Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers pitch 63-unit modular apartments downtown; businesses raise parking concerns
Summary
Spear2/Zin Home presented a concept for a 63‑unit modular apartment project on the parking lot in front of Ace Hardware; council members and nearby business owners expressed concerns about parking, boat/RV storage and impact on downtown businesses; city staff said code and parking studies would govern next steps.
Developers presented an initial concept on Oct. 23 for a modular, factory-built apartment complex in downtown Page that would add housing close to employers and services, while nearby business owners warned the project could worsen parking shortages.
Trevor Barger, representing Spear2 and Zin Home, told the council the preferred site is the city parking lot in front of Ace Hardware on Navajo Drive and that the first phase proposes 63 stacked modular units in a three‑story building with a potential second phase of roughly 30 more units. Barger said the location is desirable because a five-minute walk would reach the hospital, City Hall, grocery and many downtown employers.
Business owners and residents raised immediate concerns. Caroline (local business owner) said she is opening a restaurant in the block and that evening parking already fills, asking where customers, RVs and boat trailers would park if housing replaces on‑site spaces. She told the council she opposed locating the project on that lot if parking and customer access cannot be guaranteed.
Council members and staff discussed options: narrow Navajo Drive and add diagonal parking on North Navajo to create new spaces, require on-site parking, or use an Arizona‑licensed professional engineer to perform a parking study to allow variances from minimums. The developer emphasized that as a multifamily apartment complex of more than four units, the project would be prohibited from operating as short-term vacation rentals under current city code.
The presentation was introductory; developers asked to meet with staff to negotiate possible site adjustments and the council signaled parking and business impacts would need resolution before any land sale or formal plan approval. The council scheduled an executive-session discussion later in the meeting to consider related property and negotiation topics.
The developers did not request immediate council approval; the council said staff would follow up with parking analyses, outreach to affected businesses and formal negotiation if the project moves forward.
