Tempe council continues contested Marshall on Spence rezoning after neighborhood objections

The Tempe City Council on June 11 voted to continue consideration of the Marshall on Spence rezoning and planned area development (PAD) for six months after a lengthy presentation from the applicant and extensive public comment from neighbors and supporters.

Anthony Vitali of CHA Consulting and Ben Herrell, representing Aptitude Development, told the council the proposal would redevelop a narrow parcel at 1026 E. Spence Ave. into a seven‑story, mixed‑use student housing project with 105 units and 269 bedrooms. The team said the design includes two parking levels concealed behind a residential facade, 89 garage spaces (84 assigned), three EV‑ready spaces, secured bike storage for about 130 bikes, and stepped upper floors intended to reduce perceived bulk. The applicants said the Design Review Committee unanimously recommended approval and that the design changes addressed prior council concerns.

Neighbors and speakers at the public hearing were sharply divided. Phil Amarosi, a 50‑year Tempe resident, urged council to reject the project, saying, “It’s still seven stories, 90 ft high with 269 bedrooms and only 89 parking spaces,” and calling the density incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Christian Curry, representing nearby residents, criticized the developer’s outreach, saying promised neighborhood meetings had not occurred and questioning the legitimacy of 24 letters of support collected by the applicant.

Supporters said the project aligns with Tempe’s long‑range plan and transit investments. William Rodriguez (virtual) and Peter Mains said the site’s proximity to Arizona State University, the streetcar and light rail made the location appropriate for higher‑density housing. Chris Plit, a longtime Mill Avenue business owner, described the project as “responsible growth” that would relieve pressure on single‑family neighborhoods.

Council members split over the tradeoffs. Several members said the city faces a housing supply challenge and praised staff and the DRC for their review; others said Spence is a narrow residential street and expressed skepticism that delivery and ride‑share behavior would respect planned pull‑over spaces. Council debate focused in part on two technical points: the minimal retail requirement (the applicant proposed a 120‑square‑foot space described as an ATM) and whether the proposed stepbacks would comply with fire‑department operational needs. Staff and the applicant said a detailed fire‑code submission would be required before final approval and that they had been meeting with fire officials, but some council members said they needed clearer assurance on ladder access and emergency staging.

Council Member Keating moved — and Council Member Adams seconded — a motion to continue the public hearing on the rezoning and PAD for six months to allow further neighborhood engagement and technical follow‑up. The motion passed 6–1; Mayor Corey Woods cast the lone “no.”

Next steps: the continuance pauses final council action while staff, the applicant and the neighborhood can seek additional refinements and provide the detailed fire‑safety materials requested. The council did not approve the rezoning or the PAD; affected residents and the applicant will reconvene with staff during the continuance period.