Commission approves rezone to C‑2 and master plan for 2768 Agua Fria amid neighbor concern about scale and parking

The Planning Commission recommended that the governing body approve a rezoning from mixed‑use to C‑2 and approved a master plan for a proposed 130‑unit mixed‑use multifamily community at 2768 Agua Fria Street after considering a traffic and parking study, open‑space provisions and public input.

Project summary: The applicant proposes three buildings (two three‑story and one two‑story), neighborhood commercial space, 130 residential units and shared amenity areas on a 4.12‑acre site. The proposal includes 160 resident parking spaces on the draft master plan; the applicant requested a parking reduction and provided a parking‑demand study using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) methodology. Staff reviewed and concurred with the study and agreed to the requested reduction, subject to conditions.

Why the rezone: Under the existing mixed‑use designation, density is limited by building height (12 units per acre up to 25 feet, 14 units per acre up to 35 feet); the applicant sought C‑2 zoning to allow higher density and greater design flexibility. Staff concluded the request aligns with the future land‑use map’s transitional mixed‑use designation and recommended the rezone and master plan.

Public and neighbor testimony: Property owners and operators adjacent to the site — including a long‑standing industrial operation (Capital Scrap Metals) — urged the commission to deny the rezone or require different design approaches, arguing the proposed three‑story massing and the project’s density are incompatible with the surrounding context. Concerns included privacy impacts, traffic on narrow local roads, potential reduction in property values, and adjacency of a large residential complex to heavy commercial/industrial activities. Applicant representatives said they had tailored the site plan to provide buffers (garages and landscaping) along the shared boundary and had conducted traffic and parking analyses.

Parking and the 42‑foot easement: Staff presented a parking‑demand analysis and noted a 42‑foot easement along the site’s south edge that — if developed as MPO connectivity — would remove six parking stalls from the plan; staff’s review considered the potential removal and still supported the requested parking reduction. The applicant agreed to provide 10% of units as affordable housing (13 units) and to pay a fee‑in‑lieu for 5% per city policy.

Commissions actions: The commission voted to recommend approval of the rezoning to C‑2 and approved the master plan, subject to technical corrections and conditions listed in staff materials. Commissioners also asked the applicant to increase exterior bicycle parking during development‑plan review; the applicant offered to double exterior bicycle racks as a follow‑up condition.

What happens next: The commission’s recommendation will go to the governing body for final action on the rezone; a future development‑plan review will implement the master plan’s details including final unit layouts, parking counts and required public‑realm improvements. The applicant will address staff conditions and coordinate mitigation measures for adjacency to industrial uses at the development‑plan stage.