The guy-in-thegreen-shirt (from The Nation) Fast forward to Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wis. ". . . Local cops patrolled the streets in armored vehicles, seeking to enforce the city’s 8 pm curfew set in the wake of the police shooting of Jacob Blake. When they rolled up to a group of white men with assault rifles—self-described militia members—they greeted them over one of the armored cars’ speaker systems: “We appreciate you guys, we really do.” An officer in one of the vehicles stuck his torso out of the hatch and tossed a bottle of water to a rifled teenager in a green T-shirt. Soon after the encounter, the boy in the green shirt, Kyle Rittenhouse, allegedly shot three protesters, killing two of them.
Kyle Rittenhouse, left, with backwards cap, walks with another armed civilian in Kenosha, Wisconsin.The Journal Times/AP
For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.
"In Kenosha, Wisconsin a 17-year-old dressed up in the regalia of the modern warriors he saw online—AR-15 style rifle, backward hat, jeans—to patrol a protest. Kyle Rittenhouse wound up shooting two people fatally and injured one more. Republican media has already spun this idea. He saw a lawless world in the uprisings of people demanding respect, they say. He was pressed into duty as a wannabe cop because the regular cops have been hamstrung, they say.
“Those in charge, from the governor on down, refused to enforce the law.” Tucker Carlson told viewers last Wednesday. “How shocked are we that 17-year-olds with rifles decided they had to maintain order when no one else would?”
This idea, of a vigilante maintaining order when he sees Black people rising up, reminded me of the birth of the Ku Klux Klan.
Like the Klan, today’s right-wing military groups are discreetly organized and wrapped in myth. They’re small organizations that gain power when they make national headlines, eager to throw open their doors to anyone looking for a home for his or her sense of grievance. And like the Klan, groups tend to spring up when politicians say lawlessness is rampant and someone has to do something. . .
Those are the BIG ISSUES in this Study Session for a Public Hearing - and to try to make sure there's no hint of corruption or kowtowing to "Special Interests" and closely-connected cohorts of Hizzoner Mayor John Giles all 7 members of the Zoning Appeals Board will get to hear and to discuss a presentation of the city's Open Meeting Laws. This rushed and attempted fast-tracking of a development proposal originated with an entity named Habitat Metro, two of whose principals in the formation and registration of a number of holding companies are former Arizona State-Senator Bob Worsley and his business partner W. Tim Sprague. Back in 2018 they had plans for a 15-story luxury hotel built on top of The Drew Street Parking Lot . . . PRESS RELEASE
Caliber and Habitat Metro buy eight Arizona buildings for $7.5M
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Caliber – The Wealth Development Company, a real estate investment, development and management firm, and project partner, Habitat Metro, have purchased eight downtown buildings for $7.5 million on Main Street in Mesa, Arizona. (See other posts on this blog for more details)
The eight-building acquisition was purchased with the CaliberDiversified Opportunity Fund II, LP . . .
An aerial view shows the buildings that Caliber, The Wealth Development Company purchased and will redevelop in Mesa. They are outlined in red.
Below is the proposed development site for Eco Habitat
Strange as it may seem, this proposedproject now given the new name "Eco Mesa", is the fourth downtown in-fill development proposal that uses under-utilized city-owned parking lots to qualify for both (government-owned property) GPLET tax incentives and private wealth-creation Opportunity Zone incentives.
It's a complicated item - with a long history - compounded by being put on the agenda for a City Council Session with only a 24-hour notice to give a presentation with the added pressure for Major Points To Be Negotiated or Resolved - with the deadline of September 15,2020. What do we know about "the local and trusted"developer Habitat Metro?
"An expensive obstacle won’t halt the construction of Eco Mesa, a high-end sustainable apartment complex that will rise over a downtown Mesa parking lot, attracting a higher-income clientele. City officials anxious to see the trendy six- or seven-story apartment complex have agreed to move an antiquated electric duct bank that otherwise would block the development at a cost of nearly $600,000 to move the $30 million project into high gear.
They also agreed to a tax incentive program, . .
“I can’t remember the last time, if ever, I was excited about an apartment complex,’’
Mayor John Giles said.
Eco Mesa will have 102 units, catering to renters who are likely will to spend more for the location and to live in a sustainable building, said Jeff McVay, downtown transformation manager.
A development agreement being negotiated with Eco Habitat, a developer with a lofty reputation, would include a Government Property Lease Excise Tax, . .
McVay said the developer has financing arranged through an Opportunity Zone investor, but that all approvals must be in place by Sept. 15.
He said he will bring the development agreement before the council when it returns from a summer break in late August. . ."
To decrease COVID-19 exposure, the City Council Chambers is closed, but public participation will be available electronically and telephonically and listening to the meeting will be available electronically. Members of the Board of Adjustment will conduct their study session meeting via a telephonic conferencing platform, and the live meeting will be accessible telephonically. The live meeting may be listened to by calling 888-788-0099 or 877-853-5247 (toll free) using meeting ID 530 123 2921 and following the prompts.
Public participation will be available electronically and telephonically.
If you want to provide a written comment or speak telephonically at the meeting, please submit an online comment card at least 1 hour prior to the start of the meeting. If you want to speak at the meeting, you will need to indicate on the comment card that you would like to speak during the meeting, and you will need to call 888-788-0099 or 877-853-5247 (toll free) using meeting ID 530 123 2921 and following the prompts, prior to the start of the meeting. You will be able to listen to the meeting; and when the item you have indicated that you want to speak on is before the Board, your line will be taken off mute and you will be given an opportunity to speak. Applicants and their representatives who have items on the Board agenda and who want to be able to comment on their item or be able to answer questions should fill out this Applicant online comment card at least 1 hour prior to the start of the meeting and call 888-788-0099 or 877-853-5247 (toll free) using meeting ID 530 123 2921 and following the prompts, prior to the start of the meeting. You will be able to listen to the meeting; and when the item you have indicated that you want to speak on is before the Board, your line will be taken off mute and you will be given an opportunity to speak. For help with the online comment card, or for any other technical difficulties, please call 480644-2099.
_________________________________________________________________________________ Board of Adjustment Web Page: https://www.mesaaz.gov/government The Seven members conduct public meetings to hear and decide upon requests for variances, special use permits, and interpretations of the City of Mesa Zoning Ordinance and Sign Code. Members are appointed for staggered terms of three years. For a full explanation of the duties and responsibilities of the Board of Adjustment, see Title 11 - Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 66, Section 3 of the Mesa Code of Ordinances.
Board Member:
Role:
Date Appointed:
Term Expires:
Chris Jones
Chair
07/03/2017
06/30/2021
Kathy Tolman
Vice-Chair
07/05/2016
06/30/2022
Adam Gunderson
Board Member
07/03/2017
06/30/2020
Ken Rembold
Board Member
10/16/2014
06/30/2021
Nicole Lynam
Board Member
07/01/2019
06/30/2022
Steven Curran
Board Member
07/01/2015
06/30/2021
Wade Swanson
Board Member
08/16/2012
06/30/2020
First Wednesday of every month 5:30pm
City Council Chambers (lower level) 57 E. First Street Bylaws Staff Contact: Rachel Prelog, Senior Planner Rachel.Prelog@mesaaz.gov 480-644-2762 City of Mesa Planning Division 55 N. Center Street P.O. Box 1466 Mesa, AZ 85211-1466 _________________________________________________________________________________
Board of Adjustment Study Session 4:30 PM Virtual Platform Wednesday, September 2, 2020 Printed on 08.27.2020 City Council Chambers 57 E. First Street Chair Chris Jones Vice Chair Kathy Tolman Boardmember Ken Rembold Boardmember Steve Curran Boardmember Adam Gunderson Boardmember Nicole Lynam Boardmember Alexis Wagner* Meeting Agenda - Final 1 Call meeting to order 2 Election of Chair and Vice Chair 3 Staff update (a) Update on the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendment Open House 4 Open Meeting Laws Presentation. (a) Receiveanddiscuss a presentation on Open Meeting Laws 5 Review and discuss items listed on the Public Hearing agenda for September 2, 2020.
__________________________________________________________________________________
BOA20-00497 - District 4. Within the 100 to 200 block of West Pepper (south side). Requesting a variance for a reduced setback to parking spaces along a main drive aisle connecting directly to a street, and the Form Based Code Building Form Standards, Building Type Standards and Private Frontage Standards, to allow a mixed-use development in the T5 Main Street Flex (T5MSF) Transect Zone. Staff Planner: Jennifer Gniffke Staff Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
JUSTIFICATION. AND COMPATIBILITY STATEMENT ECO MESA PROJECT NARRATIVE STATEMENT: ECO MESA is a mixed use infill residential rental community designed with sustainability and walkability in mind.
Rooftop solar panels will provide over 50% of the development’s energy needs, gray water capture from showers will irrigate the landscaped areas and a car share program will be available for residents. Located just one street north of the light rail in downtown Mesa, the building is located in and designed to the T5MSF transect of the form based code. The building will be constructed in the place of the 76 parking space Purple Lot, and will provide those same 76 public parking spaces plus additional parking for residents onsite. The building will yield 102 rental apartment units including studios, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom units. The structure will feature > 3 parking floors of Type I C.I.P. concrete construction below the 3 hr podium slab, and > 4 residential floors of Type V wood frame above the podium slab. The top of wood frame structure at roof plane will be 72’-0”. A number of rooftop appurtenances in the form of stair and elevator overrun, and a sizeable array of solar panels will be constructed below the maximum allowable height of 85’ per form based code. These elements will be of non-combustible construction. If you have questions regarding ECO Mesa, please feel free to reach out to: Development Team: Mr. Tim Sprague of Habitat Metro… tim@habitatmetro.com Architect: Mr. Martin Ball of CCBG Architects… mball@ccbgarchitects.com _________________________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND: Habitat Metro, LLC represents the ‘Landowner’ in redevelopment of approximately 1.17 acres (gross) in Downtown Mesa for a mid-block site consisting of 6 parcels between Robson and McDonald on the south side of Pepper Pl. The subject parcels are currently home to the City of Mesa Downtown surface parking Purple Lot, including existing electrical and trash/recycle infrastructure serving neighboring businesses. The landowner has opted into the Form Based Code (“FBC”) zoning for this project redevelopment. Based on the FBC Regulating Plan (11-57-1), the parcel is designated FBC T5MSF. PURPOSE FOR REQUEST: The purpose for making this variance request is to redevelop the subject parcels into a mid-rise mixeduse development featuring residential rental units, replacing existing public parking and providing new ground level retail opportunities within one block of the light rail. Given the existing electrical infrastructure onsite, and more stringent parking setback requirements than exist for the surface lot today, there are a few instances where the new structure must request variance from specific elements of the Form Based Code requirements described below: Note: In each request below, responses are given for the following justification questions. > Explain what special circumstances or conditions apply to this property that my not apply to other properties in this area or zoning district (example: size, shape, topography, location or surroundings). > Explain how the special circumstances or conditions cited in Question #1 originated. Are these conditions pre-existing and not self-imposed? Why or why not? > Explain how strict compliance with the Zoning or Sign Ordinance would deprive the property of uses or development options available to other properties in the same zoning district
> Explain why the requested variance will not grant special privilege or unusual vafor to this property or development over other sites with similar circumstances and zoning. 1) Omit… item removed from consideration 2) TRANSECT GUIDELINE: Building Types Standards: Building Size and Massing (11-59-14(D)) Building width is 264’ at its widest point, and is 256’ at the right of way line. Maximum allowed is 200’. Solution: Development team requests Variance from 200’ limit not to exceed 264’ total width. Justification for variance: A new structure limited to 200’ of width per the FBC while simultaneously incorporating the existing onsite public parking plus electrical would constitute an economic hardship to the development team in lower yield of residential and retail, and require another level of underground parking in order to accommodate all functions. It would also leave a 90.25’ wide second parcel or unused portion of a single lot which is encumbered by part of the existing underground electrical infrastructure that would likely prove durable and/or challenging for a smaller development to accommodate in the future. The architectural design of this longer structure incorporates a deep vertical cut in the façade at the elevator core in order to further articulate the building into smaller logical masses. Approval of this variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege because the specific infrastructure encumbrances unique to this site plus accommodation of existing public parking function while upgrading the same amenity to garaged covered public parking within the constraints of a more restrictive newly adopted Form Based Code where a 30’ setback of said public parking is required… will require the use of the entire width of the unencumbered site. The same surface parking lot under the FBC would itself be in violation of the allowable width of the parcel, and would lose 25% (19 of 76 spaces) of its parking capacity with the 30’ surface parking setback imposed upon it. As such, the conditions are not self-imposed but are pre-existing as evidenced by the existing Purple Lot that currently exceeds the allowable width of the combined parcel. The requirement and need to maintain the existing 76 parking spaces of the Purple Lot for public use deprives the property of uses or development options available to other properties in the same zoning due to its inherent location and necessity for its existing use to be maintained. Guideline building mass depth above 2nd floor is not perceptible from street. 3) TRANSECT GUIDELINE: Building Size and Massing (Sec 11-59-14(D)) Building width on 3rd floor is 135’. Building width on 4–7 floors is less than 76’-8” (two units plus 6’ hallway) Maximum allowed is 65’. Solution: Development team requests Variance from 65’ limit not to exceed 76’-8”
Justification for variance at residential floors and rooftop apurtenance: Variance from guideline dimension of 65’ for all floors above 2nd floor of a mid-rise is proposed for the 3rd floor parking deck, and for each residential floor, parapet and solar panel rooftop apurtenance. The residential floors feature a typical unit depth of 33’ which extends to 35’-4” at the point of deepest building shaping projection. Hallways are a minimum of 6’-0” clear. These dimensions are not uncommon in modern urban infill residential solutions, and allow for the bulk of the usable balcony (5’-0” depth) to be inset rather than extend fully from the face of structure. This set of modules, when assembled generates a building section of roughly 76’-8”. It also results in a smaller exterior wall surface per unit and a greater surface area of roof which both serve the sustainability goals of this project. Strict adherence to the codified 65’ would result in wider, shallower units which would reduce the potential yield of residential units on this site that is limited on east and west sides by existing electrical infrastructure. Approval of this variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege because the guideline depth of building section, as applied to this site which is encumbered by existing City of Mesa electrical infrastructure is a condition unique to this building site, and is not shared by all other privately held land with a Form Based Code T5MSF mid-rise overlay. Justification for variance at 3rd floor parking deck: The third floor parking deck extends the full depth of the parcel to allow for 2 efficient double loaded parking bays in order to provide enough parking for residents and to fully replace the existing Purple Lot public parking onsite. This 3rd floor of parking is required as the number of existing parking spaces on the existing surface lot does not setback from right of way line the 30’ required from the Form Based Code T5MSF mid-rise typology. When adhering to this mark, and when added to the number of spaces required to provide a minimum of 1:1 parking ratio for residents, a third level is required. Given existing electrical infrastructure to remain onsite (either active or abandoned in place), the construction of a full or partial basement relative to the utilization of same is both costly and functionally prohibitive due to the existing underground infrastructure. Approval of this variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege as the floor to floor height and configuration of the architecture at the primary street façade and alley results in a building mass that reads as a tall first floor with shopfront/arcade development plus a shorter (visually speaking) second floor mass containing stacked resident fitness amenity. The height of the podium atop these three levels of parking is less than 30’ from existing grade which is not out of character for a tall first floor and floor above for a commercial structure when considering the formal character rather than the number of floors. In both instances above, the conditions are not self-imposed but are pre-existing by the need to maintain the existing Purple Lot an address the existing utility infrastructure that currently exceeds the allowable width of the parcel. Furthermore, the unique existing conditions of the site limit the development options over other sites with similar circumstances and zoning.
Reports Contradict the President’s Repeated False Statements
Washington, D.C. (August 31, 2020) — Today, Rep. James E. Clyburn, Chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, released eight weeks of White House Coronavirus Task Force reports obtained in response to the Select Subcommittee’s July 29, 2020, request to Vice President Mike Pence and White House Coronavirus Task Force Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx.
These reports—which the White House sent privately to states but did not disclose to the public—directly contradict the Administration’s rosy public statements downplaying the threat of the virus.
“The Task Force reports released today show the White House has known since June that coronavirus cases were surging across the country and many states were becoming dangerous ‘red zones’ where the virus was spreading fast,” said Chairman Clyburn. “Rather than being straight with the American people and creating a national plan to fix the problem, the President and his enablers kept these alarming reports private while publicly downplaying the threat to millions of Americans.
As a result of the President’s failures, more than 58,000 additional Americans have died since the Task Force first started issuing private warnings, and many of the Task Force’s recommendations still have not been implemented. It is long past time that the Administration finally implement a national plan to contain this crisis, which is still killing hundreds of Americans each day.”
On June 16, Vice President Pence claimed in an op-ed that “panic” over a resurgence of coronavirus infections was “overblown.”
But on June 23, the White House Task Force concluded that seven states were in the “red zone,” indicating the highest risk of coronavirus spread.
The Task Force found new cases were up
70 % in Arizona,
72 % in Texas,
87 % in Florida,
93 % in Oklahoma
134 % in Idaho.
14 states that have been in the “red zone” since June 23 have refused to impose statewide mask mandates per Task Force’s recommendations—including states with severe case spikes like Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
2 states—Iowa and Nebraska—have attempted to ban local jurisdictions from imposing mask mandates, and Georgia only recently reversed a similar ban and dropped a lawsuit aimed at invalidating mask ordinances instituted by the city of Atlanta.
The Administration has also refused to make the Task Force’s reports and recommendations available to the public. Instead, the Task Force has privately issued the reports to states and held periodic calls and meetings with state and local officials that are closed to the public.
The Task Force’s reports also have been kept secret from some local government and public health officials who need them.
Click below to read the Task Force’s reports released today:
