Planning and Zoning Commission forwards Milltown rezoning to city council after debate over parking and tree protection

The Flagstaff Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4–1 on Feb. 25 to forward a request from Vintage Partners to amend the 2018 Milltown direct-to-ordinance zoning map and site plan to City Council, with staff-recommended conditions including a requirement that the property be developed according to the approved site plan and a two-year reversion provision if final civil plan approval is not secured.

Alexandra Puccarelli, the City’s current planning manager, told the Commission the amended plan reduces overall residential units from 348 to 265 and reduces bedrooms on the site from 1,186 to 669. She said the proposal removes a previously planned five-story residential building and the related parking garage, replacing structured parking with 502 on-site surface spaces supported by a parking demand study and a condition requiring the applicant to secure 65 additional off-site spaces as a contingency. "Another change proposes the elimination of the parking garage. This project will have surface parking only," Puccarelli said.

The applicant and its attorney, Lindsay Schuobee of Gamwich and Burnham, framed the amendment as a rightsizing that responds to market conditions and new sustainability expectations. Schuobee said the development agreement commits 12 units to be subsidized at a minimum of 30% below comparable market units for a 10-year period and that Vintage is not using city, state or federal incentives to achieve the affordability commitment. "We are providing 12 affordable units without taking any incentives," Schuobee said.

Commissioners focused much of their questioning on parking, unit mix and the resource-protection overlay (RPO). Commissioner Mary Norton raised concerns that the project's parking ratio is substantially lower than the prior plan and the 2016 code baseline; she repeatedly argued the current arrangements leave the site underparked and questioned reliance on off-site parking solutions. Norton noted the current proposal equates to roughly 0.5 parking spaces per bedroom compared with the prior plan’s higher ratio. The applicant and staff responded that the approved parking demand study, transit adjacency, bike facilities and identified off-site partners (including the airport and NAU as potential leased-lot providers) justify the reduction and that commercial parking will be preserved for retail uses.

Public comment raised resource-protection and public-notice issues. Resident Nat White said notices and agenda links were hard to find and urged deeper attention to integrating the RPO into the site design to preserve Flagstaff’s character. "Flagstaff has been my 56 year investment," White said, adding that deciduous replacement trees can look sparse in winter and that the community expects stronger RPO integration.

Developer Walter Crutchfield of Vintage Partners highlighted the project's long timeline and past public–private partnership components, saying the team has delivered prior infrastructure and that the Milltown parcel completes a larger redevelopment plan. Crutchfield said Vintage has secured interest from potential residential partners after the prior development partner (Toll Brothers) sold its multifamily portfolio; he also detailed prior public infrastructure contributions including the pedestrian underpass.

Staff recommended forwarding the amendment with four conditions to be incorporated into the zoning-map-amendment ordinance, among them: development per the approved site plan dated Oct. 7, 2025 (unless modified as provided in the DA), compliance with all city codes and ordinances, full satisfaction of the Milltown development agreement terms, and that the City may schedule a public hearing to revert the zoning to the former classification if final civil plan approval is not obtained within two years (per zoning code section 10-20-50-060).

After debate, a motion to forward the request to City Council with staff conditions passed 4–1 (Commissioner Norton opposed). The item will next be considered by Flagstaff City Council; staff will include the updated approval letter and the DA conditions in materials for Council review.

The Commission’s actions at the meeting did not approve final civil plans or building permits; those approvals remain subject to subsequent civil review, permitting and any conditions imposed by City Council.