City of MesaOffice of Urban TransformationZMunicipal · 1 West Main
§ 00 · BriefFor City Staff · Council · OED

One corner.Three futures.

A decision engine for Downtown Mesa, structured around one catalytic parcel: 1 West Main. A 0.45-acre infill site at the most prominent intersection in the City's #1 priority placemaking corridor — evaluated through three distinct urban strategies.

City-ownedP3 OfferingDC/DE baseFBC T6MS / T5MSF*Mesa 2050 · EvolveOpportunity Zone · 0.2 mi Light Rail
Parcel at a glance0.1 ↓
§ 0.1Parcel at a glance
Site SF
19,376
0.445 ac · 125′ × 155′
Base zone
DC/DE
Downtown Core + Events
FBC transect
T6MS / T5MSF*
*Pre-app letter pending
Max height
135′
T6MS · § 11-58-11(D)
Stories
6–8
Transect-dependent
Revised max GBA
~81,875
T6MS · § 11-59-13(E)
§ 00.2 / A note

This site looks simple.
It is not.

1 West Main is 0.445 acres. One APN. One intersection. And yet it carries six distinct regulatory instruments that interact in ways that are not obvious, not documented in any single place, and — in our experience — not consistently interpreted even by sophisticated development teams.

A base zone with an embedded overlay. A form-based code with two competing transects whose boundary runs through the parcel itself. An adopted subarea plan with its own design character standards. A General Plan designation. Platted encumbrances from the 1878 Mesa townsite. And recorded title encumbrances affecting development structure.

This platform is built as a zoning navigation guide as much as a feasibility study — every standard cited traces to a primary source, and the Navigation Guide page tells any reviewer exactly where to go to verify it.

"We did not find simple answers.
We found the right ones."

Open the Navigation Guide
§ 01 / Concepts

Three capital
strategies, one
envelope.

The Downtown Code permits all three. The right call is the one that matches Mesa's near-term placemaking horizon, the capital appetite at the table, and the tempo of the Main Street block. Use is not the constraint — form is.

CONCEPT A→ Open
W. MAIN STCONCEPT AAdaptive Reuse

Adaptive Reuse

Chef-driven destination in the existing envelope. Fastest activation, lowest capex.

  • ±4,000 SF GBA
  • 115–135 seats
  • 12–18 months
  • $1.5–3.0M*
~15–25 FTE$50–100K / yr TPT
CONCEPT B→ Open
W. MAIN STCONCEPT BMixed-Use Residential

Mixed-Use Residential

6 stories (T5MSF) or 8 stories (T6MS) of boutique residential over multi-tenant F&B and a rooftop bar.

  • ~67–82K SF GBA
  • 21–40 units
  • 36–42 months
  • $40–55M*
~30–50 FTE$200–400K / yr TPT
CONCEPT C→ Open
W. MAIN STCONCEPT CMixed-Use Office

Mixed-Use Office

Boutique creative office with rooftop F&B. Office >10K SF is P in T6MS / PUS in T5MSF — entitlement path depends on transect.

  • ~57–66K SF GBA
  • ~14–17K NLA
  • 30–36 months
  • $30–40M*
~100–200 workers$200–400K / yr TPT

* Cost ranges are placeholders pending OPC and do not include lease termination cost. GBA figures revised per Mesa City Code § 11-59-13(E) (65′ max. upper-floor depth on a 125′ × 155′ parcel) and contingent on T6MS / T5MSF transect confirmation via written letter from Mesa Planning per Title 11, Ch. 57.

§ 02 / Context

The four-minute
walk.

Civic, cultural, educational, and transit infrastructure within a five-minute walk. The site reads differently at street level than at city level.

Open site analysis
MESA ARTS CENTERW. MAIN ST · VALLEY METRO LIGHT RAIL ↔S. CENTER ST ↕CENTER/MAIN STATION4-MIN WALK · 0.2 MI1 West MainSITE · APN 138-41-023MESA CONVENTION CTRASU @ MESA CITY CTRCIVIC COREDOWNTOWN RETAILN0¼ MI
§ 0.2Policy alignment · Mesa 2050 General Plan

Downtown Placetype · Evolve

Mesa 2050 GP designates this site for substantial transformation along transit. Multi-Family up to 100 du/ac; Mixed-Use and Non-Residential up to 10.0 F.A.R. (p. 89–90).

LU3 · Infill & Redevelopment

Only 11.7% of Mesa's land remained vacant in 2023 — growth must shift from outward expansion to reinvestment. 1 W. Main is exactly that condition (p. 63 / p. 52).

H4 · Housing in Proximity to Transit

Encourage the development of high-density housing in proximity to transit and major activity centers. Concept B directly advances H4 (p. 48).

CM4 · Transit-Supportive Development

Promote transit-supportive development along existing and future high-capacity transit routes. Site is 0.2 mi from Center/Main light rail (p. 52).

Mayor Freeman · Feb 2026
"With limited land remaining for development, quality growth must be strategic. New development must pay its own way and not shift costs to existing residents."

1 West Main sits inside existing water, sewer, transportation, and utility infrastructure. No new city investment is required to enable development on this parcel.

03C · Concepts · Live Models

One site.
Three capital strategies.

Concepts A, B, and C are three distinct capital strategies on the same parcel — not phases of one project. Each carries its own program, code path, capital intensity, and timeline. Move the sliders to stress-test the city's fiscal position under each.

Adaptive reuse corner rendering
FRONTAGE · ACTIVATED01 / 07
GBA
±4,000 SF (existing)
SEATS
~115–135
PARKING
28 stalls (existing)
COST RANGE
$1.5–3.0M
REVENUE
$2.5–5.0M / yr
OPEN
12–18 months
FLOOR STACK
  • ▪ROOF · existing low-slope, no occupancy change
  • ▪L1 · A-2 restaurant + bar · 115–135 seats · arcade dining
ENTITLEMENT PATH
  1. 01DC base zone + DE overlay · no FBC opt-in required
  2. 02IEBC 2024 change of occupancy · M → A-2 (Ch. 10)
  3. 03Full NFPA 13 sprinkler · ADA path-of-travel upgrades
  4. 04Mesa Fire pre-app · apparatus + hydrant confirmation
●LIVE FISCAL MODEL
CONSTRUCTION COST$500/SF
$250/SFBase · $500/SF$900/SF
ANNUAL F&B REVENUE$3.8M
$1.5MBase · $3.8M$6.0M
STABILIZED OCCUPANCY85%
60%Base · 85%100%
CITY FISCAL POSITION
ANNUAL TPT (2.0%)
$65K
CONSTRUCTION SALES TAX
$20K
ONE-TIME
PERMANENT FTE
17
CONSTRUCTION JOBS
14
CUMULATIVE
PROJECT COST
$2.0M
STABILIZED VALUE
$27M

FIGURES ARE CONCEPTUAL · ILLUSTRATIVE STRESS TEST · NOT A FINAL PRO FORMA

§ — / The Decision Index

One corner.
Three futures.
A transparent framework.

Prepared for the Office of Urban Transformation, Planning Staff and Commission, City Council, Economic Development, and future development partners. The platform is organized to answer four questions: which future creates the most value, which future is most achievable, what are the tradeoffs, and what the City should do next.

  • 16 sections
  • 5 columns
  • 3 futures
  • 1 parcel
  1. Part I
    The Opportunity
  2. Part II
    Policy & Impact
  3. Part III
    Regulatory Framework
  4. Part IV
    Three Futures + Comparison
  5. Part V
    Evidence · Source Library
    • § 09
      10-Step Gating Sequence
      • Ten city obligations · named owners
      • Risk register · outside dates
      • Recommended read before RFP
    • § 10
      Disclaimer + Terms
      • Conceptual study terms
      • Zoning, title, utility caveats
    • § IDX
      Source Documents & Site Data
      • Confirmed site data index
      • Index to Appendices A–O
    • § A–O
      Appendices — Source Documents
      • A — Mesa GIS screenshots
      • B — Special Warranty Deed (Doc. 2023-0552381)
      • C — Original Mesa Townsite Plat (Bk 3 / Pg 11)
      • D — City of Mesa Replat (Bk 23 / Pg 18)
      • E — Title Guarantee CTG-08005555
      • F — EPS Utility Due Diligence Report
      • G — Central Main Plan
      • H — § 11-58-9 T5MSF (adjacent context)
      • I — § 11-58-11 T6MS (controlling transect)
      • J — § 11-24 DE overlay
      • K — §§ 11-59-12 to 15 Building Type (Mid-Rise 65′)
      • L — §§ 11-60-1 to 12 Frontage (Shopfront 75%)
      • M — § 11-58-3(A) Use Table (office P in T6MS)
      • N — § 11-56-3 FBC Nonconformity (SCIP)
      • O — T6MS confirmation + DC/DE distinction (Robbins, 6/2/2026)
Scroll continues the full document below.City of Mesa · Office of Urban Transformation
§ — / Workflow

How it
actually moves.

ZMunicipal runs first — packaging the brief, site, and concepts. The developer / P3 partner and the public City decision then move in parallel against that record. Click any stage to see how they line up.

OPEN FULL WORKFLOW →
§ — / WORKFLOWThree independent tracks. Click a header or any circle to light one up.
PLATFORM · Starts first · then runs in parallel as the single platform
ZMunicipal
The platform layer. Runs ahead of the other two tracks — packages the site, the fiscal read, and the concepts before a developer or the City ever sees them.
TRACK 2 · 9–18 mo pre-close, then 12–42 mo vertical
Developer / P3 Partner
Capital + contract — 14 steps, 3 off-ramps, branches at Concepts
TRACK 3 · 6–9 mo to vote, then 8-yr monitoring
City of Mesa
Statutory + political — 12 steps, remand + continuance loops, GPLET tail
PLATFORMZMunicipalTRACK 2Developer / P3 PartnerTRACK 3City of MesaWeek0Weeks1–4Weeks4–8Weeks8–12Month3Month4Month5Months5–6Months6–8◆ CONVERGEMonth8Months8–10◆ CONVERGEMonth10Month11Month12Year1Year1◆ CONVERGEYears1–2Years2–3Years1–8REMANDCONTINUANCEC1C2C3C4C5C6C7C8C9C10D1D2D3D4OFF-RAMPD5D6D7D8OFF-RAMPD9OFF-RAMPD10D11D12D13D14G1G2G3G4G5G6G7G8G9G10G11G12
Each track runs on its own clock. Diamond markers (◇) flag the three developer off-ramps — NDA (D4), ENA (D8), and GMP cost re-trade (D9). The City lane has two return loops: REMAND (long, vote → Staff Scoring) and CONTINUANCE (short, vote → Study Session). The City lane extends below the others for the 8-year GPLET + annual compliance tail. Tracks genuinely converge only at Scoring / LOI (row 5), Review (row 7) and the Council vote (row 12).
PART IWhy this corner. Why now.

The Opportunity

§ 1.1Executive Summary
§ 1.2Downtown Mesa Context
§ 1.3The Site
§ 01Site & Context

A 0.45-acre parcel doing 21% of its work.

1 West Main is a single-story commercial building on the SE corner of S. Center and W. Main — adjacent to the Mesa Arts Center, one block from the Center/Main light rail station, and at the geographic center of the City's highest-priority placemaking corridor. The City of Mesa is the prospective conveying party; partner selection will run through an RFQ / RFP under A.R.S. § 9-521 et seq.

Notice · 01.0

Procurement & authorization — confirm before proceeding.

Disposition or encumbrance of City-owned real property requires formal procurement authorization. The applicable instrument — RFQ, RFP, or negotiated development agreement — must be authorized by City Council prior to any binding commitment. Prospective partners should confirm Council authorization status and the governing instrument with Mesa Economic Development before investing in response preparation.

The title record for APN 138-41-023 (CTG-08005555, Appendix E) reflects a recorded U.S. Small Business Administration Deed of Trust ($828,000, Doc. 2023-552386/388, Schedule B Item 14). The City must confirm in writing whether this encumbrance survived acquisition or was released at transfer. If surviving, SBA consent is required before any GPLET development agreement, ground lease, or major financing event can be structured — a minimum 60–120 day process. No development agreement should be executed without written SBA confirmation.

Sources: A.R.S. § 9-521 et seq. (municipal property disposal) · A.R.S. § 42-6201 et seq. (GPLET — fee title conveyance) · Mesa City Code Title 2 (procurement) · CTG-08005555 Sch. B Item 14 · Doc. 20230552381.

§ 1.3.1Parcel
Address
1 W. Main St.
APN
138-41-023
Site Area
±19,376 SF / 0.445 AC
Dimensions
±125′ × 155′
Existing Use
Single-story commercial
Footprint
±4,000 SF (21% util.)
On-site Stalls
28 (DC/DE: not required)
Base Zone
DC/DE — Downtown Core + Downtown Events Overlay
FBC Transect
T6MS / T5MSF*
General Plan
Mesa 2050 — Downtown · Evolve
Opportunity Zone
Yes — federally designated

* Transect boundary location on APN 138-41-023 to be confirmed in writing by Mesa Planning per Title 11, Ch. 57. Source: Mesa GIS (queried May 28, 2026); Special Warranty Deed Doc. 20230552381.

W. MAIN STREET ↔ · 125′ FRONTAGES. CENTER STREET ↕ · 155′EXISTING ±4,000 SF28 STALLS · EXISTING★ACTIVE CORNER±19,376 SF · 0.445 AC · DC + FBC
§ 1.3.2Walking shed · within four minutes on foot
Light rail
0.2 mi
Center/Main · 4 min
Mesa Arts Center
Adj.
2 min walk
Convention Ctr.
0.1 mi
3 min walk
ASU @ Mesa
0.2 mi
4 min walk
Civic core
0.2 mi
4 min walk
Main St frontage
125′
Direct
§ 1.3.3Block context

The highest-amenity intersection in downtown Mesa. Civic, cultural, educational, and transit infrastructure within a five-minute walk. The site reads differently at street level than at city level.

  • Project site (APN 138-41-023)
  • Center/Main light rail station
  • 4-minute walking radius
  • Mesa Arts Center
MESA ARTS CENTERW. MAIN ST · VALLEY METRO LIGHT RAIL ↔S. CENTER ST ↕CENTER/MAIN STATION4-MIN WALK · 0.2 MI1 West MainSITE · APN 138-41-023MESA CONVENTION CTRASU @ MESA CITY CTRCIVIC COREDOWNTOWN RETAILN0¼ MI
§ 1.3.4Existing conditions

Stucco mass on the corner. Deep canopy on Main. Mature palms.

  • 01 Single-story commercial structure of ±4,000 SF footprint.
  • 02 Deep canopy / arcade element along the south elevation — supports outdoor dining adaptation.
  • 03 Generous Main St frontage; corner exposure at the S. Center intersection.
  • 04 Existing surface parking: 28 stalls (not required under DC zoning).
  • 05 Mature palms and street trees along Main — retain as part of the streetscape strategy.
Lot utilization
built ±4,000 SF · 21%
unbuilt ±15,376 SF · 79%

Less than a quarter of developable potential — at Mesa's most prominent downtown corner.

§ 1.3.5Six-layer regulatory framework

The regulatory stack governing this parcel has six confirmed layers. Every concept, every GBA figure, and every entitlement path in this platform reads against this stack — not against a simplified two-layer summary.

#InstrumentDescriptionPrimary source
1DC/DE Base ZoneTitle 11, Art. 6 + Ch. 24 — Downtown Core with Downtown Events OverlayMesa GIS COM ZONING 'DC DE'
2FBC OverlayT6MS / T5MSF — Title 11, Ch. 56–64Mesa GIS Form Based Code Zoning layer
3Central Main PlanModern Downtown character type — Map 5, p. 68Adopted Jan. 23, 2012
4Mesa 2050 General PlanDowntown Placetype — Evolve Growth StrategyMesa GIS GP 2050 layer
5Platted EncumbrancesW. Main St. Alley ROW — southern boundary, permanentBook 3 / Pg 11; Book 23 / Pg 18
6Title EncumbrancesFirst DOT ($1.01M), SBA DOT ($828K), Assignment of Rents, tenant, delinquent 2025 taxesCTG-08005555, Sch. B Items 8–17 (Apr. 7, 2026)
§ 01.6City pre-development obligations · pending

Seven items the City must resolve before RFQ / RFP issuance.

These are City-side pre-development actions, not developer contingencies. None are confirmed as resolved.

T6MS / T5MSF transect letter

Written confirmation from Mesa Planning of transect boundary on APN 138-41-023 per Title 11, Ch. 57. Gating item — all GBA, story count, and use-by-right claims contingent on this letter.

SBA Deed of Trust resolution

Confirm in writing whether the SBA $828K DOT (Doc. 2023-552386/388) survived City acquisition or was released. If surviving, no GPLET, ground lease, or DA can be structured without SBA consent. 60–120 days minimum.

Google Fiber vault relocation

Vault confirmed within the parcel boundary at the NE corner (EPS Group, Item 5). Relocation: 6–18 months. Schedule-critical for Concepts B and C.

Delinquent 2025 tax resolution

Outstanding tax obligation per CTG-08005555 Sch. B. Must clear before partner conveyance.

AT&T transcontinental fiber inquiry

Initiate feasibility review with AT&T regarding the transcontinental fiber line identified in the EPS Group due diligence.

Valley Metro coordination letter

Coordination on ROW, electric, and platform proximity at Center/Main station. Required for streetscape and curbline design.

Existing tenant termination cost

Existing tenant(s) confirmed per CTG-08005555 Sch. B Item 17 — unrecorded leases and/or month-to-month tenancies. City should obtain lease terms from 1WM LLC, quantify termination or relocation cost, and disclose in the RFP. Material pro-forma input for every concept.

PART IIOne envelope. Three strategies.

Three Futures

§ 2.1Future A — Adaptive Reuse
§ 2.2Future B — Mixed-Use Residential
§ 2.3Future C — Mixed-Use Office
§ 02Three Futures

Three concepts. One envelope.

Each concept is sized for a distinct return profile and entitlement path. Toggle to read the capital, code, and activation logic for each — then compare them side-by-side.

CONCEPT A1 story
Adaptive Reuse
CONCEPT B8 storys
Mixed-Use Residential
CONCEPT C6 storys
Mixed-Use Office
Concept A

Adaptive Reuse.

Chef-driven destination F&B in the existing envelope.

Code pathDC/DE base zone · IEBC 2024 · no FBC opt-in
EntitlementLowest entitlement risk · ~12–18 months to open
MassingW. MAIN STL1 · F&BCONCEPT AAdaptive Reuse
§ 2.1.1Program at a glance
GBA SF
±4,000
Existing envelope
Total seats
115–135
Indoor + outdoor
On-site stalls
28
Existing surface
Project range
$1.5–3.0M*
*Placeholder · OPC pending
Annual revenue
$2.5–5M
Projected
Time to open
12–18 mo
Target
§ 2.1.2Floor-by-floor program
Level / UseDetail
Indoor dining65–75 seats · ~2,200–2,600 SF net
Outdoor patio50–60 seats · ~1,850 SF (1,500 E + 350 N)
Bar counterIncluded in indoor seat count
Kitchen / BOH35–45% gross floor allocation
Total leasable~5,850 SF including outdoor
§ 2.1.3Code + zoning notes
  • 01Conversion from M to A-2 occupancy triggers IEBC Ch. 10 change-of-occupancy review.
  • 02Required scope: NFPA 13 sprinkler, ADA path-of-travel, structural review for occupant load, kitchen exhaust per IMC 2024 / IFC 2024.
  • 03Existing 28 surface stalls preliminarily satisfy DC/DE base zone A-2 ratio (~22 stalls at 1/100 SF net dining). Confirm at pre-app.
  • 04FBC nonconformity threshold: SCIP triggered at 800 SF of expansion (20% of 4,000 SF existing). Open-air patio may not count toward this trigger — confirm at pre-application per § 11-56-3.
  • 05DE Overlay (Title 11, Ch. 24) is a baked-in zoning designation, not an add-on — supports unlimited special events under a Special Event License.
§ 2.1.4Economic activation
Permanent jobs
15–25 FTE
Construction jobs
12–20 construction jobs
Annual city revenue
$50–100K annual Mesa TPT
Transaction Privilege Tax
Compare across all threeOpen side-by-side comparison →
PART IIIWhich future creates the most value?

Comparison & Impact

§ 3.1Comparative Analysis
§ 03Comparison

One site. Three capital strategies.

Different capital paths, different return profiles. GBA figures revised per Mesa City Code § 11-59-13(E) (65′ max. upper-floor depth) and contingent on T6MS / T5MSF transect confirmation by Mesa Planning. Cost ranges are placeholders pending OPC.

§ 3.1.1Massing comparison · same parcel, three envelopes
W. MAIN STL1 · F&BCONCEPT AAdaptive Reuse
→ Open Concept A
W. MAIN STL6 · Roof BarL5 · ResidentialL4 · ResidentialL3 · ResidentialL2 · ParkingL1 · F&B + LobbyCONCEPT BMixed-Use Residential
→ Open Concept B
W. MAIN STL5 · Roof BarL4 · OfficeL3 · OfficeL2 · ParkingL1 · F&B + LobbyCONCEPT CMixed-Use Office
→ Open Concept C

* Zoning paths and project costs are contingent on T6MS / T5MSF transect confirmation via written letter from Mesa Planning per Title 11, Ch. 57. Cost ranges are order-of-magnitude placeholders pending OPC and do not include lease termination cost.

§ 3.1.2Comparison matrix
Concept A
Adaptive Reuse
Concept B
Residential
Concept C
Office
UseAdaptive Reuse F&BMixed-Use ResidentialMixed-Use Office
Stories16 (T5MSF) / 8 (T6MS)5 (T5MSF) / 6 (T6MS)
Total GBA (revised)±4,000 SF~67,250 / ~81,875 SF~57,500 / ~65,625 SF
Upper floor plate—~8,125 SF · 125′ × 65′ (§ 11-59-13(E))~8,125 SF · 125′ × 65′ (§ 11-59-13(E))
Key output115–135 seats21–24 units (T5MSF) / 35–40 units (T6MS)~13.8K / ~17.1K SF office NLA
Ground F&B±4,000 SF~18,125 SF L1 multi-tenant + lobby~18,125 SF L1 multi-tenant + lobby
Structured parking28 existing surface30 stalls30 stalls
Rooftop amenityNone~5,000 SF bar / restaurant~4,500–5,000 SF bar / restaurant
Zoning pathDC/DE + IEBC 2024DC/DE + FBC · T6MS DRB / T5MSF admin*DC/DE + FBC · T6MS by-right / T5MSF + SUP*
Office >10K SF usen/an/aP in T6MS · PUS in T5MSF (§ 11-58-3(A))
Project cost*$1.5–3.0M$40–55M$30–40M
Time to open12–18 months36–42 months30–36 months
Entitlement riskLowestHighestMid-low
Capital return driverCash-on-cash F&BMultifamily yield + saleOffice NOI + sale
§ 3.1.3Annual TPT · order-of-magnitude

Transaction Privilege Tax at Mesa's current 2.0% retail/restaurant rate, sized to projected F&B and rooftop revenue at full occupancy. Illustrative; formal fiscal impact study recommended.

AF&B TPT
50–100K
BF&B + rooftop TPT
200–400K
CF&B + rooftop TPT
200–400K
§ 3.1.4One-time construction sales tax
AConstruction tax (one-time)
30–60K
BConstruction tax (one-time)
800–1,100K
CConstruction tax (one-time)
600–800K
§ 3.2Fiscal & Community Impact
§ 3.3Incentives & Implementation
§ 04Impact & Tools

What Downtown Mesa gains, and the tools to make it happen.

Fiscal position, community benefit themes (cited to Mesa 2050 General Plan strategies), incentive programs, and the City's pre-development sequence as fee owner. All cost figures are order-of-magnitude placeholders pending OPC; a formal fiscal impact study is recommended prior to Council submission.

§ 3.2.0Council Lens · concept × strategic pillar

One-screen crosswalk for the Friday packet. Each concept against the Council Strategic Plan (Feb. 2026) pillars, with a speech-ready talking point. Read across, not down — every concept advances every pillar, but each tells a different story.

Council pillarA · Adaptive ReuseB · Mixed-Use ResidentialC · Mixed-Use Office
Economic VitalityFastest activation. New TPT in 12–18 mo. Proof point for downtown investors.Largest construction tax. 24/7 spending base of new residents within the walking shed.Daytime population for adjacent F&B. Anchor for boutique / civic-adjacent users.
Housing ChoiceNeutral — no units delivered. Preserves optionality for future redevelopment.Direct: 21–40 units on transit, with 10% ≤80% AMI floor. Advances H1 / H4.Neutral on units; advances downtown live-work pattern through employment density.
Mobility & TransitReactivates the corner without adding trips. Honors the 4-min walking shed.Highest transit ridership uplift — residents 0.2 mi from light rail. CM3 / CM4.Daytime ridership lift. Shared-parking MOU with City garage reduces curb pressure.
Public Safety & VibrancyEyes on Main Street in 18 months. Single-tenant — concentration risk.All-day activation: F&B + residential + rooftop. Lowest passive-surveillance risk.Strong M–F vibrancy; weekends rely on ground-floor F&B operator selection.
Fiscal ResponsibilityLow risk, low capex, low yield. ~$50–100K/yr TPT, ~$30–60K one-time.Highest absolute return; GPLET decision (8 vs. 25 yr) is the Council lever.Materially positive, but boutique-office absorption is the open question.
Public Realm & IdentityPreserves the 1925 envelope — heritage narrative; modest streetscape gains.FBC-controlled facade + 100% Main Street active use. Strongest identity move.Same FBC discipline as B; weaker after-hours story without programmed patio.
Source: Council Strategic Plan, Feb. 2026 · Mesa 2050 General Plan · Elevate Mesa.
§ 3.2.1Fiscal position · illustrative
Mesa Mayor Freeman, Feb 2026: "New development must pay its own way and not shift costs to existing residents." The figures below address that principle directly. Site is within existing water, sewer, electric, and road infrastructure; capacity growth fees apply at permit. No new city infrastructure investment is required.
Fiscal itemConcept A · Adaptive ReuseConcepts B & C · New Construction
TPT — F&B revenue~$50–100K / yr~$160–320K / yr (8K SF multi-tenant at full occupancy)
TPT — rooftop amenityN/A~$40–80K / yr additional
Property tax / GPLET exciseMarginal: $8–15K / yr incrementalSignificant uplift from current 1-story assessed value. GPLET (if elected) substitutes reduced excise for property tax up to 25 yrs.
Construction sales tax (one-time)~$30–60K (2% of $1.5–3M)~$600K–1.1M (2% of $30–55M)
City services / infrastructure costMinimal — existing building & connections.Within existing infrastructure. Growth fees paid by developer at permit.
Net fiscal positionPositive from day one.Strongly positive on construction tax + long-term TPT.
Mesa TPT rate
2.0%
Retail / restaurant
OZ census tracts
11
Mesa designated
GPLET term
25 yrs
8 yr fully abatable
Utility rate cut
25%
First 3 yrs · qualifying SBs
§ 3.2.2Community benefit + public realm
ABC

Activated corner at the city's most prominent intersection

Every concept activates the SE corner of S. Center + W. Main with pedestrian-scale frontage, outdoor dining, and full-glass transparency — replacing 21% lot utilization with a destination. Mesa 2050: LU5 (vibrant activity centers, p. 64); LU2 (placemaking and neighborhood character, p. 62).

ABC

New dining and retail for downtown

Cited as a top priority in the resident survey. Concept A delivers fastest (12–18 months). B and C layer multi-tenant ground-floor F&B beneath residential and office uses — an all-day activation pattern. Mesa 2050: ED5 (Mesa as a regional commercial, entertainment, and tourist destination, p. 111); LU5 (p. 64).

ABC

Active public patio on W. Main Street

~1,500–1,850 SF of programmed patio space along Mesa's signature pedestrian corridor — reversing the existing surface-parking-fronted condition. Mesa 2050: LU2 (p. 62); CM2 — complete, connected, safe active transportation network (p. 52).

ABC

Light rail ridership and TOD investment

Bringing residents (B), office workers (C), and diners (all) to a block 0.2 mi from Center/Main station increases the economic value of the City's transit investment. Mesa 2050: CM3 — enhance the public transit system incorporating light rail (p. 52); CM4 — transit-supportive development (p. 52); H4 — high-density housing in proximity to transit (p. 48).

ABC

Downtown housing supply on a transit corridor

Concept B adds ~21–40 units (T5MSF–T6MS) in the location type that reduces car dependence and adds spending to downtown retailers. Mesa 2050: H1 — create more opportunities for housing options (p. 46); H4 (p. 48).

ABC

Streetscape and urban design quality

FBC-compliant design requires build-to-line frontage, 75% min. shopfront glazing (§ 11-60), active ground-floor uses, and no parking between building face and sidewalk — code requirements, not suggestions. Mesa 2050: LU4 — design and development standards that improve the City's visual quality (p. 63).

ABC

No displacement

The existing building is single-story commercial, not housing. The transition is from underactivated commercial to activated mixed-use — the cleanest possible redevelopment from a community impact standpoint.

§ 3.2.3Available incentives + partnership tools

APN 138-41-023 qualifies for multiple City of Mesa and federal incentive programs.

Government Property Lease Excise Tax

GPLET

Parcel sits within Mesa's Town Center Redevelopment Area and Central Business District. Strong candidate for Concepts B and C. Reduced excise tax replaces property tax for up to 25 years — first 8 years may be fully abated. Requires Council approval.

Capital gains deferral

Federal Opportunity Zone

Downtown Mesa is within a federally designated Opportunity Zone. QOF investment in Concepts B or C may be eligible for capital gains deferral and reduction — a meaningful capital attraction tool.

Downtown Small Business Attraction

Utility Rate Program

New qualifying small businesses in the Town Center / CBD receive a 25% reduction on city electric and water bills for the first three years. Concept A operator and ground-floor tenants in B / C may qualify.

100% / 200% permit cost

Expedited Plan Review

Material schedule advantage for Concept A. Larger projects (B and C) are eligible for a dedicated downtown project manager at no cost.

Office of Urban Transformation

Downtown Project Manager

Large redevelopment projects in downtown Mesa may be assigned a dedicated project manager at no cost — coordinates across planning, building, economic development, and fire. Request at the pre-application meeting.

SRPMIC-funded grant

Downtown Sign Program

Competitive grant supports signage in downtown Mesa. Neon / projecting signs receive preference. Relevant for Concept A branding and ground-floor tenants in B / C.

§ 2.1.4Recommended path

How we close the feasibility cycle.

  1. Step 01

    City obtains transect confirmation letter

    From Mesa Planning — T6MS / T5MSF boundary on APN 138-41-023 per Title 11, Ch. 57. Gating item; nothing else proceeds.

  2. Step 02

    City resolves SBA encumbrance

    Written confirmation whether the SBA $828K Deed of Trust (Doc. 2023-552386/388) survived City acquisition or was released. 60–120 days minimum.

  3. Step 03

    City resolves delinquent 2025 taxes

    Per CTG-08005555 Sch. B. Must clear before partner conveyance.

  4. Step 04

    City initiates Google Fiber vault relocation

    Vault confirmed within parcel at NE corner (EPS Group Item 5). 6–18 months — schedule-critical for B and C.

  5. Step 05

    City initiates AT&T fiber inquiry

    Transcontinental fiber relocation feasibility per EPS Group due diligence.

  6. Step 06

    City obtains Valley Metro coordination letter

    ROW, electric, platform proximity at Center/Main station.

  7. Step 07

    City quantifies tenant termination cost

    Existing tenant per CTG-08005555 Sch. B. Quantify exposure before RFQ/RFP.

  8. Step 08

    City issues RFQ / RFP

    Partner selection under A.R.S. § 9-521 et seq. with all pre-development items disclosed and confirmed.

  9. Step 09

    Selected partner files FBC opt-in

    Administrative filing per Title 11, Ch. 57 once partner is under DA.

  10. Step 10

    Design Review or administrative review

    Per confirmed transect: T6MS → DRB; T5MSF → administrative; Concept A → IEBC change-of-occupancy.

PART IVWhat should the City do next?

Recommended Path

§ 4.1Strategic Findings
§ 4.2Recommended Direction
§ 4.3Action Framework
§ 07Council Brief

Council brief, risks, baselines, obligations.

One-page brief for the Friday packet, followed by what could go wrong, the cost of doing nothing, what the City must do, the community-benefit floor, an equity note, and a version log.

§ 4.1.1One-page Council Brief

Parcel
1 W. Main St., APN 138-41-023. 0.445 ac / 19,376 SF. City-owned. Currently leased as a 28-stall surface lot.

Question before Council
Authorize OUT to issue a concept-agnostic RFQ for redevelopment of 1 W. Main against three studied futures (A adaptive reuse, B residential, C office), subject to the community-benefit floor (§ 3.1.4) and city pre-development obligations (§ 3.1.3).

Why now
The corner is the most-asked-about parcel in downtown. Mesa 2050 (LU2, LU5, H1, H4, CM4, ED5) directly addresses this site type. Doing nothing carries real opportunity cost (§ 3.1.2).

What changes if Council authorizes
OUT issues the § 11-57 transect determination request, terminates the surface-lot lease, publishes the pre-application code-path memo, and releases RFQ within 90 days. No commitment to a single concept; the RFQ is concept-agnostic.

What does not change
No public capital outlay at this stage. No zoning amendment. No commitment to GPLET or any incentive — those are decisions at term-sheet stage with a named developer.

Recommendation
Authorize. The studied range is defensible; the floor protects the public interest; the RFQ preserves market discovery.

See three-concept comparison →See Appendices A–N →
§ 4.1.2Do-nothing baseline · the implicit fourth concept

Every analysis of three concepts must compare against the status quo. Holding the parcel as a surface lot is a real option — and a real cost.

Fiscal

Surface lot generates property tax only; no TPT, no construction tax, no employment. Net annual contribution to General Fund: nominal.

Opportunity cost

10 years of foregone activation at the city's most prominent corner. Concepts B/C generate $200–400K/yr TPT + $600K–1.1M one-time construction tax — compounding.

Vacancy externality

Surface parking at a signalized Main Street corner depresses adjacent ground-floor rents and pedestrian counts within the 4-minute walk shed.

Political risk

Visible inaction on the most-asked-about parcel in downtown; erodes trust in OUT and the Mesa 2050 implementation narrative.

When 'do nothing' is correct

If transect determination stalls beyond 12 months OR if no concept clears community-benefit floor under prevailing capital conditions, hold rather than concede. Do-nothing is a real option — it is not the default.

§ 4.1.3What the City must do · pre-development checklist

The city owns this site. Before any RFQ has standing, ten obligations must be cleared. Each is discrete, time-boxed, and owned by a named department.

  1. 01
    Issue written transect determination
    § 11-57 letter confirming T6MS vs. T5MSF for APN 138-41-023. Gates Concepts B and C entitlement path. Target: 30 days from request.
  2. 02
    Confirm DE Overlay operational posture
    Written confirmation that event-day operations (closures, amplified sound, sidewalk programming) are administratively cleared under Ch. 11-24.
  3. 03
    Terminate / buy out existing surface lot lease
    Identify lessee, negotiate exit, align vacancy date with selected concept's mobilization.
  4. 04
    Pre-application meeting + code-path memo
    Planning, Building Safety, Engineering, Fire. Single memo covering FBC, IEBC 2024, parking, frontage, utility capacity.
  5. 05
    Utility capacity letters
    Water, sewer, dry utilities — capacity confirmation for the larger of B / C envelopes; cost-share on any upsizing.
  6. 06
    ROW & frontage standards confirmation
    Sidewalk width, street tree spacing, curb cuts, loading per § 11-60 Private Frontage standards.
  7. 07
    Shared-parking framework
    MOU template for City garage shared-use, applicable to B and C; published ratios and pricing.
  8. 08
    Incentive stack disclosure
    Written inventory of available tools (GPLET, façade grants, infrastructure reimbursement, opportunity zone) with eligibility tests.
  9. 09
    Community benefit floor
    Adopt the floor (see § 3.1.4) as a term sheet input before RFQ release.
  10. 10
    RFQ / RFP issuance
    Concept-agnostic solicitation; respondents propose against the three futures or a hybrid; evaluation rubric weights public benefit and execution risk equally.
§ 4.1.4Community-benefit floor · not a menu

A menu invites negotiation downward. A floor sets the minimum the City accepts in exchange for putting a publicly-owned corner into private hands. Below the floor, the City does not transact.

MetricFloorNote
Affordable housing set-aside (Concept B only)10% of units at ≤80% AMI, 20-year covenantBelow this floor, the City does not advance B.
Public realm contribution$8–12 / GBA SF, deposited at TCOFunds Main Street streetscape, lighting, public art. Auditable line item.
Main Street ground-floor active use100% of W. Main frontage in active use (F&B / retail / gallery)No blank wall, no back-of-house, no office lobby fronting Main.
Local hiring — construction30% of trade hours from Maricopa County workforceReported quarterly; aligned with City of Mesa local hire framework.
Local hiring — operationsGood-faith targets; quarterly reportingNo quotas; transparency is the deliverable.
Operator profile (F&B)Independent / Arizona-based operator preferenceTie-breaker in RFQ evaluation, not a hard exclusion.
Public access during eventsPatio + L1 lobby available for DE Overlay event programming at no charge, ≥6 days/yrNegotiated at lease; rolling 5-year term.
§ 4.1.5Risks & what could go wrong · per concept

Council and public are sophisticated. Naming the risk and the mitigation builds trust faster than presenting a clean story.

Concept A

Adaptive Reuse — F&B

Operator failure / single-tenant concentration
Mitigation · RFQ a short list of three operators with executed LOIs before close; structure rent with percentage component.
IEBC 2024 unknowns in 1925 envelope (structural, MEP, ADA)
Mitigation · Phase 1 condition assessment + code-path memo before LOI; price contingency 15–20%.
Lease termination of existing 28-stall surface parking lessee
Mitigation · Negotiate buyout in pre-development; budget line item; align with vacancy date.
Optionality loss — locks the corner at 1 story for 10+ years
Mitigation · Structure lease at 5+5; preserve future redevelopment optionality in covenant.
Concept B

Mixed-Use Residential

T6MS / T5MSF transect determination delay or denial
Mitigation · Pre-application meeting + § 11-57 letter request in first 60 days; B sized for both outcomes.
Multifamily capital market timing (rate environment)
Mitigation · Two go/no-go gates — entitlement complete and construction pricing locked.
Construction cost escalation (24–30 mo. build)
Mitigation · GMP with shared-savings; early procurement of long-lead items; 8% contingency.
Ground-floor F&B lease-up risk
Mitigation · Pre-lease 60% of L1 SF before vertical start; rooftop operator under LOI at TCO.
Construction-period disruption to Main Street pedestrians
Mitigation · Construction management plan with Downtown Mesa Association; staged sidewalk closures.
Concept C

Mixed-Use Office

Office >10K SF: P in T6MS, SUP-only in T5MSF (§ 11-58-3(A))
Mitigation · Transect letter is gating; if T5MSF, file SUP concurrent with DRB to preserve schedule.
Boutique office absorption in tertiary submarket
Mitigation · Anchor tenant LOI for 30–40% of NLA before close; target creative / civic-adjacent users.
Parking ratio thin for office program (30 stalls)
Mitigation · Shared-parking agreement with City garage; TDM plan; transit proximity (light rail 0.2 mi).
TI capital intensity for spec office
Mitigation · Build to warm shell; reserve TI allowance per executed lease only.
§ 4.1.6Equity & displacement note

Who lives and works within a 4-minute walk of this corner today — and how each concept affects them. The City's responsibility is to name the risk, set monitoring in place, and require mitigation as a term-sheet condition.

Who lives within the 4-min walk
Mixed-tenure: Encore on First (senior, mixed-income), market-rate lofts, single-room occupancy housing one block north. Median household income materially below citywide median.
Who works within the 4-min walk
City Hall, Mesa Arts Center, light rail riders, ground-floor F&B and retail workers. Predominantly service-sector employment.
Concept A displacement risk
Negligible — no resident displacement; potential displacement of existing 28-stall parking users (mitigation via City garage MOU).
Concept B displacement risk
No on-site residential displacement (parcel is currently surface). Indirect risk: rent pressure on adjacent older multifamily. Mitigation: 10% affordable floor + 20-year covenant; rent-pressure monitoring on a 4-block radius.
Concept C displacement risk
Negligible residential; possible commercial rent pressure on adjacent ground-floor F&B. Mitigation: rent pressure monitoring; small-business stabilization fund eligibility.
Public benefit visibility
Equity outcomes published annually on the OUT dashboard. Same template across all three concepts.
§ 4.1.7Version log

What changed, when, and why. A planning document earns trust by showing its corrections in public.

  1. V3 · 05.2026
    Current. Reframed regulatory stack as DC + DE (six-layer framework). Split FBC into T6MS / T5MSF; flagged § 11-57 transect determination as gating. Revised all upper-floor plates to 65′ max. depth per § 11-59-13(E). Reclassified DE Overlay as operational asset. Promoted Appendices A–N to top-level chapter. Added Council Brief (§ 3.1) with risks, do-nothing baseline, city obligations, community-benefit floor, equity note, version log.
  2. V2 · 04.2026
    Added Concept C office variant. Introduced fiscal at-a-glance (TPT + construction tax bands). Reorganized navigation into chapters with hamburger index.
  3. V1 · 03.2026
    Initial three-concept framing (A adaptive reuse, B residential). Parcel data, walking shed, basic massing diagrams. Single-page index with hash anchors.
PART VEvery conclusion traces to a source.

Source Library & Regulatory Framework

§ 5.1Source Library
§ 5.2Regulatory Framework
§ 5.3Technical Studies
§ 5.4Concept Materials
§ 05Regulatory Framework + Appendices

Confirmed regulatory framework — every conclusion traces to a source.

Six layers governing APN 138-41-023, the confirmed T6MS transect, the EPS utility-conflict register, the three-step FBC entitlement path, building-code feasibility, and the full primary-source appendix index (A–O). T6MS confirmed in writing by the Office of Urban Transformation, June 2, 2026 (Appendix O).

§ 05 · Six-layer framework

Six instruments. One settled stack.

APN 138-41-023 is governed by six distinct regulatory instruments that apply simultaneously — DC base zone, DE overlay (applied separately), the FBC overlay (T6MS confirmed), the Central Main Plan, GP 2050 Downtown placetype, and recorded plat + title encumbrances. Form — not use — is the binding constraint. Mid-Rise § 11-59-13(E) caps upper-floor depth at 65′, which drives every revised GBA figure for Concepts B and C.

Every layer below is reproduced as a primary-source appendix in this section (A–O). The single most important confirmation — T6MS for APN 138-41-023 — is in writing from the Office of Urban Transformation (Appendix O); no transect ambiguity remains.

§ 05AT6MS — Confirmed Transect Standards

Confirmed in writing by Jeff Robbins, Redevelopment Program Administrator, Office of Urban Transformation, City of Mesa, June 2, 2026, per the FBC Regulating Plan, MZO Title 11, Art. 6. See Appendix O.

StandardT6MS — confirmed
Max height135′ (155′ if >25% affordable; no max. for LEED)
Stories (by right)4+ encouraged; up to 8 (Mid-Rise)
Build-to line100% of front (Front 0′ max.; 100% defined by building)
Ground-floor depth50′ min.
Office >10,000 SFP — permitted by right
Frontage typesShopfront, Terrace, Gallery, Arcade
Parking — residentialNo min.; 1/unit max.
Review pathDesign review board (4+ stories); admin if office P by right
§ 05BUtility Conflicts — Confirmed (EPS Group, May 5, 2026)

Schedule-critical pre-development items. Items 1 and 5 carry the longest lead times and should be initiated first — both are City pre-development obligations on a City-initiated P3, not developer risks. See Appendix F.

ItemConfirmed conflictLocationRiskAction / lead time
1AT&T Transcontinental FiberWest side of S. Center St.HighestContact AT&T on relocation feasibility before RFP. May refuse relocation or require extreme lead times.
5Google Fiber vaultWithin parcel — NE cornerSchedule-criticalCity-initiated relocation, 6–18 months. Resolve or commit to resolving before RFP issuance.
9Valley Metro light rail — underground electricW. Main St.CoordinationObtain written coordination letter confirming excavation and connection restrictions before RFP.
1184″ master storm drainW. Main St. centerlineCoordinationConstrains W. Main frontage/utility tie-in. Confirm connection points at pre-app.
§ 05CFBC Entitlement Path — Three-Step Process

The gating sequence for Concepts B and C under the FBC overlay (Title 11, Ch. 56–64). Concept A operates under the DC base zone + IEBC 2024 and does not require FBC opt-in.

STEP 01

Confirm transect — ✓ Done

T6MS confirmed in writing (Appendix O). No pre-application meeting required to resolve the transect boundary. Proceed to Step 2.

STEP 02

File FBC opt-in

Administrative election of the Form-Based Code. Activates T6MS transect standards as the governing form standard; DC remains the underlying base zone of record. The opt-in adds a form layer; it does not change the base zone.

STEP 03

Design review

Concept C (5–6 stories): admin review likely — office >10K SF P by right in T6MS (no SUP). Concept B (6–8 stories): design review board.

§ 06Building Code Analysis — 2024 ICC / 2023 NEC

City of Mesa adopts the 2024 ICC family and the 2023 NEC with local amendments (Mesa Municipal Code, Title 4). Mid-rise mixed-use feasible via podium construction or full steel/concrete framing for taller variants. Height governed by transect + design review — not a hard code cap.

Adopted codes
  • IBC 2024 · International Building Code
  • IFC 2024 · International Fire Code
  • IEBC 2024 · Existing Building Code (governs Concept A)
  • IMC / IPC / IFGC / IECC 2024
  • NEC 2023 · National Electrical Code
  • ICC A117.1 (2017) · ADA
Key code risks (expert review)
  • • Podium coordination — 3-hour slab penetrations; MEP early.
  • • Rooftop A-2 (B/C) — separate egress stair, 100 psf, A-2 sprinkler.
  • • Mixed-use separation — IBC § 508 + § 510.2 podium.
  • • Mesa Fire access — ladder access >30 ft.; confirm at pre-app.
  • • IEBC change-of-occupancy (A) — M → A-2 triggers IEBC Ch. 10.
  • • Utility conflicts — Google Fiber vault + AT&T fiber gating.
§ 05.lookupLookup table — if you want to know…
If you want to knowGo toWhat you'll findPrimary source
Base zoning
Mesa GIS · gis.mesaaz.govBase zone is DC (Downtown Core) — Title 11, Art. 6. The DE (Downtown Events) overlay is applied separately under Ch. 24 — not a combined designation. Confirmed in writing by Jeff Robbins, Office of Urban Transformation, June 2, 2026 (Appendix O).Title 11, Art. 6 / Ch. 24 · Appendix O · Appendix A
FBC transect — confirmed
FBC Regulating Plan · MZO Title 11, Art. 6Transect is T6MS (T6 Main Street) — confirmed in writing by the Office of Urban Transformation (Robbins, June 2, 2026) per the FBC Regulating Plan, MZO Title 11, Art. 6. No pre-application meeting is required to resolve the transect. See Appendix O. The Mesa GIS Planning & Zoning viewer renders multiple layers simultaneously; any T5MSF label visible in frame applies to adjacent parcels, not APN 138-41-023.§ 11-58-11 (Appendix I) · Appendix O (written confirmation)
Permitted uses
Mesa City Code § 11-58-3(A), Table 11-58-3.AFind the use in the left column; read across to the T6MS column (the confirmed transect for this parcel). Office > 10,000 SF is P by right in T6MS — no Special Use Permit required.P · permitted by rightPUA · Administrative Use PermitPUS · Special Use PermitPUC · Council Use Permit— · prohibited§ 11-58-3(A), Table 11-58-3.A (Appendix M)
Building height — T6MS
Mesa City Code § 11-58-11(D)T6MS (confirmed): 135′ maximum; 155′ if >25% affordable / senior; no maximum for LEED-certified buildings. 4-story minimum encouraged; up to 8 stories under Mid-Rise (§ 11-59-13). No transect boundary resolution required (Appendix O).§ 11-58-11(D) (Appendix I)
Building footprint
Mid-Rise building type · § 11-59-13Floors 1–2: 150′ maximum depth. Floors 3 and above: 65′ maximum depth regardless of transect. This is the controlling massing constraint on the parcel and drives every revised GBA figure in this platform.§ 11-59-13(E) (Appendix K)
Frontage requirements
Mesa City Code Ch. 60 · Shopfront frontage type75% minimum ground-floor glazing; 2′ maximum between glazing panels; awning minimum 4′ depth at 8′ clear height. The Central Main Plan (p. 68) independently requires an awning or arcade along the public ROW at this location.Title 11, Ch. 60 (Appendix L) · Central Main Plan, Map 5, p. 68 (Appendix G)
Subarea plan designation
Central Main Plan, Map 5, p. 68Parcel is designated Modern Downtown — the plan's highest-intensity character type. Requires a 4-story minimum, full street wall, structured parking, awning/arcade along the ROW, and over 90% lot coverage. The existing single-story building has been plan-inconsistent since 2012.Central Main Plan, Map 5, p. 68 (Appendix G)
Title status
CTG-08005555, Apr. 7, 2026 · Old Republic National TitleTwo recorded Deeds of Trust totaling $1,838,000. SBA is the beneficiary of the second DOT — SBA consent is required for any GPLET, ground lease, or major financing event. 2025 property taxes are delinquent.CTG-08005555, Sch. B Items 8–17 (Appendix E)
Utility conflicts
EPS Group Due Diligence Report, May 5, 2026Item 1: AT&T transcontinental fiber on the west side of S. Center (highest risk). Item 5: Google Fiber vault within the parcel at the NE corner — 6–18 month relocation. Item 9: Valley Metro underground electric on W. Main. Item 11: 84″ master storm drain in the W. Main centerline. Items 1 and 5 are City pre-development obligations, not developer risks.EPS Group DD Report (Appendix F)
Independent verification
Appendices A–OEvery source document is reproduced as an appendix below. Every citation in this platform includes the specific code section, ordinance number, date, and page reference. Nothing here is asserted without a traceable primary source — and the single most important confirmation (T6MS) is in writing from the Office of Urban Transformation (Appendix O).Primary-source audit · ZFramework · June 2026
§ 06.riskRisk register · the one page that protects the deal

Six city-side risks that can stall or unwind a P3 if not pre-cleared. Each carries a named owner, a mitigation, and an outside date. Concept-specific construction risks live in the Council Brief (§ 4.1.5).

RiskWhy it mattersMitigationOwnerOutside date
Utility relocation (Google Fiber vault, AT&T fiber)Vault confirmed within parcel at NE corner (EPS Item 5); transcontinental AT&T fiber (Item 1). Either can add 6–18 months and 7-figure cost to B / C.Open relocation track at Council authorization — not at developer selection. Cost-share framework published in RFQ.Mesa Utilities · OUTT + 12 mo.
Title — Special Warranty Deed exposureDeed (Doc. 2023-0552381) is Special, not General. Title Guarantee CTG-08005555 Sch. B is the only backstop. SBA $828K DOT (Doc. 2023-552386/388) status unconfirmed.Written release / subordination from SBA before any conveyance. Tax delinquency cleared concurrently.City Attorney · TitleT + 4 mo.
GPLET — SBA + ASLD consent timing8 vs. 25-year structure is a Council decision, not a developer ask. Consent from State Land and any junior lienholders adds 60–120 days; misses an RFP window if started late.Pre-clear consent letters in parallel with transect determination. Publish 8 vs. 25 yr decision tree before RFP.OED · City AttorneyT + 6 mo.
FBC opt-in / transect determinationAlthough T6MS is confirmed in writing (Appendix O), the opt-in is filed by the developer and is a gating administrative step for B / C entitlement.Pre-application memo with code path (FBC, IEBC 2024, parking, frontage, utilities) issued before RFP — single document, all departments.Planning · BuildingT + 3 mo.
Surface lot lease termination28-stall lessee occupies the site today. Termination cost and vacancy date drive the developer's mobilization schedule.Quantify exposure pre-RFP; negotiate exit aligned to selected concept mobilization. Budget line item in OUT pre-development.Real Estate · OUTT + 9 mo.
Parking deficit · shared-use MOUB and C both undersupply parking against suburban norms; C is thinnest at ~30 stalls. Without a published shared-use MOU with the City garage, financing tightens.Template MOU with City garage published as RFP exhibit; ratios and pricing fixed before bids.Transportation · OUTT + 6 mo.
T = Council authorization. Outside dates are gating, not aspirational.
§ 05.notesFour notes to the Office of Urban Transformation

Observations offered alongside the navigation guide — not findings, but framings.

01

The transect is confirmed — in writing — for APN 138-41-023.

T6MS confirmed by Jeff Robbins, Office of Urban Transformation, June 2, 2026 (Appendix O). The FBC Regulating Plan map (MZO Title 11, Art. 6) places the parcel entirely within T6MS. No pre-application meeting is required to resolve the transect — Concepts B and C proceed directly to the FBC opt-in election and design review.

02

DC is the base zone; DE is a separately applied overlay.

DC (Downtown Core) is the sole base zone designation for APN 138-41-023. DE (Downtown Events) is a standalone overlay applied over DC — not a combined 'DC/DE' designation. § 11-24-3(A) eliminates the annual cap on Special Events within the DE district, an operational asset for rooftop programming, outdoor dining, and Mesa Arts Center cross-events.

03

The Modern Downtown designation creates an affirmative argument.

The City adopted the Central Main Plan in 2012 to catalyze TOD development on this corridor. The plan requires a minimum 4-story building at this location with full street wall, structured parking, and awning/arcade. The existing single-story building has been plan-inconsistent for 14 years. Concepts B and C deliver what the plan has required since adoption.

04

The critical path now runs through encumbrance and utility relocation.

Step 1 (transect) is complete (Appendix O). The remaining gating items before RFP issuance are: SBA consent on the $828K DOT (60–120 days, Appendix E); cure of delinquent 2025 first-installment taxes; Google Fiber vault relocation (6–18 months, Appendix F Item 5); AT&T transcontinental fiber feasibility (Appendix F Item 1); Valley Metro coordination letter (Items 9 and 11); existing-tenant termination cost quantification (Sch. B Item 17). These are City pre-development obligations.

§ IDX · A–OSource library · Appendices A–O

Fifteen reproduced primary sources — instrument, date, items confirmed, governing code section. Every zoning designation, code citation, FBC standard, title fact, and utility conflict in this platform is reproduced below. The single most important prior uncertainty — the T6MS transect — is confirmed in writing by the City (Appendix O). All entries confirmed as of June 5, 2026.

  1. APPENDIX AOfficial municipal GIS database query

    Mesa GIS Planning & Zoning Screenshots

    Captured May 28, 2026·gis.mesaaz.gov · APN 13841023·Mesa GIS · Title 11, Art. 6 · Ch. 24
    Items confirmed

    Zoning layer (DC base + DE overlay), FBC transect layer (T6MS), GP 2050 Downtown placetype, Central Main Plan boundary, Opportunity Zone (Tract 421400).

    Why it matters

    Evidence base for every regulatory designation on the parcel. Note the layer-stacking behavior — the FBC Regulating Plan map governs over the GIS label display; the controlling transect is confirmed T6MS (Appendix O).

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  2. APPENDIX BRecorded real-property conveyance

    Special Warranty Deed — Doc. No. 2023-0552381

    Recorded October 24, 2023·Maricopa County Recorder·Maricopa County Recorder
    Items confirmed

    Legal description (E. 125′ of Lot 6, Block 11, ex. S. 10′); owner of record (1WM LLC); dimensions; transfer date.

    Why it matters

    Confirms current ownership, the legal description, and the S. 10′ exclusion as the W. Main Street alley public ROW. Special — not General — Warranty makes the title guarantee (Appendix E) essential.

    VIEW SOURCE DOCUMENT (PDF)
  3. APPENDIX COriginal recorded subdivision plat

    Original Mesa Townsite Plat — Book 3 / Page 11

    Circa 1878·Maricopa County Recorder·Maricopa County Recorder
    Items confirmed

    W. Main alley ROW; south 10′ excluded from parcel; platted right-of-way framework; original street grid and block/lot layout.

    Why it matters

    Foundational legal document — confirms the W. Main alley is a permanent public ROW dedicated at original platting, not a private easement.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  4. APPENDIX DOfficial City of Mesa replat

    City of Mesa Replat — Book 23 / Page 18

    July 10, 1930·Maricopa County Recorder·Maricopa County Recorder
    Items confirmed

    Replat reconfirming the alley ROW; current parcel configuration. Certified by S.M. Musse, City Engineer; J.G. Peterson, Mayor.

    Why it matters

    Second plat reference cited in the deed Exhibit A. With Appendix C, establishes continuous 95+ year recognition of the W. Main alley as public ROW.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  5. APPENDIX ECLTA Guarantee Form No. 28

    Condition of Title Guarantee — CTG-08005555

    Effective April 7, 2026·Old Republic National Title · via Premier Title Agency·CLTA Form No. 28 · A.R.S. § 33-401 et seq.
    Items confirmed

    Two DOTs: First Fidelity Bank $1.01M + U.S. SBA $828K; Assignment of Rents; existing tenant (Sch. B Item 17); 2025 first-installment property taxes delinquent (Sch. B Item 8).

    Why it matters

    Most complete title snapshot available. SBA consent required for any GPLET, ground lease, or major financing event. Schedule B Items 8 and 17 are both pre-development obligations the City should resolve before RFP.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  6. APPENDIX FUtility-conflict identification

    EPS Group Utility Due Diligence Report

    Issued May 5, 2026·EPS Group, Inc. · Mesa, AZ·Mesa Engineering / Valley Metro coordination
    Items confirmed

    Item 1: AT&T transcontinental fiber (highest risk); Item 5: Google Fiber vault NE corner within parcel (6–18 mo. relocation); Item 9: Valley Metro underground electric on W. Main; Item 11: 84″ master storm drain in W. Main centerline.

    Why it matters

    Items 1 and 5 are the gating schedule risks for Concepts B and C. The Google Fiber vault relocation is a City pre-development obligation, not a developer risk — resolve or commit before RFP issuance.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  7. APPENDIX GAdopted City of Mesa subarea plan

    Central Main Plan

    Adopted January 23, 2012·Mesa City Council · 167 pages · Map 5, Page 68·Subarea plan under Mesa General Plan
    Items confirmed

    Modern Downtown character type; 4-story minimum; full street wall; structured parking; awning/arcade required; >90% lot coverage.

    Why it matters

    The existing single-story building has been plan-inconsistent since 2012. Modern Downtown standards are Council-adopted, not aspirational. Concepts B and C are plan-anticipated; A is the lowest-capex activation.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  8. APPENDIX HMunicipal zoning ordinance

    Mesa City Code § 11-58-9 — T5MSF Standards

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 58·§ 11-58-9
    Items confirmed

    T5 Main Street Flex transect: 75′ max. height (105′ LEED Gold); 2-story min.; BTL 0–10′; office >10K SF requires SUP (PUS).

    Why it matters

    Applies to adjacent parcels — included for boundary context and GIS layer-stacking reference. Not the controlling transect for APN 138-41-023 (which is T6MS, Appendix O).

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  9. APPENDIX IMunicipal zoning ordinance

    Mesa City Code § 11-58-11 — T6MS Standards

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 58·§ 11-58-11
    Items confirmed

    Confirmed controlling transect for APN 138-41-023. 135′ max. height (no max. for LEED; 155′ if >25% affordable); 100% build-to line; 50′ min. ground-floor depth; structured parking required; office >10K SF P by right.

    Why it matters

    Single most important code citation in the package. T6MS confirmed in writing per Appendix O; all GBA, story counts, and use-by-right determinations for Concepts B and C are now final.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  10. APPENDIX JOverlay zoning district

    Mesa City Code § 11-24 — DE Overlay

    Ord. 5862 · 317.39 acres·Title 11, Ch. 24·§ 11-24
    Items confirmed

    Downtown Events overlay applied separately over DC base zone — not a combined designation. § 11-24-3(A): unlimited annual special events under standard Special Event License.

    Why it matters

    Corrects any reading of DE as a restriction. It is an operational asset — unlimited event programming, rooftop activations, outdoor dining, and Mesa Arts Center cross-programming across all three concepts. Cross-ref: Appendix O for DC/DE distinction.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  11. APPENDIX KFBC Building Type Standards

    Mesa City Code §§ 11-59-12 to 15 — Building Type Standards

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 59·§§ 11-59-12 to 15
    Items confirmed

    Mid-Rise (§ 11-59-13): 4–8 stories; 100% lot coverage; structured parking. Floors 1–2: 150′ max. depth. Floors 3+: 65′ max. depth (§ 11-59-13(E)).

    Why it matters

    The 65′ upper-floor depth cap on a 125′ × 155′ lot is the controlling massing constraint and the basis for every revised GBA / unit count / NLA figure for Concepts B and C.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  12. APPENDIX LFBC Private Frontage Standards

    Mesa City Code §§ 11-60-1 to 12 — Frontage Standards

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 60·§§ 11-60-1 to 12
    Items confirmed

    Shopfront: 75% min. ground-floor glazing, 2′ max. between panels, awning 4′ depth / 8′ clear. Terrace, Gallery, Arcade also available in T6MS.

    Why it matters

    Defines the W. Main frontage standard for all three concepts. The Central Main Plan independently requires an awning or arcade — the FBC Shopfront standard satisfies it.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  13. APPENDIX MComposite Use Table for all transect zones

    Mesa City Code § 11-58-3(A) — FBC Use Table

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 58 · Table 11-58-3.A·§ 11-58-3(A)
    Items confirmed

    Office >10,000 SF: P by right in T6MS; PUS in T5MSF. Decisive use determination for Concept C administrative-review entitlement path.

    Why it matters

    Combined with confirmed T6MS (Appendix O), this is the use determination that makes Concept C an admin-review path — not a Special Use Permit hearing.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  14. APPENDIX NFBC Nonconformity Standards

    Mesa City Code § 11-56-3 — FBC Nonconformity

    Ord. 5948 § 1 · Eff. July 1, 2025·Title 11, Art. 6, Ch. 56·§ 11-56-3
    Items confirmed

    SCIP threshold: expansion >20% of existing floor area OR >1,000 SF. On the 4,000 SF existing building, trigger is ~800 SF of enclosed addition.

    Why it matters

    Governs Concept A scope limits. Keeps adaptive-reuse activation under the SCIP threshold while preserving the option for later FBC opt-in on Concepts B or C.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach
  15. APPENDIX OWritten confirmation from the Office of Urban Transformation

    Written Correspondence — T6MS Transect + DC/DE Confirmation

    June 2, 2026·Jeff Robbins, Redevelopment Program Administrator, City of Mesa·FBC Regulating Plan · MZO Title 11, Art. 6
    Items confirmed

    (1) APN 138-41-023 is T6MS per the FBC Regulating Plan, MZO Title 11, Art. 6; (2) the base zone is DC only — DE is a separately applied overlay, not a combined designation. FBC Regulating Plan map excerpt + full email reproduced.

    Why it matters

    Resolves the single most important prior uncertainty in the package. With T6MS confirmed in writing, no pre-application meeting is required to settle the transect — Concepts B and C proceed directly to FBC opt-in and design review.

    Source document on file — PDF to attach

All 15 primary source documents confirmed and verified. Every regulatory finding in this package is traceable to one or more of the appendices above. Prepared by ZFramework™ · 1 West Main · Downtown Mesa, AZ · Revised · June 2026.

The spirit of this document
"We did not find simple answers.
We found the right ones."