." I don't want to say he I mean, I say he's supportive. I don't know. He didn't seem to have any concerns. the one person on our neighborhood meeting and you know just believe that this is a great project. Uh look forward to having something here meeting the housing goals the the sustainability crisis and respectfully request approval from this commission.

Thank you for your presentation Lindsay. Do we have any questions from commissioners? I know I have questions but I'll go to other commissioners first. So Commissioner Maher. Thank you Madam Chair. Um, you know, by and large, I like this project, right? I I think that, you know, as you'd identified, you know, it meets a lot of the needs in terms of, uh, Flagstaff's housing goals and and what have you.

Um, and also, you know, the revisions, I think, are largely a reflection of changing market conditions, uh, changing enrollment projections, what have you.

um you know understanding that you're moving away from that more studentoriented you know large format um type product by and large uh could you walk me through the decision-m process as to why that bedroom bathroom ratio remains still that one to one so uh through the chair commissioner mayor are you asking why we still are doing kind of the the open space with the bedrooms around it like why it's a right it still sort of looks like that more studentoriented type product can you talk through that yeah absolutely commissioner chair or chair commissioner uh no good question I mean really this type of development is actually like I said there's two new ones popping up in temp intended for young professionals you know they are the market is not for students now across from NAU, we will have students and in even in your 10-year housing plan, it did it does say there's still a need for student housing.

And um interestingly, I have heard from people in the community, you know, there was a lot of uproar, you know, with the first student housing development or private student housing development that was brought here that I was a part of. We're not going to say that word out loud. Um but one thing that was interesting is members of the community have said, "It's nice. It did take some of the people, some of the students out of the neighborhoods.

It took some of the students out of south out of the southside and other rental houses that would be potentially available for families. So, there still will be students, you know, across from NAU, bike hooks in there. Um, there will be students. There's also young professionals. I hear all the time, you know, people who work at the hospital need unit need somewhere to live. People who live uh work at Gore.

So the unit mix was we did have a partner um I think when we went through the development agreement is you may remember Tol uh Tol was our development partner at that point uh they sold their multif family portfolio and decided not to move forward with Miltown. We are speaking with other uh with other potential residential developers. We do feel like the one two we got rid of three right we have no three bedrooms uh and then fours and fives.

there is still uh there's a need for these and there's a need for the one and two bedrooms and to be able to share that space. I I leave it to the industry professionals to say what unit mix they believe is right. Another interesting point in the development agreement that uh that Alex didn't touch on is we do have the ability to reduce the large format units even more as long as we're sticking with the same kind of scale of of overall density.

Um because we do not have a a science sealed and delivered residential partner at this time. We did want the opportunity to to maybe have some of more traditional multif family units if we want to call it that. Um but we do are we do believe that there is an opportunity here. This is kind of a form of a affordable housing when you think of a five- bedroomedroom unit.

um there's an opportunity to to be social, to get to know other people, to have your own kind of bed bath area, but then have a common area uh for people to to gather. Thanks for that. And I I would agree with you, right? I just wanted to hear you say it. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. So, I know you just brought up that you eliminated three-bedroom units, and that's one of my questions. Why no three-bedroom units? Sure. I don't know because three girls fight. I don't know. Three's a crowd.

I mean, five don't. That's what I mean.

And I was like, uh, I I personally would have rather seen more three-bedroom units than four and five bedroomedroom units, but that's my and like Lindsay Lindsay alluded to that development agreement because because staff is tired and and we have a lot of work um it we kind we're trying to build in some more flexibility in these agreements so that when vintage finds finds the perfect partner to take on this residential project that they have some flexibility.

Um, and that they could shift some of those unit numbers around um, and not have to go through the whole process or amend a DA and um, so we'll see what happens. And yeah, with the market constantly um, moving around, we'll see we'll see what happens. So, but so we won't see though more four or five bedroomedroom units. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. So, this is the maximum that could happen. And I tend to look at those bathrooms in kind of the same way.

Like this is the most bathrooms that we could see in this development. And anything that actually gets built is either this or potentially less. Okay. Thank you. And then you know can you remind me how many number of beds there are? Yes. 669. 668. No 69. Okay. So yeah, I don't have a problem with parking for residents, but I do have a question about, you know, I've worked at NAU. I've been a student at NAU through the years, long time ago.

Um, how would you keep NA students who don't live there from parking there? Uh, chair, great question. And and it will be very controlled. So, one nice thing, too, and you didn't hit on this, but the commercial parking is is the the commercial parking that we need, which is great. So, the reduction is taken from the residential portion. It will be controlled. It will be permit park it permit parking and so it will be very managed. It will be controlled. You will be towed.

Um we'll work with our our resident our residential or commercial neighbors and support towing of of anyone who should not be parking there. And if we have a greater demand for parking passes, then we have spots. Um we've identified multiple partners with excess parking who we can partner with to to do some off-site parking. So, the off-site parking it wouldn't be with the um the the commercial units then or are you looking at that being the off-site parking? No. Through the chair?

No, we are looking at off-site parking that has you know foots adjacency andor just other commercial um commercial opportunity. We've identified two major partners that have a major excess of parking that would love to rent us some parking if we need it. So, okay. But not the commercial for our our project. And then the energy efficiency are is are these units going to be airond conditioned.

Uh chair they will be but we have agreed to the third certain type of smart thermostat uh that will make them more energy efficient. Okay.

And I did I did take all the um proposed um components of that sustainability and talk to our partners in sustainability and as well as building safety to see I always like to know like well what's already required in code and is this really like are we actually getting something out of this or is this just what code requires and I think everything except the toilet flushing was exceeded code.

So they had stipulations about um the mechanical units meeting certain standards um the smart thermostat, things like that that exceed our current code. Um will the thermostats be controlled by the rooms or by the total unit? Chair, I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. I believe unit, but I'm not I can't answer that question. Okay.

And then my only comment is if you could bring in a Trader Joe's, people in Flagstaff would be really happy for that com that com that that third commercial unit. They'd be really happy. Um, other other questions or comments from commissioners? Mary? Oh okay. Okay. Um, first of all, I'm glad you addressed the Toll Brothers apartment living platform being sold to Kennedy Wilson. Good to know. I mean, good. It's good information to have. I think it's important.

I think the community cares about who is building here and who's going to own things. Um, as we've seen with the NAH and hospital, things like that. I think it's important that that information is is out there. Um, interesting that not having a residential developer could change things or leave for some flexibility. I think we can look at that almost in in two ways.

But my question is is as this site plan gets goes through this process, obviously it's been modeled for fast food, fast coffee, and a ger, but that zone obviously allows a lot of different things. So, does this site plan lock in? Obviously, the the pad is locked in at that size, but it certainly can change who could lease it and what they could put in there. Is that that correct? Yeah, through the chair, Commissioner Norton. Yeah, great question.

So, the flexibility that we've built into the DA is mostly to do with the unit mix, right? Because we want flexibility in the residential portion of the unit mix. the balance of the project will follow the minor modification process that's in the code which is about a 10% deviation. Um you're correct that the you if we have changes in development partners if it's more than a 10% deviation then you we will come back to see you. So there's there's a decent amount. Yes.

And I think it makes a lot of sense for developers to include something like a drive-thru because that tends to be an intense use and then if they come through and decide to do something else, then they're not looking at, oh, we have to look at our traffic impact again and make sure that the parking layout works and we have enough room for all the queuing and stuff like that.

So, if we can do that kind of early on and and look at not worst case, I'll say most more intense of uses, then it gives us more flexibility to always lower that intensity. Um, then that that's a good point about the the necessity for accommodating a drive-thru.

I had thought of it as the on the opposite side of things if it was something that required more parking because, you know, those parking numbers are so tight and an issue um that if it was a retailer or somebody else that needed more parking than a drive-thru restaurant, um that could be problematic for them or could limit who could come in there. And obviously, we would want those commercial entities to be successful. And I think we all know how crowded a Trader Joe's parking lot is.

Um, so let's be real. Like, are they really going to want to share their parking lot with overflow guest parking from a from a residential side that is underparked? I mean, that could keep somebody like that away, you know. So, that that concerns me. Um, and I too had the same question. You know, seemed to to be a missed opportunity to not have any threebedrooms.

Um, knowing that there's this flexibility and undetermined residential developer, are we are you trying to lock in um a unit count or a bedroom count? And is there some way that I mean if that going forward that we have a little more assurance of what actually would be built unitwise and and bedroomwise either one. Um I my understanding you may have to to help me out.

My understanding is that we're locking in maximums and that giving ourselves the flexibility that that we could have this is the maximum number of units. This is within that I assume that 10% deviation. Um this is the maximum bedrooms but that we could shift things around. So, let's say instead a developer comes in and says, "I don't do five bedrooms." Um, but I I think there's a lot of demand for three.

All those five bedrooms could turn into three bedrooms and it wouldn't it wouldn't require a major change to that site plan. It could be handled administratively, staff approval. And I I think knowing that there is that flexibility, my sticking point, and it's it's a very sticky sticking point is the parking.

Um, I would like to see that maximum unit count or bedroom count down size to the appropriate level that 502 parking spaces or which is actually not 502, it's the what's the residential side can actually accommodate. Um, because right now we're like at 0.5 spaces per bedroom. Um, and I don't think that this arrangement of offsite off-site parking is a good solution for whether they're students, young professionals. Yes, they may be able to hop on their bike or the bus or walk.

Doesn't mean they don't have a car. Students come here with a car because they want to go exploring and they drive home to Phoenix or Southern California. My student did. Um, and I think it's important to acknowledge that um that this shared uh parking with the commercial could be an issue and being underparked. Um the old site plan was at 72 spaces per bedroom. We're now at 0.5. Um so I really, you know, have an issue with that.

And if there's room to be flexible with unit counts and bedrooms counts, let's make it all work. That would be my comment. Chair, may I address that? Just a a short answer. Uh, Chair, Commissioner Norton. So, good. I mean, good question, right? And so, the commercial parking will be saved for commercial. If there are residential, if there's overflow students from NAU, if there if there's someone who's parking there, if there's a car overnight, they will get towed, right?

We're going to we're going to tow some of those like we're we're going to make sure that the commercial is protected and commercial developers do want to make sure they have enough parking and it's important to vintage as a developer that we are not going to compromise our specialty ger um and we are going to ensure that the specialty ger has enough parking because it's important to us that they are successful there and parking is part of that.

Where I will respectfully disagree with you on the off-site parking is the exact thing that you hit, which is some students or people who live here may have a car for the exploring, for the driving home, whether it's Tucson or Phoenix, but they don't need it on site. And so the opportunities that we're looking at for off-site parking have foots connectivity.

So they can take their bike that's in their bike hook in their room, take their bike down, whether we have shuttle services, all of those things. So that if there are the students that have their car for the weekend adventures, they don't need to be there on a day-to-day basis. And we will absolutely accommodate th those cars. We want to make sure we are not a burden on the neighbor on any of our neighbors, commercial or residential. We don't residential.

And I think I'm I'm very as I reviewed all of this and I have been following this because I'm a development nerd like you are. Um I have been following this and I and I did attend the council meetings last year when you got your extension and I spoke at that time. Um so I thought all right it's time to lock in and look at this with 2016 code eyes and this is what the parking required in and um so that's that's where my that's where I'm holding firm at. CJ first. Oh, okay. Go ahead.

So, you've mentioned a couple of times that you've had conversations with uh some external partners and I on the staff presentation had NAU and uh the Flagstaff airport listed. Can you detail some of the the nature of the conversations that you've had with those organizations on this topic? Yeah, absolutely. Chair, Commissioner, um, you know, as we know, the airport has a ton of of parking, right? There's the the the lot that's closer to the airport.

There's the kind of more economy lot that's further out. Um, on their busiest day, Thanksgiving or kind of over Christmas, they have always had over a hundred spots in excess that haven't been used. Now, again, we want to support your airport and if you get more partners and and that builds out, there is also land around the airport. um that we would work with the the airport on on on developing and getting the right permits in order to allow for more parking there.

NAU I think is I can't remember which one, you know, decreased enrollment and some of those things. There are a lot of there potentially are some opportunities at NA and they would love to rent us the spots. You know, the the airport is a nice example because it's a revenue generating source for the city, right? Why have these hundred spots in economy parking that aren't used?

That said, there's a backup to the backup, which I love, of still being able the Flagstaff uh airport being able to go out and market themselves and get as many flights and and airline partners as they can, and there's still a backup opportunity for additional parking for us to rent. All right, Commissioner Luki. Um, so when I first was appointed to the planning commission, this was the one project people came to talk to me about.

Um, so I think you've done a great job of of addressing many of those concerns that they've had for the last six to eight years. Um, and so my my only thing is, and I bring it up a lot, is uh child care facilities. And I know this isn't the demographic, but you have a lot of different um high density residential in that area. And so some of them have kids. Um, and so maybe just thinking through I don't know, but we just don't have enough in the city.

So any any place that we can put that and I believe there's a a a school across the street to the north. Sorry. Yeah, Monasuri School. Thank you. Yeah. So my other comment that I forgot earlier unless you have something okay was that you know where where this is it's a gateway to the community right so I would have loved to see a picture from like across from Milton to see what that looks like as you're coming up Milton Avenue to see what that viewshed looks like.

um just because that was you know that that is the gateway to the community. Do you have a picture like that? I don't but I'm going to talk for a while and see if if they can come up with one.

But I will say that when when this project came in at 20 in 2018 that that was one of the decisions that was made why that residential building was pushed to the west was to keep those shorter buildings the commercial components up by Milton so that you weren't narrowing that viewshed of when you come in and you see the peaks um up ahead. head it. So there's that. How did you That's that was you know that's my concern.

I mean you know we've talked about viewshed probably for the last 30 years since these bigger buildings have become available. I've lived here believe it or not 50 years now when Milton was all trees. Um, so it's it looks way different than when I first moved here. That can be a good or bad thing. I mean, we have a lot more buildings and stores and places to shop.

Um, but I know that for people who have lived here a long time, the viewshed and the and being the gateway to our community is important. And yes, I you know I I I can see that the lower buildings are up front, the parking's behind those lower buildings and then the higher buildings. And I appreciate that, but I would have liked to see a view like that. So, I can speak to that. Walter Crutchfield, Vintage Partners, 252 East Camelback Road.

Um, I'm probably the only one in the room who's been in this project since day one, 2013, when the first P3 statute was passed and then this project came forward. So, and this was the first public private partnership of which subsequently there have been many. Um, so I go way back and one of those to answer your question, Commissioner Mandino, um, we did a number of viewshed studies with a much larger building. You know, this is about 400,000 square feet total.

Um, the original project was over a million square feet. And so the reason the building was situated where it was was because we kept working with the viewshed to try to do exactly that. But it was a large building and um it is public record. The original documents were in the system so you can go back and look at those but we knew it was acceptable with a million square foot building given where the footprint was.

So in making this a 400,000 foot development um while we have not done a viewshed study on it um it was acceptable before with a much bigger building. I think it would be far better than it was then. Okay. And then the utility things that are sometimes on roofs, that's going to be on the west side of the building. Is that correct? You are you talking about power? Are you talking about air conditioning? See any of that? Okay.

And I and I do want to speak Commissioner Norton, I do want to speak to your um Toll Brothers. Obviously, um we have a substantial resume both in Flagstaff and in the state of Arizona. A developer is only as good as their resume. The words really because sadly don't mean a lot. It's their resume that means something. Our resume is we deliver what we say.

We're going to deliver this been a very difficult project 15 years and the most valuable thing I can say is we delivered everything we were responsible to deliver to the tune of nearly $30 million and have not generated a single dime of revenue. So if you want to know who we are, we're the guys who put their money out regardless of where the revenue return was.

We chose Toll Brothers, funny enough, because Bill Tol still ran the company and even though it was publicly traded, Bill Tol runs the company and they don't do unstable things. So when I got the phone call right after we got approvals that they were s selling to Kennedy Wilson, which essentially is a VC firm, I mean I they'll say they're developers, but they're VC and that hasn't helped any aspect of our business. just look at data centers. So I was immediately this isn't going to work.

We could have gone forward with them. Uh they wanted to change the deal. We never change deals. We don't accept that. So we said no. Uh and we went back out to the market and we have secured uh tremendous interest and we're pairing that process down. And whether it's uh the Sierra on 66 or Habitat or our multi-million dollar houses out there, we secure the best partners. We're not the builders, we're the developers. So, I have great confidence in who we'll bring.

On the commercial side, we've built some of the most iconic commercial projects in the state of Arizona. So, uh what we deliver um will stand behind just like we have for the last few decades. Hope that answers your questions. Okay, Commissioner Norton. So, you will be the commercial de correct builder developer for that part of it. That's correct. That was one of my other questions. Thank you. All right. Are there any other questions or comments from commissioners? Uh, Commissioner Norton.

Yeah, this is um this is just two other comments. Um, you know, I really had to knowing that this is in a resource protection overlay, I really had to dig to find out, okay, where is that? how is that affected? And um so I basically had to go back to the 2018 staff report to say how is that being handled? Um and there are trees on that lot one. I mean there are there are trees that and it's disappointing to me to see that that was the execution of the RPO that there's no trees.

It's basically clearcut on that one lot, the main lot. Everything gets cleared out. And I wished there could have been I'm just gonna make this is just a comment. I wish there could have been at least some border trees on on that side. Yes, I know that the other side of Bula has the tract with where all the resource protection is, but just just a comment that I had wished that um you know the RPO had been executed a little bit better.

And I do want to surprising to you that as you were that you haven't had a lot of public comment and I think this kind of popped up on our agenda even you know quickly or without much fanfare. The other development granted was a behemoth a ridiculous behemoth. It is. Yes, it is right size.

But I think the community needs to understand and maybe that they will as this goes down the pipeline through council is this as it is at a reduction is still one of the larger student housing focus type multifamily buildings here. It is very similar to um to Fremont Station in in size and and bedrooms and units and and all the other ones. So, the community needs to know or needs to realize because sometimes they don't pay attention till until it's going up, this is more of the same.

And I I think the sooner that they realize that and they know that that this is a student housing, it's a large development. There's a large building mass as we saw in the renderings. This is what's coming. So, um, yes, it is much smaller, thank goodness. It's still it's still a big student housing development that the community was had always been very upset about and which generated the HOH specific plan and code changes. So, just wanted to throw that out there and get it out.

So, although I can't imagine what else would go into that spot. So, that's that's my only thinking is what else could go in that spot to give you the revenue that you need for the revenue you put out. Right. So, I can't see single family housing there. Um I can't see. Yeah. So, anyhow, um I know I've had somebody in our audience who has been patiently waiting since the beginning of the meeting. And I'll call on um the public, but I'm going to call on Nat White.

And if you'll just give us your name and whether or not you're a Flagstaff resident. This has been interesting. I wasn't being patient then. I was really interested in this. Uh my name is Nat White. Uh I live 1120 North Rockbridgeidge 8686001. Yes. Um surprisingly most of my comments is for us internally. Uh, the first one is the agenda. I was really disappointed with the agenda. When I looked at it, there wasn't anything I could put my finger on that would give me information.

There were no links. There were no none of that. Now, I tried to do some things, but I ended up with uh Excel sheets and stuff like that. Um, so I was disappointed with that information that was available. Uh and along with that, one of the reasons I was looking for information was how the resource protection overlay was being um uh how it integrated into this whole development.

And from being here, I understand like a lot of um scratch that I understand that it's a strip of woods on the other side of Bula and that's how it's uh how it's met. Um, that's too bad. And it's not very uh integrated. Um, if we put in deciduous trees and those kinds of things, which are just skeletons during the winter, uh, they don't evoke what I consider makes part of what Flagstaff is a lovable place to be.

and and so um I still don't understand uh how much resource protection was thought about in terms of integrating in into the the total development. So that's that point. Um those are two points that I really wanted to make. The last one is uh I've lived in Flagstaff all well a little bit longer than you 56 years. Uh and Flagstaff has been my 56y year investment. It's a long-term investment.

And what part of that investment is when I came here, Flagstaff was a mountain town and it can grow and I'm not against growth, but it can still be a mountain town, but it takes a lot of thought with the developers that come in and with the developers that live here. So I just want to emphasize that the importance of a lot of this community and maybe all of this community um the end result is very important and part of that has to do with resource protection.

I'll end quickly by saying that a lot of what chairman uh Norton mentioned I totally agree with and have concerns with. Thank you. Thank you Nat. Are there do you want to answer? Yeah, sure if I may. And just just to you know hit the RPO. So we do meet right the RPO standards as far as the trees uh that are in the southeast corner. We wanted to save there are trees down there we wanted to save too because of streets and the size of the sidewalk. We had to take an extra dedications.

We are losing some of those. We look forward to working with staff if there's any way. We did ask for a more narrow sidewalk. We weren't we couldn't do that. If there are, you know, engineering modifications that could be allowed to preserve some of those trees, we would encourage that. But again, it's it's all right. The conflict of all the different codes and I know you guys are all going through that.

But the engineering, you know, engineering codes, the street codes, the you've got Martin in mobility who's, you know, you've got so many codes. So, we were trying to save some of those trees. I was just reminded of that. We worked very, very hard. We arm wrestled staff. We lost. Um but if there if you want to move this forward with the recommendation that we work with staff to try to preserve some of those trees, we we're open to it. But we do need RPO.

Alex, yeah, the the RPO in this area would have been 30% of the tree canopy. Um so, and I I've said it at the last project. I actually love it when we're able to sort of set it aside and actually protect it. And I think that that has to do with the trauma of going out on a on a construction site and seeing seeing the fate of some of those trees with, you know, all the equipment around them.

Um, so I appreciate being able to set that aside in a place I know it'll actually be protected and saved and knowing that that appropriate landscaping will be used on site, you know, after all the the underground work is done. Um, yeah, Lindsay brought up a good point. I know that staff and the applicant were kind kind of working together to try and figure out there are some really large um ponderosas like right on the frontage of Milton.

Um and I think I think there's still opportunity especially as we get into the the civil plan review of that site and really get into the the specifics of the grading there. um that that staff is willing to look at, you know, can we meander a sidewalk so that some of these can save be saved. Um we're also we have to remember that Milton is also AOT right ofway. And so um AOT I believe I don't think they'd be mad if I said that AOT looks at trees as just something that a car can hit into.

So that they don't really like them at all. Um but but there is opportunity to to try and save some of the those larger trees right on the frontage. I I do want to speak to this again as the one who goes back to the beginning on the resource protection. We worked I worked closely with Tiffany Antol if you notice to say well you did you have a ton of resource protection on the back. um that's really just where the site gave us the best contiguous resource protection.

And in working with staff, that's where they wanted it. And so what it did for us is by putting a roundabout in there and then giving all of that strip up. It changed any sort of commercial value for that uh intersection. But we're fully willing to do that. There is a parcel up there that has some commercial value. I'm not sure it really can be developed. Um, but we gave all that up because for resource protection, but it was resource protection around a much larger building.

And I probably could have just sat back there and let this go on, but we worked really hard at that. And I think the view of resource protection has changed over the years because of fire and other things. That has changed. But we made sure that we exceeded it.

We also made sure that one of the reasons that we have such a large roadway there is because we have buson lanes in and that was supposed to be part of a much bigger multimodal view uh that didn't materialize not because we didn't deliver but because we had to have lots of other things happen to do that.

So I I I at least want to say the intentionality and I think um what we actually deliver uh is very much a resource protection view as well as a true resource protection because of the multimodal nature of it. So thank you. Thank you. Are is there any other public comment or questions? Okay. The only thing Yeah.

I wanted I'll just reiterate from from my son who hasn't been here in a while, but the last time he came here, you know, he he came into town and said, you know, Flagstaff's looking like any town USA. Doesn't look like Flagstaff anymore. And part of that is all these units going up around NAU. And I don't know how we keep the flavor of Flagstaff. I really don't know.

I'm um just it's just a comment that if there's a way that we can keep that Flagstaff flavor instead of being any town USA, any college town USA, it would be really nice to be able to somehow keep that Flagstaff view. So any anything else? All right. I know Alex is up there to read that statement that we It's also I think it's on the agenda. It is on the agenda.

Um, so staff recommends the planning and zoning commission in accordance with the findings presented forward the request to city council with a recommendation approving PZ-24-0000162-03 subject to the following four conditions which will be included in the zoning map amendment ordinance.

Uh number one, the subject property must be developed in accordance with the approved site plan and the conditions of approval dated October 7th, 2025 unless modified as provided for in the Miltown development agreement as amended. Modifications other than modifications permitted by the development agreement to the approved site plan will require an amendment to this direct to ordinance zoning map amendment request.

Now, I want to point out we did talk about minor amendments and minor amendments are included in that DA amendment. So, all those amendments are included. I also want to point out that the approval letter gets the number of units a little bit wrong and I owe them an updated approval letter. So, just want to be clear with that. Um, all other number two, all other requirements of the zoning code and other city codes, ordinances, regulation shall be met by the proposed development.

Number three, all terms, conditions, and restrictions detailed within the Miltown development agreement as amended must be fully satisfied. And then number four, Christine's favorite.

Um, in the event the property is reszoned and the developer fails to obtain final civil plan approval within two years of the effective date of the reszoning ordinance, then the city may schedule a public hearing before the city council for the purpose of causing the zoning on the property to revert the zoning back to the former former classification of rural residential and public facility per section 102050. 5060 of the zoning code. Okay. So, thank you for that.

I I forgot that I wanted to address NAD on one of his comments if I can.

And um sorry Alex, but one of those comments was finding the links and we've we've been provided with how you find these links now because in the last month this has changed for it seemed um at our last planning and zoning meeting we couldn't find the links to get to the the project and now we're told you just have to hover over over the item and I wish that was published on the website because I think a lot of people will not know how to get these links to see things.

So that would be my only comment would be, you know, either go back to the old method or provide on Yeah, I'm not sure if there's some sort of technical issue going on with the program we use. Um, but yeah, it usually links are highlighted in blue and it's still working because our minutes are highlighted in blue, so it's obvious that you can click on it. But for whatever reason, this item is staying as its black text. So, it's like this secret. Um, right.

And then that happened at our last meeting too where we all came that I was like, well, I'm I went to do it earlier that day to look at everything and um I couldn't get to anything because I didn't know you had to hover over the black portion. It just seems odd.

And I wish they'd either even if it's a problem with the with the technology that they would publish how you get to those links because had I not had an email earlier today I think it was or last night we wouldn't have known how to get to those links either. So yeah appreciate that. I I I thought it was just a am I talking into this? Yeah. I thought it was just a a new change.

You could where you have up you can go to zoom on this and right below that you can say oh and if you want to a link you hover over such and such you could do it that way too. Um and I I since I'm up here I just want to say one quick thing. Um I get letters all the time about these coming up. You're a neighbor. um be aware of this and so on. Uh and I follow up on that. That doesn't mean because I didn't show up at a neighborhood meeting that I wasn't interested in it or that I didn't follow up.

And I don't know how many other people might do that, too. But I just wanted to add that. Yeah. And and looking at the invitation list, most of those were commercial entities because that's what's there. So, not a lot of them were individual, although I did see some individuals on that list. They were mostly it's mostly commercial property that surrounds what they're looking at.

So, that's, you know, a a lot of the neighborhood is commercial, so not a lot of individuals were invited to comment on or knew about it, but there was a sign up. There was a sign. So, you know, if they were interested and drove by, they could have come to that because of the sign that was on the property for that meeting. Um, does somebody want to make a motion? Boy, everybody's quiet. I can jump in. Okay. CJ, I mean, not CJ, Christine, sorry. All right, I will take a stab at this.

Um, planning. I make a motion that the planning and zoning commission in accordance with the findings forward the request to the city council with the recommendation approving PZ2400162-03 subject to the following four conditions which will be included in the zoning map amendment ordinance. And the conditions were read by Alex. So, do I need to read those in accordance with the findings? In accordance with the findings. I think you mentioned those findings a couple times.

So, um but yes, you can say the conditions as as read that's presented by staff in addition to what's listed in the agenda. Is there a second to the amend to the motion and it was seconded by Commissioner Lukey. I do have a question. Um, and this is to Alex. You talked about an updated letter. Um, will that um letter be updated before the council hears this? Yes, that is my intention. Okay. Thank you. Okay. And Commissioner Norton has a question. I just have a I just have a comment.

Um, obviously I have no issues with regard to the resoning. It's grid locations, proper zoning. It's a better mixeduse model. Um we're all happy to see the reduction um from from behemoth to typical uh development that is surrounding. Um but I still think that this needs work with regard to the parking and the bedroom and the unit count parameters.

Um, and what I would like to see, um, is that it either go, you know, back to developers and staff for discussion and clarifying or if it ends up going forward that that city council um, gets into the gets into the nitty-gritty on this um, and and settles that. Um, what I'd like to see is that there's a unit or bedroom configuration that accommodates that matches the 334 residential parking spaces that are there now that are outlined now.

And that uses the 2016 code with the 15% reduction that's allowed, but no other reductions and no other off-site parking and no other creative math or modeling projections and other reductions. I just it needs to be the 2016 parking code and what's allowed. And so I I it just as it is right now to me it doesn't meet code. So I I'm going to vote a no. And that's going to be my my statement with regard to that because I don't think it meets code.

and therefore what doesn't meet finding number three because I think it needs more work. Um, and I hope it gets there. So that's that's where I'm going with this. And just minor minor point is that code does allow for those parking demand studies. So I I I see your point. Um, but but I would also say that that the ability to provide a parking demand study and to have that approved by staff is also part of code, right?

And even if they were to within the parking demand study, even if you know they chip away at it and they chip away all the way, there's still like I think it was like 9.9 basically 10% that they were actuallying for an an additional allowance after all the other allowances had been factored in. So there's even in the end, no matter how creative we get, it's still short. So that's I just would like to see some adjustment there that compensates for some of that to make it all successful.

And there is a threshold in code that says what staff can approve and then a certain percentage reduction then requires council approval. And this proposal allowed that that met that staff approval. Thank you. Any other comments? My only comment was that I'd like to state to thank the staff and the applicant for their hard work on this project and for your presentations today. So, thank you very much. Hearing no other discussion or comments, I'm going to take this to a vote. All in favor say I.

I. opposed. Nay. So the motion carries 421. Okay. Thank you very much. We have the next item on the agenda agenda is general business 6A. Selecting a member of planning and zoning commission to serve as a representative to the or for the water commission. Is there Yes. So Ian Sharp has resigned from the commission. um and he was serving as our representative for the water commission. So if if you guys want to pick a victim and send them off to the water commission.

So it looks like CJ is I I am volunteering just because I really want to learn more about it. So is there Thank you. Thank you and have a good trip back to Phoenix. Um unless somebody else wants to. I was just going to ask if there was any other volunteers. We serve open I I have a volunteer for water. I think all that would go over my head. So um CJ, you are the lucky person to um be a representative for the water commission.

So and then just if that's okay with everybody, do we need to vote on that? I don't think that we need to actually vote on it. We can. You want to? Let's vote. Okay. Well, I'm I'll make a motion that CJ Lukey be our representative to the water commission. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Okay. The motion carries. And then we're on to miscellaneous items to and from commissioners.

And yesterday I did find out that we were going to have a commissioner that wasn't staying that it's a longer story than that, but um so um where was I going with this? Did the council because I heard that it had to be done really quickly. Did the council So it's on the agenda for next council meeting. Is that correct? Uh yes. Okay. So by the time that we meet the next time we should have a new commissioner. We So we don't have to do it quickly.

Um I just it, you know, I ignore things for months and other things. I jump right on. So this just happened to to be an easy one to work with the clerk's office and they were able to get it on an agenda really quickly. Um and then that whoever is selected will have to do the training first. Okay. Um and then they'll be eligible to to come hang out with us. Okay. Well, is there anything else from to and from commissioners hearing? Nothing. We are adjourned at 5:44. Thank you.