*50 ***REQUEST TO CONTINUE (SEE ATTACHED MEMO)*** (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 15, 2025) Public Hearing and Modification of Stipulation Request - Rezoning Application PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 - Northwest Corner of 24th Street and Missouri Avenue - District 6
As residents of Bartlett Estates, we strongly oppose PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Despite opposition, the stipulations were originally included to protect the character of surrounding neighborhoods from overwhelming commercial development. Allowing revision only benefits the commercial property owner & sets a poor, disrespectful precedent now & in the future. We respectfully demand that the strong opposition from those who are truly vested & live in this area is heard & does not fall on deaf ears.
I strongly oppose any modification to the original stipulations established and fought for by the affected neighborhoods. Approving the requested changes would not only disregard those hard-won stipulations—both then and now—but would also set a precedent that invites further commercial expansion along 24th Street, north and south of Missouri
I strongly oppose any modification to the original stipulations fought for by the affected neighborhoods. Allowing the requested modifications not only ignores these stipulations, then and now, but opens up the inevitable expansion of commercial construction along 24th St north and south of Missouri.
I strongly oppose PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6. My family and I have lived in this neighborhood for over 20 years, and we oppose the proposed rezoning to commercial use and the addition of a second story. This change would significantly alter the residential character of our community, increase traffic and parking congestion, and create additional noise and safety concerns. We respectfully ask the commission to preserve the integrity and livability of our neighborhood by denying this rezoning request.
The original stipulations on 5500 Missouri should be strictly enforced without modification. The property owner has acted in bad faith towards the neighborhood & to modify the stipulations would only reward bad behavior & let others know that acting in bad faith will be rewarded. An exception was already made for 5500 Missouri - no further exception can be granted without harm to all the residents of the neighborhood.
PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 I oppose any change to the stipulations for this property. We keep hearing about a mezzanine. It does not exist, has never existed according to Phoenix C-O zoning. What they are trying to do is have a second floor and want to add 1,000 sq. ft. to the already existing attic. There is no room for a mezzanine! Please keep the 1980 Stipulations in place.
When we talk about what makes a community thrive, we usually start with the basics: good schools, safe neighborhoods, steady jobs. This neighborhood, Bel Air Estates, has all three – in spades. AS IS: no commercial with one exception. Now he wants another HOWEVER HE CAN GET IT. We have lived in this house for 49 years. We opposed commercial in this neighborhood in 1979. There is availability for commercial just a few blocks up 24th St. at Lincoln Drive. Perhaps the owner should look up there.
I’m writing to express my strong opposition to PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6. The original stipulations were put in place for a reason to protect our neighborhood’s character and quality of life. Ignoring them now would only encourage future developers to bypass regulations, increase congestion and parking problems, and reward those who disregard the law. Please uphold the City’s original conditions and stand by the residents who depend on them for fair and consistent enforcement.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25-Z-323-79-6. We have lived in this neighborhood for 29 years. The original commercial zoning was granted with strict stipulations in spite of neighborhood opposition. Now the current owner is seeking to alter those stipulations and did renovations without the proper permits. I respectfully ask that the City deny this request and uphold the City's original stipulations.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25-Z-323-79-6. My husband and I have been in the area for 20 years. However, our family has been on the same property since 1939/40. We know that the original commercial zoning was granted with strict stipulations in spite of neighborhood opposition. Please do not ignore this neighborhood's opposition again. The commercial creep into our residential area is unwanted and unnecessary and irresponsible by the City.
I formally oppose the proposed zoning modification. Our neighborhood is defined by its residential character, open space, and strong sense of community. Expanding commercial use at this site would disrupt that balance and introduce levels of activity that are incompatible with the area’s intended design and purpose. I respectfully ask that the City deny this request and uphold the existing zoning commitments that have guided responsible growth and preserved the quality of life in our community.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. As mentioned by others, since the 1970's our neighborhood initially opposed the construction of this commercial building, then agreed only because the City offered specific stipulations. Now the current owner is seeking to alter those stipulations. We need the City to protect the integrity of Phoenix's beautiful neighborhoods. One knows, that once a new precedent is set, others will follow. This is a prime example.
I live two blocks from this property and am firmly opposed. In 1980 the City gave its word this site would always remain a one-story office under 24 feet. That promise protected our homes and must still mean something. The owner knowingly built without permits and now wants forgiveness instead of consequences. Approving this would reward lawbreaking and betray the community. Stand by your word, protect our neighborhood, and deny this reckless request completely.
I strongly oppose PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Uphold the City’s original stipulations. Failing to do so would set a dangerous precedent for future commercial development encroaching on our neighborhood, increase traffic & parking issues, and effectively reward a property owner who chose to ignore permit requirements and act outside the law. Stipulations were established to protect our community & they should be honored by both the City and the property owner, not disregarded for convenience or profit.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Since the 1970s our neighborhood initially opposed the construction of this commercial building, then agreed only because the City offered specific stipulations. The current owner is now seeking to remove or alter those stipulations and even began renovations without the proper permits. Unacceptable! And especially egregious for this owner/attorney to disregard the law and claim ignorance. Please honor the original commitment to us.
PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 is deeply concerning. I strongly oppose any alteration to the original stipulations that the City guaranteed to our neighborhood to protect our community.
Concerns: dangerous precedent this could set for future commercial development adjacent to our neighborhood, potential loss of privacy for nearby homes, increased traffic & overflow parking, and—most importantly—the erosion of the trust our community has built with the City over the years. Please oppose this PHO.
As residents of Bartlett Estates, we strongly oppose PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Despite opposition, the stipulations were originally included to protect the character of surrounding neighborhoods from overwhelming commercial development. Allowing revision only benefits the commercial property owner & sets a poor, disrespectful precedent now & in the future. We respectfully demand that the strong opposition from those who are truly vested & live in this area is heard & does not fall on deaf ears.
I strongly oppose any modification to the original stipulations established and fought for by the affected neighborhoods. Approving the requested changes would not only disregard those hard-won stipulations—both then and now—but would also set a precedent that invites further commercial expansion along 24th Street, north and south of Missouri
I strongly oppose any modification to the original stipulations fought for by the affected neighborhoods. Allowing the requested modifications not only ignores these stipulations, then and now, but opens up the inevitable expansion of commercial construction along 24th St north and south of Missouri.
I strongly oppose PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6. My family and I have lived in this neighborhood for over 20 years, and we oppose the proposed rezoning to commercial use and the addition of a second story. This change would significantly alter the residential character of our community, increase traffic and parking congestion, and create additional noise and safety concerns. We respectfully ask the commission to preserve the integrity and livability of our neighborhood by denying this rezoning request.
The original stipulations on 5500 Missouri should be strictly enforced without modification. The property owner has acted in bad faith towards the neighborhood & to modify the stipulations would only reward bad behavior & let others know that acting in bad faith will be rewarded. An exception was already made for 5500 Missouri - no further exception can be granted without harm to all the residents of the neighborhood.
PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 I oppose any change to the stipulations for this property. We keep hearing about a mezzanine. It does not exist, has never existed according to Phoenix C-O zoning. What they are trying to do is have a second floor and want to add 1,000 sq. ft. to the already existing attic. There is no room for a mezzanine! Please keep the 1980 Stipulations in place.
When we talk about what makes a community thrive, we usually start with the basics: good schools, safe neighborhoods, steady jobs. This neighborhood, Bel Air Estates, has all three – in spades. AS IS: no commercial with one exception. Now he wants another HOWEVER HE CAN GET IT. We have lived in this house for 49 years. We opposed commercial in this neighborhood in 1979. There is availability for commercial just a few blocks up 24th St. at Lincoln Drive. Perhaps the owner should look up there.
I’m writing to express my strong opposition to PHO-1-25—Z-323-79-6. The original stipulations were put in place for a reason to protect our neighborhood’s character and quality of life. Ignoring them now would only encourage future developers to bypass regulations, increase congestion and parking problems, and reward those who disregard the law. Please uphold the City’s original conditions and stand by the residents who depend on them for fair and consistent enforcement.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25-Z-323-79-6. We have lived in this neighborhood for 29 years. The original commercial zoning was granted with strict stipulations in spite of neighborhood opposition. Now the current owner is seeking to alter those stipulations and did renovations without the proper permits. I respectfully ask that the City deny this request and uphold the City's original stipulations.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25-Z-323-79-6. My husband and I have been in the area for 20 years. However, our family has been on the same property since 1939/40. We know that the original commercial zoning was granted with strict stipulations in spite of neighborhood opposition. Please do not ignore this neighborhood's opposition again. The commercial creep into our residential area is unwanted and unnecessary and irresponsible by the City.
I formally oppose the proposed zoning modification. Our neighborhood is defined by its residential character, open space, and strong sense of community. Expanding commercial use at this site would disrupt that balance and introduce levels of activity that are incompatible with the area’s intended design and purpose. I respectfully ask that the City deny this request and uphold the existing zoning commitments that have guided responsible growth and preserved the quality of life in our community.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. As mentioned by others, since the 1970's our neighborhood initially opposed the construction of this commercial building, then agreed only because the City offered specific stipulations. Now the current owner is seeking to alter those stipulations. We need the City to protect the integrity of Phoenix's beautiful neighborhoods. One knows, that once a new precedent is set, others will follow. This is a prime example.
I live two blocks from this property and am firmly opposed. In 1980 the City gave its word this site would always remain a one-story office under 24 feet. That promise protected our homes and must still mean something. The owner knowingly built without permits and now wants forgiveness instead of consequences. Approving this would reward lawbreaking and betray the community. Stand by your word, protect our neighborhood, and deny this reckless request completely.
I strongly oppose PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Uphold the City’s original stipulations. Failing to do so would set a dangerous precedent for future commercial development encroaching on our neighborhood, increase traffic & parking issues, and effectively reward a property owner who chose to ignore permit requirements and act outside the law. Stipulations were established to protect our community & they should be honored by both the City and the property owner, not disregarded for convenience or profit.
I strongly oppose case PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6. Since the 1970s our neighborhood initially opposed the construction of this commercial building, then agreed only because the City offered specific stipulations. The current owner is now seeking to remove or alter those stipulations and even began renovations without the proper permits. Unacceptable! And especially egregious for this owner/attorney to disregard the law and claim ignorance. Please honor the original commitment to us.
PHO-1-25--Z-323-79-6 is deeply concerning. I strongly oppose any alteration to the original stipulations that the City guaranteed to our neighborhood to protect our community.
Concerns: dangerous precedent this could set for future commercial development adjacent to our neighborhood, potential loss of privacy for nearby homes, increased traffic & overflow parking, and—most importantly—the erosion of the trust our community has built with the City over the years. Please oppose this PHO.