HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDApacket__03-09-20_0852_56
NOTICE OF MEETING
REGULAR MEETING
FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Chairman Erik Hansen
Vice Chairman Peter Gray
Commissioner Mathew Boik
Commissioner Clayton Corey
Commissioner Susan Demptster
Commissioner Dan Kovacevic
Commissioner Scott Schlossberg
TIME:6:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING
WHEN:MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2020
WHERE:FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS
16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ
Commissioners of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call; a quorum of the
Town’s Council, various Commission, Committee or Board members may be in attendance at the Commission meeting.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to A.R.S. §1-602.A.9, subject to certain specified statutory exceptions, parents have a
right to consent before the State or any of its political subdivisions make a video or audio recording of a minor child. Meetings
of the Commission are audio and/or video recorded and, as a result, proceedings in which children are present may be subject
to such recording. Parents, in order to exercise their rights may either file written consent with the Town Clerk to such
recording, or take personal action to ensure that their child or children are not present when a recording may be made. If a
child is present at the time a recording is made, the Town will assume that the rights afforded parents pursuant to A.R.S.
§1-602.A.9 have been waived.
REQUEST TO COMMENT
The public is welcome to participate in Commission meetings.
TO SPEAK TO AN AGENDA ITEM, please complete a Request to Comment card, located in the back of
the Council Chambers, and hand it to the Executive Assistant prior to discussion of that item, if
possible. Include the agenda item on which you wish to comment. Speakers will be allowed three
contiguous minutes to address the Commission. Verbal comments should be directed through the
Presiding Officer and not to individual Commissioners.
TO COMMENT ON AN AGENDA ITEM IN WRITING ONLY, please complete a Request to Comment card,
indicating it is a written comment, and check the box on whether you are FOR or AGAINST and agenda
item, and hand it to the Executive Assistant prior to discussion, if possible.
REGULAR MEETING
REGULAR MEETING
1.CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE – Chairman Hansen
2.ROLL CALL – Chairman Hansen
3.CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.01(H), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters NOT listed on the
agenda. Any such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Commission, and (ii) is subject to reasonable
time, place, and manner restrictions. The Commission will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised
during Call to the Public unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion
of the Call to the Public, individual commissioners may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter, or
(iii) ask that the matter be placed on a future Commission agenda.
4.CONSIDERATION OF approving the meeting minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13,
2020.
5.HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF rezoning approximately 0.41 acres
located at the southwest corner of E. Parkview Avenue and N. Verde River Drive (AKA 13040
and 13048 N. Verde River Drive; APN's 176-08-977 and 176-08-976) from C-2-ED -
Intermediate Commercial Zoning District with the Entertainment District Overlay to C-3-ED -
General Commercial Zoning District with the Entertainment District Overlay.
6.HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF rezoning approximately 1.62 acres
located north of the northeast corner of N. Saguaro Boulevard and E. Shea Boulevard (AKA
9637 N. Saguaro Boulevard; APN # 176-10-805) from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and
Professional Zoning District to C-2, Intermediate Commercial Zoning District.
(Case Z2019-04)
7.REVIEW AND DISCUSSION of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020.
8.COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff.
9.SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director.
10.REPORT from Development Services Director.
11.ADJOURNMENT
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of March 9, 2020 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF NOTICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing notice was duly posted in accordance with the statement filed
by the Planning and Zoning Commission with the Town Clerk.
Dated this ______ day of ____________________, 2020.
_____________________________________________
Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480-816-5199 (voice) or
1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting or to obtain
agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Commission with this agenda are
available for review in the Development Services' Office.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of March 9, 2020 3 of 3
ITEM 4.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: 03/09/2020 Meeting Type: Planning and Zoning Commission
Agenda Type: Submitting Department: Development Services
Prepared by: Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
Staff Contact Information: John Wesley, Development Services Director
Request to Planning and Zoning Commission (Agenda Language): CONSIDERATION OF
approving the meeting minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 2020.
Staff Summary (Background)
The intent of approving meeting minutes is to ensure an accurate account of the discussion and action
that took place at the meeting for archival purposes. Approved minutes are placed on the Town's
website and maintained as permanent records in compliance with state law.
Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle
N/A
Risk Analysis
N/A
Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s)
N/A
Staff Recommendation(s)
Staff recommends approving the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 2020.
SUGGESTED MOTION
MOVE to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 2020.
Attachments
Meeting Minutes 2/13/2020
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Development Services Director
Form Started By: Paula Woodward Started On: 03/03/2020 05:02 PM
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 13, 2020 PAGE 1
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
February 13, 2020
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Chairman Erik Hansen
Chairman Hansen called the meeting of February 13, 2020 to order at 6:00 p.m.
1. MOMENT OF SILENCE – Chairman Erik Hansen
2. ROLL CALL — Chairman Erik Hansen
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Erik Hansen, Vice Chairman Peter Gray; Commissioners,
Mathew Boik, Clayton Corey, Susan Dempster, Dan Kovacevic and Scott Schlossberg.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Development Services Director John Wesley and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward.
3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC
None.
Pursuant to ARS. 38-431.01(H), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters NOT listed on the agenda. Any such comment (I) must be within the jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Commission and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The Planning and Zoning Commission will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during "Call to the Public" unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the Call to the Public, individual commissioners may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter, or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a future Planning and Zoning Commission agenda.
4. CONSIDERATION of approving the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes dated January 23, 2020.
Commissioner Kovacevic MOVED to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission dated January 23, 2020; Commissioner Dempster SECONDED: passed unanimously.
5. CONSIDERATION OF rezoning approximately 1.62 acres located north of the northeast corner
of N. Saguaro Boulevard and E. Shea Boulevard (AKA 9637 N. Saguaro Boulevard; APN # 176-10-
805) from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and Professional Zoning District to C-2, Intermediate
Commercial Zoning District.(Case Z2019-04)
Mr. Wesley said that this is a request for a rezone from a C-1 to C-2 zoning in order to build a three-story hotel with sixty- six rooms. Staff has received a number of comments from the public regarding the proposed rezone. Public comments are in the agenda packet. Based on the large
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 13, 2020 PAGE 2
community interest the applicant would like to meet with the neighbors. They would like to
request a continuance to have that opportunity to meet with the community. Chairman Hansen suggested and the commission agreed to a twenty-five day continuance to the next scheduled Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The commissioners discussed and agreed it was a good idea to hear the call to the public that evening. It would allow the applicant to hear firsthand the public’s comments. Commissioner Dempster MOVED to hear the public speakers that evening. Commissioner Schlossberg SECONDED passed unanimously. Wendy Ridell of Berry Riddell LLC, representing the applicant, asked the Commission for a continuance so that more of the community could be reached to share the proposed plan and take their input. The following Fountain Hills individuals spoke in opposition to this project; Larry Meyers, Fred Bedell, Steve Smith, David Williams, Cindy Strasser and Robert Strasser. Commissioner Kovacevic MOVED to continue Item # 5 to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting March 9, 2020; Commissioner Corey SECONDED: passed unanimously.
6. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff.
None
7. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director.
None
8. REPORT from Development Services Director.
Mr. Wesley announced the new Senior Planner is Farhad Tavassoli. Previously he was the Project Manager for the Flood Control District of Maricopa County and as a Planner for the City of
Goodyear. Farhad is active in the Arizona Planning Association and holds both undergraduate and graduate degrees in Urban Planning from Arizona State University.
Mr. Wesley reminded the Commission that the open meeting laws training takes place on February 18, 4:00 p.m. in the council chambers. The General Plan Update 2020 stakeholders meeting is on February 26, 2020 at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers.
9. ADJOURNMENT.
The Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held February 13, 2020,
adjourned at 6:32 p.m.
Town of Fountain Hills
Erik Hansen, Chairman
ATTEST AND PREPARED BY:
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 13, 2020 PAGE 3
Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Session held by
the Planning and Zoning Commission of Fountain Hills in the Fountain Hills Council Chambers on the 23rd day of
January 2020. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 3rd of February 2020.
Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF NOTICE
ITEM 5.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: 03/09/2020 Meeting Type: Planning and Zoning Commission
Agenda Type: Submitting Department: Development Services
Prepared by: John Wesley, Development Services Director
Staff Contact Information: John Wesley, Development Services Director
Request to Planning and Zoning Commission (Agenda Language): HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING
AND CONSIDERATION OF rezoning approximately 0.41 acres located at the southwest corner of E.
Parkview Avenue and N. Verde River Drive (AKA 13040 and 13048 N. Verde River Drive; APN's
176-08-977 and 176-08-976) from C-2-ED - Intermediate Commercial Zoning District with the
Entertainment District Overlay to C-3-ED - General Commercial Zoning District with the Entertainment
District Overlay.
Staff Summary (Background)
Request
The property owner desires to have an indoor, climate controlled, multi-story, mini-storage facility built
on the property at the southwest corner of Parkview Avenue and Verde River Drive. The zoning
ordinance clearly lists mini-storage as a use by right in the C-3 zoning district and does not include
mini-storage in any other zoning district. The property currently has a base zoning district of C-2,
Intermediate Commercial. Therefore, a rezoning is needed to allow the proposed use.
Context
This property is currently vacant. The property immediately to the west includes a veterinary clinic
along Parkview with the Plat 208 common parking area behind. Further to the west are additional
commercial properties. To the north along Parkview Avenue, there is a commercial building and vacant
lot to the west of Verde River Drive and an office building at the northeast corner of Parkview Avenue
and Verde River Drive. To the east, across Verde River Drive, the property is vacant. The property
immediately south of this site is developed with a commercial building. All of the surrounding
properties are zoned C-2-ED.
General Plan
Zoning of property must be consistent with the General Plan. The Land Use designation for this area is
C/R - General Commercial/Retail. This land use designation "denotes areas providing for the sale of
convenience goods (food, drugs and sundries) and personal services that meet the daily needs of a
multi-neighborhood trade area." This area is also designated as part of the Downtown Area Specific Plan.
The General Plan, Chapter 4, Growth Areas Element, includes the following objectives related to the
Town Center:
Objective 1.2 The Town should implement its recently approved Town Center Vision Plan and
should continually study comparable and successful downtown areas. The Town Center Vision
Plan should be used to help guide the design and development of the Town Center and peripheral
areas. This should be part of the Town Center Specific Area Plan.
Objective 2.2 The Town should encourage mixed-use developments, particularly in the Town
Center.
Objective 3.2 The Town should encourage mixed-use housing in the Town Center.
Objective 4.1 The Town should encourage the development of mixed-use housing in the Town
Center to be used as an opportunity to provide a variety of housing price points.
Objective 5.6 The town should recognize the plan for the downtown area prepared by Swaback
Partners as an Area Specific Plan. This plan will encourage the development of the Town Center
that will strengthen the community identity and provide day and night time activities.
In addition to the objectives listed above, Chapter 4 of the General Plan includes a section
describing the vision and plan for the Town Center Multi-Use Growth Area (pages 52 and 54).
This section states in part "The Town Center should incorporate residential, office, retail,
entertainment and governmental services providing day and evening activities to maintain a
lively and safe environment." The Plan also describes the desire for the Town Center to
primarily be an employment center and secondarily a residential community. Emphasis
is placed on designing an attractive and enjoyable streetscape resulting in an area that will
"attract investment and stimulate development."
Downtown Area Specific Plan & Town Center Vision Plan
These planning documents were completed and adopted in 2009 and were "the product of months of
research, staff reviews, Town Council reviews, focus groups, and public forums." The location of this
request is within The Avenues District of the Plan. This district is defined as "The core of the downtown
with a comfortable atmosphere for strolling, sight-seeing and shopping. This district will evolve into a
premier shopping destination for residents and a must-visit magnet for visitors."
A couple of specific recommendations for this area include:
The Avenues district is designed as a premier shopping and dining location but is also designed to
"accommodate a variety of other uses including second story office space, condominiums and
small-scale businesses along with neighborhood services."
Special attention should be given to creating sidewalks with an abundance of shade. Sidewalk
design should allow for generous space for seating as well as storefront presentations (emphasis
added). Outdoor sidewalk cafés and dining will be highly encouraged.
Zoning Ordinance
Section 12.01 D of the Zoning Ordinance states the following for the purpose of the C-2 Zoning District:
C-2. Intermediate Commercial Zoning District: The principal purpose of this Zoning District is to
provide for the sale of commodities and the performance of services and other activities in
locations for which the market area extends beyond the immediate neighborhoods. Principal
uses permitted in this Zoning District include furniture stores, hotels and motels, restaurants, and
some commercial recreation and cultural facilities such as movies and instruction in art and
music. This Zoning District is designed for application at major street intersections.
Section 12.01 E of the Zoning Ordinance states the following for the purpose of the C-3 Zoning
District:
C-3. General Commercial Zoning District: The principal purpose of this Zoning District is to
provide for commercial uses concerned with wholesale or distribution activities in locations
where there is adequate access to major streets or highways. Principal uses permitted in this
Zoning District include retail and wholesale commerce and commercial entertainment.
The development standards in the C-3 zoning district are the same as in the C-2 zoning district.
Some of the additional uses allowed by right in the C-3 zoning district include: Art metal and
ornamental iron shops; cabinet and carpentry shops; lumber yards; new and use automobile
sales; stone monument sales; wholesale stores; mini-storage. Even though the current property
owner and applicant has a plan for development as a mini-storage, once the property is
rezoned, any of the uses allowed in the C-3 district could be established on the property.
In 2016 the Town added Chapter 25, Entertainment District Overlay, to the Zoning Ordinance and
applied the district to much of the Town Center area, including these lots. The primary purpose of this
zoning district was to equalize and standardize the allowance for noise in this area to help facilitate
entertainment activities. In 2017 this district was amended to allow for residential uses without
requiring a Special Use Permit. Partially due to a potential mixed use development on this property that
was considered in 2019, staff proposed and Council approved an amendment to Chapter 25 to allow
consideration of residential uses in excess of 8 units per acre within the Overlay area. This zoning
overlay will still apply to this property if it rezoned to the C-3 Zoning District.
Plat 208 was platted in the County and began development prior to the incorporation of the Town. It
was clearly platted with the intent and understanding that, for at least the smaller lots, the common
parking area would serve all the development and individual lots would not need to provide on-site
parking. There was not, however, a zoning district in the County that seemed to correlate with this form
of development. In order to have initial zoning for the Town following incorporation, the Town adopted
a zoning ordinance in 1990 which was similar to the County zoning ordinance in effect at the time (I
have not been able to find a copy of that initial Town zoning ordinance).
Following incorporation, additional development was proposed for the Plat 208 area. Because there
was nothing in the zoning ordinance to allow for this form of development in this portion of Plat 208,
the Town created and approved a zoning overlay district, the Shopping Center Plaza Overlay District, in
1992 and then applied that zoning district to this area. Among other things, this zoning designation
allowed properties 10,800 square feet or less to have 100% lot coverage and lots larger than that to
have 60% lot coverage.
In 1993 the Town completed the process of drafting and adopting a zoning ordinance specific for the
Town. That new zoning ordinance was adopted in November 1993. I have reviewed that ordinance.
That ordinance did not include the Shopping Center Plaza Overlay zoning designation and it is still not in
our zoning ordinance today. While the Town has continued to rely on the provisions of that ordinance,
and will continue to do so until a new overlay can be adopted, the action of rezoning the property will
clearly remove any rights or ability to continue to apply this now non-existent zoning overlay. This
situation creates challenges for the proposed as described below under the Tentative Development Plan
section.
Tentative Development Plan
The tentative development plan submitted with this request shows a three-story, enclosed mini-storage
facility. There is access into the building from the existing parking lot. Approximately three existing
parking spaces would need to be removed to provide access to the loading area. The proposed plan
shows the building located on or close to each of the property lines. There are a number of issues with
the proposed plan that will need to be addressed in a formal site plan review. These include but are
not limited to: adjustments to setbacks, completing a re-plat to join the lots, the overall building height,
verification of existing parking requirements for this block of Plat 208 to allow a reduction in the number
of spaces.
The tentative plan shows a building with minimal to no setback and near 100% lot coverage. Because
they are rezoning the property to C-3 to allow for the use, we can no longer apply the non-existent
Shopping Center Plaza Overlay district to this property. Therefore, if the rezoning is approved, the
development would be subject to the straight C-3 zoning ordinance bulk standards which include a
front yard setback equal to the height of the building and a maximum 60% lot coverage. Even if we
determined they could continue to use the Shopping Center Plaza Overlay, there would be an issue with
the proposed plan. The Shopping Center Plaza Overlay district allows lots of 10,800 square feet or less
to have 100% lot coverage. Lots larger than 10,800 square feet have a ten-foot setback on the front
yard, must maintain a sight triangle at the corner, and have a maximum 60% lot coverage. The proposed
development combines to existing lots to create a new lot in excess of 17,000 square feet, therefore, if
we were able to apply the Overlay, they would have amend the tentative plan to meet these setback
and lot coverage requirements.
The proposed elevations are attractive for the proposed use; the building will not be perceived as a
storage facility. Unfortunately, however, the building has solid massing on the ground floor adjacent to
the streets. As stated above, these lots are in a portion of the downtown area that are designated for
significant pedestrian activity. In order to facilitate that pedestrian activity and make a walkable street,
these facades need to include windows and openings to add to the pedestrian experience along these
streets.
Analysis
Both the General Plan 2010 and the Downtown Area Specific Plan clearly set the goal for further
development of the town center area as a mixed-use, urban place that is active and pedestrian friendly.
As stated above, the primary purpose of the C-3 zoning district is to provide for wholesale and
distribution activities and this zoning district should have access to major streets or highways. The C-3
zoning district does not include or allow any additional uses above what is included in the C-2 that
would benefit the downtown area or add to the mix of uses desired in this urban, pedestrian area.
The Downtown Area Specific Plan envisions a strong activity core at the intersection of Verde River and
Avenue of the Fountains. This strong activity core would then radiate out along the two streets and
form the primary location in the downtown area for shops, restaurants, and entertainment activities.
For areas such as this to be successful, they must have uses that generate a lot of activity and be
designed with buildings that create and support a walkable environment. When gaps in the pedestrian
environment are created in the street, whether through vacant parcels, blank walls, or uses that do not
generate pedestrian activity, the ability to achieve the desired environment is significantly
compromised.
compromised.
Mini-storage uses are likely to be successful and be fully rented, whether downtown or elsewhere in the
Town. The use will generate some amount of sales tax revenues to the Town. There is, however, an
opportunity cost from the retail or restaurant space that will not be constructed if the mini-storage is
built. Also, because the mini-storage use will generate only minor activity and will not likely contribute
pedestrian activity on the street, other shops and restaurants in the area will not see the same level of
benefit as other uses might generate.
There is a small area to the west along Parkview that is already zoned C-3. This property was zoned C-3
in 1989. The bowling alley which has occupied this building is an allowed use in the C-2 zoning district.
Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle
General Plan 2010, especially Chapter 3: Land Use Element
Downtown Specific Area Plan, The Avenue District
Zoning Ordinance, Section 2.01, Amendments or Zone Changes
Zoning Ordinance, Section 12.02 D. Use Permitted in the C-3 Zoning District
Risk Analysis
N/A
Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s)
N/A
Staff Recommendation(s)
The General Plan and the Downtown Specific Area Plan clearly describe a vision for this area along
Verde River as a mixed use, pedestrian friendly place that contributes to the ongoing effort to make
downtown Fountain Hills a prosperous and vibrant urban core. The proposed zoning and use of this
property are not consistent with the goals and policies contained in the General Plan and the Downtown
Specific Area Plan. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the request to rezone this property from C-2
to C-3.
Should the Commission determine the rezoning and proposed use are consistent with the Plans and
recommend approval, the applicant would need to significantly redesign the site for compliance with
the zoning ordinance requirements.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Staff will assist the Commission in drafting a motion, as needed.
Attachments
Application
Vicinity Map
Tentative Development Plan
Elevations 1
Elevations 2
Specific Area Plan
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Development Services Director (Originator)John Wesley 03/04/2020 12:18 PM
Form Started By: John Wesley Started On: 02/19/2020 01:47 PM
Final Approval Date: 03/04/2020
Vicinity
CASE:
Z2020-01
SITE / ADDRESS:
13048 N Verde River Dr
APN#176-08-976 & 176-08-977
REQUEST:
Amending the OFFICIAL Zoning District
Maps of the Town of Fountain Hills,
Arizona, by changing the zoning
designation of approximately 0.41 acres
located the southwest corner of Parkview
Ave and Verde River Dr, (AKA 13040 and
13048 N Verde River Drive; from C-2-ED -
Intermediate Commercial Zoning District
with the Entertainment District Overlay to
C-3-ED - General Commercial Zoning
District with the Entertainment District
Overlay.
All that is Ariz on a
FO U N TAIN HIL
L
S
TOWN OF INC. 1989
MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN REGIONAL PARK
SALT RIVER PIMA - MARICOPA INDIAN COMMUNITY
FO
R
T
M
C
D
O
W
E
L
L
Y
A
V
A
P
A
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
SC
O
T
T
S
D
A
L
E
Rezoning C-2 to C-3
Vicinity MapMap ::Z2020-01Z2020-01 CaseCase DetailsDetails
PARK
V
I
E
W
A
V
E
VE
R
D
E
R
I
V
E
R
D
R
AVE
N
U
E
O
F
T
H
E
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S
LA
M
O
N
T
A
N
A
D
R
PALI
S
A
D
E
S
B
L
V
D
Rezoning Request
ITEM 6.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: 03/09/2020 Meeting Type: Planning and Zoning Commission
Agenda Type: Submitting Department: Development Services
Prepared by: John Wesley, Development Services Director
Staff Contact Information: John Wesley, Development Services Director
Request to Planning and Zoning Commission (Agenda Language): HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING
AND CONSIDERATION OF rezoning approximately 1.62 acres located north of the northeast corner of
N. Saguaro Boulevard and E. Shea Boulevard (AKA 9637 N. Saguaro Boulevard; APN # 176-10-805) from
C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and Professional Zoning District to C-2, Intermediate Commercial Zoning
District.
(Case Z2019-04)
Staff Summary (Background)
Update
This item was continued from the February 12, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to allow
the applicant to review the request with neighbors. Several residents of the adjacent Monterra Ranch
development attended the February meeting and expressed concerns about the proposal.
A meeting was held on February 26th. Eleven people signed in at the meeting. The applicant provided a
revised site plan to those in attendance. The revised site plan shows a maximum height of the proposed
building at 34-feet, down from the 40-foot tall building with some embellishments up to 44-feet in the
previous site plan. The drawings also now show the trees which will be planted along the north
property line to screen the building from the adjacent neighbors. They also presented the results of a
sound study which shows construction of a building at this location will help to buffer the sound of the
traffic noise on Shea Boulevard. A copy of the revised building elevations and sound study are attached.
The reduction in the building height will mean that the proposed use will have less of an impact on the
adjacent residential neighborhood. Any building built on the site, whether in the C-1 or C-2 zoning
district will help to block the sound of the traffic on Shea Boulevard from the existing residential
neighborhood. By rezoning to C-2 the site can be developed with uses that operate past 11:00 pm
which can result in increased on-site noise impacting the neighborhood.
Request
This request is to rezone the vacant property north of the northeast corner of Shea and Saguaro
Boulevards from C-1 to C-2. The intended purpose for the property is the construction of a three-story,
67 room hotel.
This property has been zoned C-1 since the start of Fountain Hills. The surrounding property to the
south, east, and west has also been zoned C-1. All of this property, except for the site now planned for a
hospital, has been developed with a variety of retail and office uses. The property immediately north
was originally zoned C-1 but was rezoned to R-5 in 1986 for the development of Monterra Ranch.
General Plan
The land use designation for this area is C/R - General Commercial/Retail. The stated intent for this
designation is to provide for the "sale of convenience goods (food, drugs and sundries) and personal
services that meet the daily needs of a multi-neighborhood trade area."
The Vision statement in the Land Use Element is: A Town that seeks to preserve its character and beauty
using land use principles that allow development in a cohesive and beneficial manner to protect
neighborhoods and support business development."
Land Use element Goals and Objectives that relate to this specific request include:
Objective 2.1 The Town should continue to employ a policy to encourage the overall
development of existing commercially zoned lands and the renovation of underutilized
commercial building.
Objective 3.2 The Town should study issues and implement solutions related to infill,
revitalization, and redevelopment of the commercial land and existing uses along Shea Boulevard
and Saguaro Boulevard.
Goal Five: Protect and preserve existing neighborhoods from incompatible adjacent land uses.
Zoning Pattern
Typical zoning patterns place the most intense zoning and land uses at major arterial intersections and
along major streets and then step down to less intense zones and uses to provide buffers and transitions
to residential areas. The C-1 and CC zoning districts are the least intense commercial zoning districts in
the Town. The C-2 District is more intense in terms of some of the uses allowed (e.g. auto repair, bars,
drive-in restaurants, liquor stores, etc.) and in terms of allowing stores to operate 24 hours a day (C-1
and CC are restricted to hours from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.).
A request was made last year to rezone the property across Saguaro to the west from C-1 to C-2. There
was significant neighborhood opposition to this request and it was denied by Council. Chief concerns in
that case was the more intense uses that could happen in close proximity to the adjacent single
residence neighborhood.
Planned Use
As shown in the attached illustrations, the request for the C-2 zoning district has been made due to the
desire to construct a 3-story hotel on the property; this use is not allowed in the C-1 district. Section
2.01 B 1 b of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a tentative development plan be submitted with each
rezoning application. A final site plan will be submitted for staff review and approval at a later date
prior to submission of construction drawings. While this tentative development plan gives an idea of
how the property owner is planning to use the land at this time, this development plan does not impose
any restrictions on the ultimate use of the property. For any reason the property ownership could
change, or the current owner could change their mind and decide to use the property for any of the
other uses allowed in the approved zoning district.
Analysis
This area has been planned and zoned for commercial uses since the founding of Fountain Hills. Most of
the area has been developed and used for a variety of commercial activities for many years, this is one
of few lots remaining to be developed.
The General Plan recognizes that the area of Shea and Saguaro Boulevards is under transition and a
good place to locate a mix of office, retail, entertainment, and residential uses. Given the proximity to
the SR 87 Highway, this is a good location attract and serve both local and regional needs. C-2 zoning
has been introduced into the area at the Tractor Supply and at the Target Center.
The General Plan supports the idea of developing the tourism industry in Fountain Hills. Hotels can be a
good revenue generator for the Town from both the taxes on the hotel stay and any purchases that take
place in the Town during a hotel stay. The applicant reports that current hotels in Fountain Hills have an
annual occupancy rate around 75%, which is high and shows some demand in the market for additional
hotel rooms. This average comes from nearly 100% occupancy in the prime season and around 50% in
the off season. Hotel rooms are currently under construction at CopperWynd and the Lakeshore Hotel is
being renovated.
As part of the rezoning application, staff asked the applicant for a traffic impact analysis. That analysis
reviewed a wide range of commercial uses that could result from C-2 zoning, not just the impact of the
proposed hotel. That analysis did not show any adverse impact on the adjacent streets due to the
development of this property with C-2 uses.
Of primary consideration in review of this request to rezone from C-1 to C-2 is the General Plan Land Use
Goal Five which states: "Protect and preserve existing neighborhoods from incompatible adjacent land
uses." Development of C-2 uses on this property could negatively impact the adjacent residential
property. As stated previously, the Council has recently denied C-2 across Saguaro due to concerns from
the adjacent neighborhood with the potential impact C-2 uses. In that case the adjacent properties are
zoned and developed with single-family uses and the street pattern allows direct access from the
commercial activities into the residential neighborhood. In this case, the adjacent property is zoned for
multi-family uses and the property is developed with attached single-family homes and there will be no
direct street access from the commercial area into the neighborhood.
Potential impacts still exist, however, in terms of the lights, noise, and activity that can occur
with C-2 uses, including a hotel. One significant difference between the C-1 and C-2 zoning
districts is the height allowed. In the C-1 District the maximum height is 25'; in the C-2 it is 40'.
However, the setback from the adjacent residential use increases with the building height
(setback must at least 40 feet for the proposed 40' tall hotel). Also of concern are the hours of
operation. People who purchased property and live in Monterra Ranch did so with the existing
commercial development being closed at night. Rezoning to C-2 will allow 24-hour operations.
The nature of the uses also become more intense with the additionally allowed uses, primarily
drive-thrus being a use by right.
Many of these impacts can be addressed through site and building design. In this case, the
applicant has tried to mitigate impacts by designing the hotel with the entry on the opposite
side from the residences and including significant landscaping along the north property line.
While the site plan provided is a "tentative development plan" and other site plans could be
provided in the future for any use allowed in the C-2 zoning district, stipulations could be
provided in the future for any use allowed in the C-2 zoning district, stipulations could be
included on the approval of the zoning to ensure whatever development occurs provides the
buffers and transitions needed to mitigate any negative impacts of the development. The
attached draft ordinance includes a stipulation for a landscape buffer of trees along the north
property line. Additional stipulations could be added.
The tentative development plan includes an access drive around the north side of the building
to provide emergency access for the fire department. This results in the trees planted along the
north property line not having a lot of room. There is a concern with the Willow Acacia trees
being shown. The trees are shown to be planted just a few feet from the north property line.
The radius of the mature tree is about 20'. This will put significant portions of the tree canopy
into the rear yards of the adjoining residential properties. Any tree that is tall enough (at least
20' tall) to provide screening of the hotel and prevent people in the hotel from looking into the
homes, would have this same issue.
Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle
General Plan Chapter 3 - Land Use Element
Zoning Ordinance Chapter 12 - Commercial Zoning Districts
Risk Analysis
N/A
Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s)
N/A
Staff Recommendation(s)
Staff appreciates the efforts the applicant has made to meet with the neighbors and provide a revised
tentative development plan which reduces the impact of the proposed use on the neighborhood. As
stated previously, the proposed hotel on this property has been designed in a manner to significantly
reduce the potential negative impacts
Staff still has concerns with the introduction of the C-2 zoning district at this location. The C-2 zoning
district brings with it an increase in intensity of use that can be detrimental to the adjacent residential
neighborhood. and approval at this location would set a precedent for similar zoning of adjacent
properties. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested rezoning.
Should the Commission determine rezoning to C-2 is appropriate for this location, a draft ordinance is
attached. The draft ordinance includes one stipulation related to trees along the north property line
that could be used to mitigate the current use and any other uses that might be proposed for the
property. Additional stipulations could be added should the Commission identify other key
development standards that would be important for this or other uses on the property to address
potential impacts.
The draft ordinance also includes a procedure for reverting the zoning back to C-1 should the property
owner not proceed with the hotel in a timely manner. This could be included in the recommendation to
Council or deleted if the Commission determines it is not necessary.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Staff will help the Commission draft a motion as necessary.
Attachments
Vicinity Map
Application
Submittal Documents
Sound Study Letter
Public Comments
Sign-In Sheet
Draft Ordinance
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Development Services Director (Originator)John Wesley 03/04/2020 09:16 AM
Form Started By: John Wesley Started On: 03/02/2020 08:41 AM
Final Approval Date: 03/04/2020
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
RENDERING ENTRANCE 27 FEBRUARY 2020
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
ARIAL CONTEXT PLAN 27 FEBRUARY 2020
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
RENDERED LANDSCAPE PLAN 27 FEBRUARY 2020
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
PLANTINGS LANDSCAPE PLAN 27 FEBRUARY 2020
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
PLANTING COLLAGE 27 FEBRUARY 2020
ACACIA SALICINA WILLOW ACACIA
LEUCOPHYLLUM LANGMANIAE RIO
BRAVO TEXAS SAGE
YUCCA RED YUCCA
POINCIANNA PULCHERRIMA RED
BIRD OF PARADISE
POINCIANNA PULCHERRIMA RED
BIRD OF PARADISE
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
SITE SECTION/ELEVATION HEIGHTS 27 FEBRUARY 2020
34
'
-
3
1
/
8
"
44
'
-
4
1
/
2
"
PREVIOUS HEIGHT
CURRENT HEIGHT
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
BUILDING ELEVATIONS 27 FEBRUARY 2020
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
REAR ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION
SIDE ELEVATION
VTAC GRILL (COLOR MATCHED) ON REAR BUILDING UNITS - TYP.
TINTED WINDOWS ON REAR BUILDING UNITS - TYP.
SIDE ELEVATION
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
BUILDING SECTION 27 FEBRUARY 2020
LEVEL 1
0' -0"
LEVEL 2
12' -3 1/8"
LEVEL 3
21' -5 5/8"
TRUSS BEARING 1
29' -7 1/4"
HIGH PARAPET 1
34' -1 1/2"
2'
-
4
3
/
4
"
31
'
-
1
0
3
/
8
"
1/4" / 1'-0"
34
'
-
3
1
/
8
"
EXTERIOR ENTRY SKETCH
HOMEWOOD STAPLETON
18 FEBRUARY 2020
FOUNTAIN HILLS - FAIRFIELD INN
RENDERING 27 FEBRUARY 2020
AZ Office CA Office
4960 S. Gilbert Rd, Suite 1-461 1197 Los Angeles Ave, Suite C-256
Chandler, AZ 85249 Simi Valley, CA 93065
p. (602) 774-1950 p. (805) 426-4477
www.mdacoustics.com
MD Acoustics, LLC 1
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
February 24, 2020
Mr. Rajan Olson
Chalet, Inc
P.O. Box 207
Flagstaff, AZ 86002
Subject: Fairfield Inn and Suites Traffic Noise Evaluation, Town of Fountain Hills, AZ
Dear Mr. Olson:
MD Acoustics, LLC (MD) has completed a traffic noise evaluation for the proposed Fairfield Inn and Suites
located at 9637 North Saguaro Boulevard in the Town of Fountain Hills, AZ. Per the Town’s request, the
project was evaluated with regard to the traffic noise impact to the existing condos located near 9750
Monterey Drive. This report provides the baseline traffic noise levels (pre project) and the post
constructed project traffic noise levels at said location. A glossary of acoustical terms is located in
Appendix A.
1.0 Study Method and Procedure
Traffic noise along Shea Boulevard was modeled using SoundPlan 3D (SP) acoustic modeling software.
SP is capable of evaluating traffic noise sources at multiple receptor locations. SP’s software utilizes
algorithms (based on FHWA TNM-traffic noise model software) to calculate the noise projections. The
software allows the user to input:
• Roadway classification – (e.g. freeway, major arterial, arterial, secondary, collector, etc),
• Roadway Active Width – (distance between the center of the outer most travel lanes on each side
of the roadway)
• Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT), Travel Speeds, Percentages of automobiles, medium trucks
and heavy trucks
• Roadway grade and angle of view
• Site Conditions (e.g. soft vs. hard)
• Percentage of total ADT which flows each hour through-out a 24-hour period
Appendix B provides the traffic data and model’s inputs/outputs. MD utilized traffic data from Maricopa
Association of Governments website -Transportation Data Management System (TDMS). According to
the TDMS website, Shea Boulevard has approximately 20,000 ADTs.
In addition to using the ADT information, MD performed 24-hour noise level measurements on
02/20/2020 to 02/21/2020 to evaluate the existing traffic noise conditions at the site. The noise level
ranged between 47.5 to 59.9 dBA and had a day night level (DNL) of 61. The day night level is the 24-
hour average noise level. This data was utilized to calibrate the acoustical model. The 24-hour sound
level data is provided in Appendix C.
Fairfield Inn and Suites Traffic Noise Evaluation
Town of Fountain Hills, AZ
MD Acoustics, LLC 2
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
2.0 Findings
The existing traffic noise levels at the property line separating the project site and the condos units (north
of the project site) currently experience a DNL of 60-61 dBA. Once the project is constructed, the DNL
will drop to 54 dBA. A 6 dBA reduction occurs along the project site’s property line and to the condos to
the north.
Exhibits A and B illustrate the existing traffic noise level contours and future traffic noise level projects.
The change in noise level would be considered an audible difference as the ear can perceive a 3 dBA
change in noise level, while a 5 dBA change will significant and a 10 dBA change is considered twice as
quiet.
As shown in Exhibit B, the noise contours illustrate how the building shell will further attenuate traffic
noise levels along Shea Boulevard.
3.0 Conclusion
MD is pleased to provide this noise evaluation for this project. If you have any questions regarding this
letter, please call our office at (602) 774-1950.
Sincerely,
MD Acoustics, LLC
Mike Dickerson, INCE Robert Pearson
Principal Acoustical Consultant
Fairfield Inn and Suites Traffic Noise Evaluation
Town of Fountain Hills, AZ
MD Acoustics, LLC 3
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Exhibit A
Existing Condition Noise Levels
Fairfield Inn and Suites Traffic Noise Evaluation
Town of Fountain Hills, AZ
MD Acoustics, LLC 4
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Exhibit B
Project Condition Noise Levels
MD Acoustics, LLC
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Appendix A
Glossary of Acoustical Terms
MD Acoustics, LLC
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Glossary of Terms
A-Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using
the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency
components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of
rating human judgment of loudness.
Ambient or Background Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context,
the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Decibel (dB): A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base
10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro-pascals.
dB(A): A-weighted sound level (see definition above).
Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample
period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average
noise level during the sample period.
Day-Night Level (LDN or DNL): LDN is the average noise level over a 24-hour period. The noise between
the hours of 10PM to 7AM is artificially increased by 10 dB. This noise is weighted to take into account the
decrease in community background noise of 10 dB during this period.
Noise: Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing,
or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines
noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...".
Sound Level (Noise Level): The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter
having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum.
Sound Level Meter: An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency
weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels.
MD Acoustics, LLC
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Appendix B
Traffic Data &
SoundPlan Input/Outputs
Directions:2-WAY EB WB
Transportation Data Management System
This report and/or data was funded in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and/or
Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. ... more
Record 1 of 1 Goto Record go
Location ID 248 MPO ID
Type LINK HPMS ID
On NHS No On HPMS No
LRS ID 07 SHEA BLVD LRS Loc Pt.19.2284597
SF Group U3-7-South FC 3 Route Type
AF Group U3-7-South FC 3 Route
GF Group U3-7-South Active Yes
Class Dist Grp Category
Seas Clss Grp Statewide-2015
WIM Group
QC Group Default
Fnct'l Class (3) Other Principal Arterial Milepost
Located On Shea Blvd
Loc On Alias
From Road Saguaro Blvd
To Road Beeline Hwy
More Detail
STATION DATA
AADT
Year AADT DHV-30 K % D % PA BC Src
2019 17,793
2018 20,9933 Grown
from 2017
2017 20,0513 Grown
from 2016
2016 19,3733 Grown
from 2015
2015 18,9563 Grown
from 2014
|<<<>>>| 1-5 of 11
Travel Demand Model
ModelYear ModelAADT AM PHV AM PPV MD PHV MD PPV PM PHV PM PPV NT PHV NT PPV
VOLUME COUNT
Date Int Total
Thu 10/3/2019 15 21,489
Tue 10/28/2014 15 19,683
Mon 10/27/2014 15 19,026
Sun 10/26/2014 15 14,879
Sat 10/25/2014 15 17,630
Fri 10/24/2014 15 21,859
Year Annual Growth
2019 -15%
2018 5%
2017 3%
2016 2%
2015 1%
2014 5%
VOLUME TREND
Transportation Data Management System https://mag.ms2soft.com/tcds/tsearch.asp?loc=mag
1 of 1 2/18/2020, 11:36 AM
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Contribution spectra - Situation 1: Outdoor SP
23
Source Time
slice
Sum
dB(A)
50Hz
dB(A)
63Hz
dB(A)
80Hz
dB(A)
100Hz
dB(A)
125Hz
dB(A)
160Hz
dB(A)
200Hz
dB(A)
250Hz
dB(A)
315Hz
dB(A)
400Hz
dB(A)
500Hz
dB(A)
630Hz
dB(A)
800Hz
dB(A)
1kHz
dB(A)
1.25kHz
dB(A)
1.6kHz
dB(A)
2kHz
dB(A)
2.5kHz
dB(A)
3.15kHz
dB(A)
4kHz
dB(A)
5kHz
dB(A)
6.3kHz
dB(A)
8kHz
dB(A)
10kHz
dB(A)
Receiver Receiver 1 Fl G dB(A)Lden 60.
1 dB(A)
W Shea Blvd Lden 58.4 26.0 32.7 36.7 38.8 40.1 41.6 43.2 45.9 46.4 47.0 49.1 50.5 48.7 49.0 47.4 46.2 44.5 41.9 39.2 36.0 31.8 32.2 29.6 26.4
E Shea Blvd Lden 55.3 21.6 29.8 34.1 35.9 36.7 37.4 38.3 39.7 41.5 43.7 46.1 48.2 46.1 46.5 44.7 43.4 41.1 37.7 33.9 29.0 23.1 24.4 21.8 19.0
Remaining sources (best guess)Lden
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Assessed contribution level - Situation 1: Outdoor SP
9
Source Source typeTr. lane Lden
dB(A)
A
dB
Receiver Receiver 1 Fl G dB(A)Lden 60.1 dB(A)
W Shea Blvd Road 58.4 0.0
E Shea Blvd Road 55.3 0.0
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Emission calculation road - Situation 1: Outdoor SP
16
Road Section name KM
km
ADT
Veh/24h
Gradient
%
W Shea Blvd 0.000 8897 0.0
E Shea Blvd 0.000 8897 0.0
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Contribution spectra - Situation 2: Outdoor SP
23
Source Time
slice
Sum
dB(A)
50Hz
dB(A)
63Hz
dB(A)
80Hz
dB(A)
100Hz
dB(A)
125Hz
dB(A)
160Hz
dB(A)
200Hz
dB(A)
250Hz
dB(A)
315Hz
dB(A)
400Hz
dB(A)
500Hz
dB(A)
630Hz
dB(A)
800Hz
dB(A)
1kHz
dB(A)
1.25kHz
dB(A)
1.6kHz
dB(A)
2kHz
dB(A)
2.5kHz
dB(A)
3.15kHz
dB(A)
4kHz
dB(A)
5kHz
dB(A)
6.3kHz
dB(A)
8kHz
dB(A)
10kHz
dB(A)
Receiver Receiver 1 Fl G dB(A)Lden 53.
7 dB(A)
W Shea Blvd Lden 52.2 20.9 27.6 31.5 33.5 34.7 36.0 37.4 39.5 40.1 40.8 42.9 44.3 42.4 42.7 41.0 39.7 37.9 35.1 31.9 27.5 21.8 23.6 21.0 17.9
E Shea Blvd Lden 48.5 16.1 24.3 28.5 30.2 31.0 31.6 32.2 33.2 35.0 37.0 39.4 41.4 39.2 39.6 37.7 36.1 33.6 30.0 26.0 20.8 14.0 16.1 13.5 10.7
Remaining sources (best guess)Lden
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Assessed contribution level - Situation 2: Outdoor SP
9
Source Source typeTr. lane Lden
dB(A)
A
dB
Receiver Receiver 1 Fl G dB(A)Lden 53.7 dB(A)
W Shea Blvd Road 52.2 0.0
E Shea Blvd Road 48.5 0.0
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
Fountain Hills Fairfield
Emission calculation road - Situation 2: Outdoor SP
16
Road Section name KM
km
ADT
Veh/24h
Gradient
%
W Shea Blvd 0.000 8897 0.0
E Shea Blvd 0.000 8897 0.0
SoundPLAN 8.0
MD Acoustics LLC 4960 S. Gilbert Rd Chandler, AZ 85249 Phone: 602 774 1950 1
MD Acoustics, LLC
JN: 06652001_Letter Report
Appendix C
Field Sheet
www.mdacoustics.com
AZ Office
4960 S. Gilbert Rd, Ste 1-461
Chandler, AZ 85249
CA Office
1197 E Los Angeles Ave, C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Project:Fountain Hills Site Observations:
Site Address/Location:9637 North Saquaro Boulevard
Date:2/20/2020 to 2/21/2020
Field Tech/Engineer:Samual Horde
General Location:
Sound Meter:LD 831 C SN:Site Topo:
Settings:A-weighted, slow, 1-min, 24-hour duration Ground Type:
Meteorological Con.:77 degrees F, 2 to 5 mph wind, eastern direction
Site ID:LT-1
Figure 2: LT-1 Photo
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet
C/L of E Shea Blvd is 470ft from meter
C/L of N Saguaro Blvd is 280ft from meter
Clear Sky, Meter at ptoperty line of project and condos to the north
east.
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:
Flat
Soft site, w/ street surface hard
Figure 1: LT-1 Monitoring Location
1
06652001 24Hr Field Sheet Template_1Min_Awtg_DOSE
www.mdacoustics.com
AZ Office
4960 S. Gilbert Rd, Ste 1-461
Chandler, AZ 85249
CA Office
1197 E Los Angeles Ave, C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Project:Fountain Hills Day:1 of 1
Site Address/Location:9637 North Saquaro Boulevard
Site ID:LT-1
Date Start Stop Leq Lmax Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 L90
2/20/2020 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 55.6 67.3 53.3 58.4 56.2 56.1 55.3 54.7
2/20/2020 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 53.2 67.9 50.4 55.2 54.6 54.4 53.1 51.2
2/20/2020 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 49.8 58.6 46.4 51.5 51.2 50.6 49.6 48.6
2/21/2020 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 48.8 67.2 46.7 52.4 51.1 50.4 47.9 45.8
2/21/2020 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 47.5 63.2 41.9 51.5 50.3 50.0 46.7 45.1
2/21/2020 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 49.4 71.2 41.7 58.1 53.3 52.1 46.1 44.5
2/21/2020 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 50.0 71.7 42.8 54.3 52.9 51.4 48.6 47.1
2/21/2020 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 50.9 62.9 47.0 53.9 52.8 52.5 50.7 48.5
2/21/2020 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 55.0 64.6 51.9 56.7 56.3 56.2 55.1 53.1
2/21/2020 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 57.6 64.0 55.0 58.7 58.5 58.5 57.6 56.7
2/21/2020 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 59.1 59.7 55.9 59.5 59.4 59.4 59.2 58.7
2/21/2020 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 59.5 65.0 56.9 59.8 59.7 59.7 59.6 59.2
2/21/2020 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 59.6 59.9 56.9 59.9 59.9 59.8 59.7 59.4
2/21/2020 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 59.8 60.0 56.6 60.0 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.6
2/21/2020 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 59.8 59.9 56.7 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.8
2/21/2020 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 59.8 59.9 57.0 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.8 59.7
2/21/2020 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 59.9 60.0 57.8 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.8
2/21/2020 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 59.8 69.3 56.7 59.9 59.9 59.9 59.8 59.7
2/21/2020 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 59.7 60.6 56.4 59.9 59.9 59.8 59.8 59.5
2/21/2020 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 59.5 59.8 56.6 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.6 59.1
2/21/2020 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 59.2 62.3 56.3 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.2 58.9
2/21/2020 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 59.0 64.4 56.1 59.4 59.3 59.3 59.0 58.5
2/21/2020 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 58.5 62.4 56.3 59.4 59.3 59.1 58.5 57.9
2/21/2020 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 57.6 59.2 55.1 58.7 58.6 58.3 57.5 57.0
DNL:60.8
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.
06652001 24Hr Field Sheet Template_1Min_Awtg_DOSE
www.mdacoustics.com
AZ Office
4960 S. Gilbert Rd, Ste 1-461
Chandler, AZ 85249
CA Office
1197 E Los Angeles Ave, C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Project:Fountain Hills Day:1 of 1
Site Address/Location:9637 North Saquaro Boulevard
Site ID:LT-1
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.
55.6
53.2
49.8 48.8 47.5 49.4 50.0 50.9
55.0
57.6 59.1 59.5 59.6 59.8 59.8 59.8 59.9 59.8 59.7 59.5 59.2 59.0 58.5 57.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
9:
0
0
P
M
10
:
0
0
P
M
11
:
0
0
P
M
12
:
0
0
A
M
1:
0
0
A
M
2:
0
0
A
M
3:
0
0
A
M
4:
0
0
A
M
5:
0
0
A
M
6:
0
0
A
M
7:
0
0
A
M
8:
0
0
A
M
9:
0
0
A
M
10
:
0
0
A
M
11
:
0
0
A
M
12
:
0
0
P
M
1:
0
0
P
M
2:
0
0
P
M
3:
0
0
P
M
4:
0
0
P
M
5:
0
0
P
M
6:
0
0
P
M
7:
0
0
P
M
8:
0
0
P
M
Le
q
(
h
)
,
d
B
A
Time
24Hr -1Hr Leq & L90 Leq
L(90)
06652001 24Hr Field Sheet Template_1Min_Awtg_DOSE
From:Julie Hendrickson
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
Date:Saturday, February 22, 2020 1:55:16 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
I am an Owner at Monterra Ranch and oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that I do not
approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z
Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Julie Hendrickson
Monterra Ranch
From:Larry Meyers
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Hotel Case Z2019-04
Date:Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:50:13 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Commissioners,
Thank you for deciding to hear from the citizens last night regardless of the continuance. For those who
have been on the board for the last few years, this will be boring and repetitive. For those who are new
this is yet again a recurrent theme for Fountain Hills. 1. Town makes general plan and has zoning ordinances.2. Residents invest in homes relying on this information and hope to enjoy life in FH.3. Commercial investors make investment in land hoping for a return on investment. Some work out. Some not so much.4. Commercial land owner with a bad parcel hires realtor and lawyer not from FountainHills to get the zoning changed and sell the land to a development project that does notbelong on the land they invested in so they can get out from under their badinvestment.5. None of the three from (4) above care one bit about the neighbors or FH, they don’tlive here probably. The land owner just wants out of the bad investment. The lawyerjust wants to bill. The realtor just wants commission on sale. The developer just wantsto make money. NONE CARE THAT THE PROJECT LOWERS PROPERTYVALUES OF NEIGHBORS AND VISION OF TOWN.6. All involved with the commercial project ride off with their saddle bags full of cash.7. Residents are always asked to bail out the commercial investment with the excuse thatthe town needs the money or doesn’t want to be known as anti-development and theproject is really needed. With the continuance the games begin.1. The lawyer will do their best to convince the neighbors that everything will be ok. The developer is really a good guy and will work with them. The town really needsthe project and the money.2. The realtor works the developer (land buyer) to hang on it will all be ok, please don’tgo away.3. The land owner pays the legal bills and hopes the lawyer can scam all of us. Sound about right? No doubt the town needs money but bad development will never get us tosustainable viability from a financial standpoint. Only a realistic property tax will get usthere. Citizens who continually get shafted by the town officials will never vote yes on aproperty tax until that changes. Certain council members will say you don’t have theknowledge to run a town and purport to have some much more knowledge than you. So I askyou:1. How would you feel if you were a direct neighbor to this?2. Is this really good for the town?3. Have you been 100% successful in all of your investments and if not, did anyone bailyou out?4. To ignore certain council members and know that of course you have knowledge, thatis why you are on P&Z and no one has the corner on smarts.
I did talk to the land owner after the meeting and he confirmed to me that his investment was
bad before the lawyer dragged him away from me. Nothing will change between now andwhen this returns to P&Z so please consider these points and reject a C1 to C2 zoning change
for this parcel.
Thanks for listening and reading. By the way, I don’t live next to this so I see this from thebig picture, not the views wrecked, traffic bad or the sound too loud. That’s all true but too
personal.
Larry Meyers
Fountain Hills resident 39 years
February 12, 2020
Rajah Olson
2919 N 73rd St
Scottsdale, AZ 85251
Fairfield by Marriott
Inn and Suites
Dear Mr Olson,
The Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce welcomes you to Fountain Hills. The Fountain
Hills Chamber of Commerce is a non-profit civic organization run by a Board of Directors
that supports business growth and vitality in Fountain Hills.
Thank you for sharing the renderings and details of the proposed Fairfield by Marriott Inn
and Suites along Shea Boulevard. The addition of the Fairfield to the Town will bring
visitors, jobs, and increased business to the Chamber members. For these reasons the
Chamber Board of Directors is please to support the project.
We look forward to having you as a Member of the Chamber in the near future.
Sincerely yours on behalf of the Board of Directors,
Betsy LaVoie
Betsy LaVoie
Executive Director
Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce
Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce
480-837-1654 16837 E Palisades Blvd Fountain Hills AZ 85268 foutainhillschamber.com
From:John Wesley
To:Paula Woodward
Subject:FW: 9637 N Saguaro Blvd; 3 story hotel
Date:Thursday, February 13, 2020 1:57:48 PM
Please provide the email below to the P&Z Commission this evening.
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank G Sparrow
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 1:29 PM
To: John Wesley <jwesley@fh.az.gov>
Subject: 9637 N Saguaro Blvd; 3 story hotel
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
Good Afternoon Mr. Wesley,
I received your two letters regarding the subject property. I am the Managing Member of the entity, MJFFH4, LLC,
that owns the property located N. Saguaro Boulevard: The MCO Building. Although I generally support the
development of a hotel, I am concerned that the parking is not sufficient relative to the zoning code. I count 60
spaces on the plans that you mailed to me, and the zoning code requires one space per room plus one space per two
employees. Based on my interpretation of the zoning code, the property would need more than 67 spaces total. The
commercial property that I own is adjacent to the subject property, and I fear hotel occupants will start to park on
my property. Please feel free to email or call me if you have any additional questions that I can answer.
Property Owner of N. Saguaro Blvd.
MJFFH4, LLC
Managing Member Frank Sparrow
From:Anthony Morande
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Oppose Rezoning
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 4:36:31 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
I oppose the rezoning of the parcel of land adjacent to Monterra ranch from c1 to c2 . Please note that I do notapprove and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z board that zoning is not changed .SincerelyMr. Anthony MorandeMonterra Ranch Sent from my iPhone
From:Anna Collins-Christie
To:PZC (Commission)
Cc:Rudy; Jose Ramos; Ole Umpa;
Subject:Feb 13 meeting for Fairfield Inn rezoning request
Date:Tuesday, February 4, 2020 12:29:56 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
P&Z Members Matthew, Clayton, Susan, Erik, Dan, Scott, & Peter:
MONTERRA RANCH HOA BOARD MEMBERS AND HOA MANAGER ARE CC'D IN THIS EMAIL.
I am out of town for the meeting, but wanted to express my/our objection to allow to increase
that building height next to our condos.
As an owner of three condos at Monterra Ranch, and as a Real Estate agent in town for 22
years, and as the President of the HOA Board of Directors at Monterra Ranch....I want you to
know that I/we do NOT approve of the zoning change request from C1 to C2 for the parcel
adjacent to Monterra Ranch on Saguaro near Shea.
I am personally not opposed to allowing the USE of a Hotel on that location, but WE are not at
all happy with the request of C2 that allows the building height of 40 feet.
I would personally be okay if you either allowed a variance on C1 to include a hotel, or limited
the C2 zoning approval to no more than 25 feet in building height. I do not speak for Monterra
Ranch Board or the owners in this opinion, and I do not know what that full opinion is. I do
know that We object to the request that will be set forth for your review on Feb 13th.
Personally, 2 of my 3 units back to that development. I've always known and accept that there
will be commercial built on that lot, and I encourage development. However, 40 feet in height
will impact my views, my property lifestyle and privacy, and will in my opinion lower the values
of Monterra Ranch properties.
Please know that I/we do not approve. Please submit a recommendation to Council that the
zoning should NOT be changed as requested.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Anna Collins-Christie
Fountain Hills Resident and Investor for 22 Years, Monterra Ranch Board President
From:Anthony Morande
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Oppose Hotel
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 2:32:14 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Sent from my iPhone Monterra Ranch Owners Reminder on upcoming hearing. If you have not already sentin a note to the Town’s Planning & Zoning Commission, please do and if possible attendthe hearing. To the Owners of Property at Monterra Ranch: As you know the Planning and ZoningCommission are going to be voting on a change to the zoning of the property adjacent toMonterra Ranch for the building of a 3 story Hotel. I am sending you this with the hope thatyou would copy and send it to the Zoning Board before the Feb. 13thmeeting. To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision, We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacentto Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do not approve and followwith a recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed. Website : pzc@fh.az.govYour Name:Unit #:Monterra Ranch Thank You if you have questions please feel free to email myself,Steve Smith Unit# Board Vice Pres.
From:Arkady Bytensky
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Oppose zoning change, Monterra Ranch, Unit #32
Date:Tuesday, February 11, 2020 9:25:18 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Good day,
We, Arkady and Nelya Bytensky the Owners of Monterra
Ranch unit oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land
adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that
we do not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Arkady Bytensky
Nelya Bytensky
Monterra Ranch, Unit
From:Gramps (via Google Docs)
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Untitled document
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 12:09:20 PM
Attachments:Untitled document.pdf
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
has attached the following document:
Untitled document
To the Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission,
In regards to APN#176-10-805
I just want to start by saying that Myself, Residents, and other Owners
always knew that something would be built in the lot adjacent to and
directly behind Monterra Ranch to the Southwest, and I myself am not
opposed to new development. But I and other Residents are opposed
to the fact it will drastically change the Landscape of this area with the
proposed Zoning change from C1 to C2, and the fact that it would allow
a 40 foot Building to be erected.
So to that effect We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of Land adjacent to Complex from a C1 to C2.
The designation of a Hotel exceeding 40 feet is totally out of character
for anyone living close to it. C1 as We/Myself understand is for
Commercial Property not to exceed 25 feet. That was the original plan
for this parcel and to now want to change it is unacceptable in our view.
There are no other structures in this immediate area that are even close
to the height being considered. Not only will our Complex be affected
by the change, (as an example) the close proximity to retaining wall and
patios, increased traffic, a market decrease in Property Value, and the
sheer appearance of a 3 story 40 foot tall structure, but the adjoining
Housing Complexes and Neighborhoods around us would be affected
as well.
Please know that We/Myself do not approve and please follow with a
recommendation that the Zoning not be changed as requested.
Thank You for your consideration,
Steven and Barb Smith
Owner for 9 Years and Vice President of Monterra Ranch Board.
Google Docs: Create and edit documents online.
Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA
You have received this email because someone shared a document with you from
Google Docs.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
We the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the
Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2.
Please know that We do not approve and follow with a
recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be
changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.go
Your Name: Gina and John Klein, Roberto Guerrieri, Rina
Bellotti
Unit
Monterra Ranch
From:Ole Umpa
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Zoning Meeting Feb 13th
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 11:53:48 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
From: Arkady Bytensky [mailto:Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2020 1:55 PMTo: RudySubject: Re: Monterra Ranch Owners - Pending Zoning Case
Good day,
I oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2.
Your Name: Arkady Bytensky
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
Thank you
Arkady Bytensky
From:Charles Portolano
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2.
Date:Thursday, February 6, 2020 8:02:34 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission
of Fountain Hill, AZ:
Charles and Elvira Portolano, Owners of Monterra
Ranch, oppose the rezoning of the Parcel
of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2.
Please know that we do not approve and want a
recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not
be changed.
Thank you for your time and efforts in this matter.
Be well,
Charles and Elvira Portolano
Unit - Monterra Ranch - N. Monterey Drive,
Fountain Hills, AZ
From:Will Collins
To:PZC (Commission)
Cc:Will Collins
Subject:Pending Zoning Case
Date:Thursday, February 6, 2020 9:39:58 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do
not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Will Collins
Unit
Monterra Ranch
From:THOMAS CUDZILO
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Rezoning Parcel of Lane
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 8:03:37 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do
not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Thank you,
Diane Cudzilo
N. Monterey Drive,
Montera Ranch
From:Dan Graham
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Zoning Change - C1 to C2
Date:Tuesday, February 11, 2020 11:26:39 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.I am an owner at Monterra Ranch and very much oppose the rezoning of the Parcel ofland adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. The traffic congestion is alreadydangerous and difficult. Please know that I do not approve and follow with arecommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Dan Graham
Monterra Ranch
From:Jeff Davey
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Fountain Hills Rezoning of Monterra Ranch Adjacent Land
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 9:32:05 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land
adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do not
approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be
changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Your Name: Jeffrey Davey
Unit #
Monterra Ranch
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Davey
Information Technology Advisor
M:
E: |
j
From:Sharon Dennis
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Monterra Ranch
Date:Thursday, February 6, 2020 9:47:28 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We/ Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do
not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Sharon Dennis, owner
Unit #
Monterra Ranch
Additionally:Property values will be diminished and resale will be very difficult, if not impossible, if athree-story building is directly behind Monterra Ranch the current owners privacy andlifestyle will be destroyed.
From my iPhone
From:Patty Domine
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:pending zone change
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 9:57:07 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
2/7/2020
To the members of the Planning & Zoning Commission,
We are homeowners in Monterra Ranch, Fountain Hills, AZ. We purchased our home in 2004,
and have enjoyed the progress and growth of our beautiful city during our 16 years as
residents of same.
We have, and will continue to support well planned development for Fountain Hills in every
way possible.
We are, however opposed to the proposed zoning change from C1 to C2 for the lot adjacent
to our residential neighborhood. Zone designations are very key to property values, highest
and best use, and ultimately long term sustainability to a community. We have all seen
examples of communities that do not maintain consistency with zoning, and the effects it can
have on future growth.
The proposed change for this C1 lot is not consistent with the immediate and surrounding
area. A 40 foot tall commercial hotel structure is completely out of character for the adjacent
residential property owners to the North, and is also a compromise to the zone protections
that the homeowners enjoy today as well as what they relied on when they made the
investment in Fountain Hills at purchase. This change is also a compromise to the well
structured office complexes on the three other lot lines. A hotel property is a 24 hour a day
endeavor, while the office buildings are essentially in line with the normal activity of the
surrounding residential properties.
Fountain Hills has a very solid reputation of care and caution with respect to planning and
zone protections. The very fabric of zoning protection is to preserve the existing intent,
value, and future of current property owners, and I believe we need to stay the course.
This change would likely diminish property values in their current use, increase traffic in an
area tightly situated between a residential entryway and the already busy corner of Shea and
Saguaro, and adversely convert the cosmetic appeal of the current zone C1.
All of this is simply outside the zone consistency and history of the Fountain Hills community.
We should not compromise the area residents and neighboring properties via a zone change
for the benefit of one. The development of that land should be done within the confines of
the current C1 zone.
Thank you,
Patty & Steve Domine
Monterra Ranch, Fountain Hills, AZ.
From:Debbie Downes
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Zoning change
Date:Tuesday, February 11, 2020 10:55:50 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
We the owners of unit at Monterra Ranch are opposed to rezoning the parcel of landadjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2 . We do not approve and recommend to theplanning and zoning board that the zoning not be changed. Dougand Debbie Downes Unit Monterra Ranch
From:Ken Griner
To:PZC (Commission)
Cc:Ken Griner
Subject:Opposition to Zoning change
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 11:32:18 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning
Commission,
Ken Griner, an Owner of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that I, Ken Griner,
do not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Your Name:Ken Griner
Unit #
Monterra Ranch
Sincerely,
Ken Griner
From:Rick Haney
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Rezoning for hotel
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 5:19:41 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
To the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
We are against the zoning change to allow the 3 story hotel to be built adjacent to the Monterra Complex. One of thereasons we chose Fountain Hills was the small quiet and safe community environment. We are from Nebraska andwe purchased our unit about 6 years ago. We really enjoy the sunlight from the south side of our complex. I feel wewill lose much of the reason for our choice of location with the hotel being built next to us. Please do not allow thezoning change.
Best Regards,
Rick and Julie HaneyMonterra ComplexUnit
Sent from my iPad
From:Robert Hawkinson
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Rezoning APN#176-10-805 C-1 toC-3. I Totally OBJECT
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 9:39:57 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Robert David Hawkinson Unit Monterra Ranch
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
From:holly sambora
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Opposed to Zoning change from C1 to C2
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 10:01:20 AM
Importance:High
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
I, the Owner of Monterra Ranch, oppose the rezoning of
the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1
to C2. Please know that I do not approve and follow
with a recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning
not be changed.
Holly Sambora
Unit
Monterra Ranch
From:CHUCK HOLLY
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:no re-zoning
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 7:53:41 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Please advise the Town Council that re-zoning from C-1 to C-2 is a burden to homeowners ofMonterra Ranch Condos as the height of a 3-story building will lower the value of thoseseveral units directly on the other side of the wall. Privacy, noise and blocking the sunsetswill surely become a few of the annoyances. I am the owner of Unit in Monterra Ranch,and a Board member. Please, do not support re-zoning.
From:Jeff Jones
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Parcel adjacent to Monterra Ranch Proposed Zoning Change
Date:Tuesday, February 11, 2020 5:33:26 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Planning and Zoning Commission;
As residents of Monterra Ranch, we vehemently oppose the proposed rezoning of the parceladjacent to our community from C1 to C2. Allowing a 3 story structure to be built on thisparcel of land will be detrimental to the property values and quality of living in the MonterraRanch neighborhood. We urge you to reject this proposed rezoning.
Jeff and Judy JonesUnit Monterra Ranch
From:Jeff Jones
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Parcel adjacent to Monterra Ranch Proposed Zoning Change
Date:Tuesday, February 11, 2020 5:33:26 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Planning and Zoning Commission;
As residents of Monterra Ranch, we vehemently oppose the proposed rezoning of the parceladjacent to our community from C1 to C2. Allowing a 3 story structure to be built on thisparcel of land will be detrimental to the property values and quality of living in the MonterraRanch neighborhood. We urge you to reject this proposed rezoning.
Jeff and Judy JonesUnit No. Monterra Ranch
From:John
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Fwd: Zoning Commission
Date:Sunday, February 9, 2020 8:11:07 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: John <>Date: February 9, 2020 at 10:07:59 AM ESTTo: pzh@fh.az.govSubject: Fwd: Zoning Commission
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: John >Date: February 7, 2020 at 9:54:07 AM ESTTo: pzh@fg.az.govSubject: Zoning Commission
To the Members of the Planning and
Zoning Commission,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra
Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel
of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from
a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself
do not approve and follow with a
recommendation to the P&Z Board that
the Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Your Name:John Stuart
Unit #
Monterra Ranch
Sent from my iPhone
From:linnel@cox.net
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Proposed 3-story hotel in Fountain Hills
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 5:01:27 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
I wanted to write to oppose the proposed 3-story hotel next to the Monterra Ranch community in
Fountain Hills. I would hope that we are not so hungry for developer fees that we are willing to
denigrate living conditions and property values for homeowners in Fountain Hills and particularly
those directly impacted by having a hotel in their back yard. I would suggest that if this developer
wants to move forward with this project, and if you are inclined to let him, he needs to buy out the
Monterra Ranch property from the property owners. Would you want to live behind a 3-story hotel?
The other two hotels in Fountain Hills are not next to an area of housing and so this proposed hotel
should not be near any houses, either.
I do not approve and recommend that the zoning for this area not be changed.
Linda L. Nelson
Unit
Monterra Ranch
From:Maria or Jim PETTIT
To:PZC (Commission)
Cc:
Subject:Monterra Ranch Rezoning of the Parcel of Land adjacent to us
Date:Thursday, February 6, 2020 8:45:07 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We/Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
from a C1 to C2. Please know that We/Myself do not approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board
that the Zoning not be changed.
Your Name: Maria Pettit
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
From:Michelle Greaves
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Zoning
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 10:47:34 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
We the Owners of Monterra Ranch Unit oppose the rezoning of the parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranchfrom C1 to C2. Please know that we do not approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board that thezoning not be changed.Michelle & Randy GreavesUnit Monterra Ranch
From:Ronald Nagel
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:FW: Monterra Ranch Owners - Pending Zoning Case
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 2:35:47 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning
Commision,
We are owners of Unit in Monterra Ranch and we
oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to
Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. We made our
purchase in 2013 partly due to the fact the adjacent
property had a C1 zoning. To change this zoning at this
time to C2 in our opinion would have a negative effect on
our property values, the traffic noise factor, and just the
general life quality issues. So please know we do not
approve or support this zoning change being presented
to the P&Z Board.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Your Name: Ron and Vicky Nagel
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
Thank You if you have questions please feel free to
email me at
From:Maria or Jim PETTIT
To:PZC (Commission)
Cc:
Subject:Monterra Ranch Rezoning of the Parcel of Land adjacent to us
Date:Thursday, February 6, 2020 8:45:07 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified
the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We/Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
from a C1 to C2. Please know that We/Myself do not approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board
that the Zoning not be changed.
Your Name: Maria Pettit
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
From:Rachelle Rizzi
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Pending Zoning Case
Date:Sunday, February 9, 2020 7:29:50 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do not approve
and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board that the
Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Your Name: Rachelle Rizzi
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
Sincerely,
Rachelle Rizzi
From:Sandra McKinney
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Rezoning parcel next to Monterra Ranch
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 12:24:35 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
We own Unit at Monterra Ranch and oppose the rezoning of adjoining lot next to us inorder to build a hotel. We enjoy our views, along with peace and quiet that would becompromised by having a hotel so close to our home.
Sincerely,Robert and Sandra McKinney-- Sent from Gmail Mobile
From:Robert Hawkinson
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:APN#176-10-805. Rezoning from C-1 to C-2 to allow for a three-story hotel.
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 9:16:21 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
I totally OBJECTRobert David Hawkinson Unit # Monterra Ranch
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
From:Suzanne Nann
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:As an owner of a property at Monterra Ranch
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 9:47:45 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
I DO APPROVE zoning change.
There is strong movement by the Board VP to oppose this change. I truly hope
they do not succeed.
Thank you for all you do for Fountain Hills. Suzanne Nann
From:Sharron Grzybowski
To:PZC (Commission); Susan Dempster (P&Z); Scott Schlossberg (P&Z)
Subject:Zoning Change approval, Trevino/Saguaro (Fairfield Inn)
Date:Wednesday, February 12, 2020 3:51:54 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
Good afternoon, P&Z Commissioners,
I'm Emailing you to express my approval of the zoning change for the 3-story
Fairfield Inn on Trevino/Saguaro. This will be approximately the height of theexisting MCO building, so I do not see the height to be a problem.
The added hotel rooms will be a good addition for the town. The location is perfect.
With this proposal being from a chain they will have signage and an online presenceto help entice the Route 87 travelers to stop in Fountain Hills. This will help to drawpeople to the area - whether it be for a short time or to fall in love an move into
town like so many of us did.
Thank you for your time,Sharron
Sharron Grzybowski
Service is the rent we pay for the privilege of living on this earth.~Shirley Chisholm
From:Ole Umpa
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Meeting Feb 13th
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 12:12:00 PM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission,
In regards to APN#176-10-805
I just want to start by saying that Myself, Residents, and
other Owners always knew that something would be built
in the lot adjacent to and directly behind Monterra Ranch
to the Southwest, and I myself am not opposed to new
development. But I and other Residents are opposed to
the fact it will drastically change the Landscape of this
area with the proposed Zoning change from C1 to C2,
and the fact that it would allow a 40 foot Building to be
erected.
So to that effect We / Myself the Owners of Monterra
Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of Land
adjacent to Complex from a C1 to C2. The designation of
a Hotel exceeding 40 feet is totally out of character for
anyone living close to it. C1 as We/Myself understand is
for Commercial Property not to exceed 25 feet. That was
the original plan for this parcel and to now want to
change it is unacceptable in our view. There are no other
structures in this immediate area that are even close to
the height being considered. Not only will our Complex
be affected by the change, (as an example) the close
proximity to retaining wall and patios, increased traffic, a
market decrease in Property Value, and the sheer
appearance of a 3 story 40 foot tall structure, but the
adjoining Housing Complexes and Neighborhoods
around us would be affected as well.
Please know that We/Myself do not approve and please
follow with a recommendation that the Zoning not be
changed as requested.
Thank You for your consideration,
Steven Smith Unit#
Owner for 9 Years and Vice President of Monterra
Ranch Board.
From:Teresa Kalaj
To:PZC (Commission)
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 10:02:07 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
I do not approve of this zoning. Owner at monterra ranch.
From:Elizabeth Burke
To:John Wesley; Paula Woodward
Subject:FW: Building and planning zoning committee
Date:Monday, February 10, 2020 7:25:47 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Please see following. Thanks.
Elizabeth A. Burke, MMC
Town Clerk
Town of Fountain Hills
p: (480) 816-5115
a: 16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains, Fountain Hills, AZ 85268
w: www.fh.az.gov e: eburke@fh.az.gov
Follow us on:
From: terri blatchford
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 6:20 PM
To: Elizabeth Burke <eburke@fh.az.gov>
Subject: Building and planning zoning committee
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
I am not certain who to forward this to, therefore, I am starting with you.
I understand there will be a vote on Feb 13 regarding building a 3 story lodging facility off of Sahuaro and
Shea.
Please, record my vote against such action.
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do not approve
and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z Board that the
Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.go
Your Name: Terri Blatchford
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
Warm regards
Terri Blatchford
From:
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Do Not Approve
Date:Friday, February 7, 2020 11:01:16 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning
Commission,
We the Owners of a property in Monterra Ranch oppose
the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We do not
approve and follow with a recommendation to the P&Z
Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Your Name: Todd Jones
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
Todd Jones
From:David Wachsman
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Letter opposing rezoning of parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch
Date:Saturday, February 8, 2020 12:55:46 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the
Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2.
Please know that we do not approve and follow with a
recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be
changed.
Your Name: David Wachsman
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
From:Jose Ramos
To:PZC (Commission)
Date:Thursday, February 13, 2020 10:55:55 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the
rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to Monterra
Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do
not approve and follow with a recommendation to the
P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed. Thank you
Regards.
Jose Ramos
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
From:Rod Drought
To:PZC (Commission)
Subject:Re: rezoning of land parcel adjacent to Monterra Ranch
Date:Thursday, February 13, 2020 8:33:20 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
To the Members of the Planning and Zoning Commision,
We / Myself the Owners of Monterra Ranch oppose the rezoning of the Parcel of land adjacent to
Monterra Ranch from a C1 to C2. Please know that We / Myself do not approve and follow with a
recommendation to the P&Z Board that the Zoning not be changed.
Website : pzc@fh.az.gov
Rodney Drought
Unit #:
Monterra Ranch
From:Robert Gregory
To:PZC (Commission); Robert Gregory
Subject:Zoning change for 9637 N Saguaro Blvd
Date:Thursday, February 13, 2020 10:15:27 AM
This message originated from an External Source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have
verified the sender and know the content is safe.
TO: Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Robert Gregory Monterra Ranch Unit RE: Case Z2019-04 9637 N Saguaro Blvd zoning change We, the owners of Monterra Ranch, oppose the
rezoning of the parcel of land adjacent to
Monterra Ranch (aka 9637 N Saguaro Blvd) from
C1 to C2. Please know that we ask the Planning
and Zoning board to decline the request for
rezoning since this would negatively affect many
of our members.
Thanks
Robert Gregory
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
ORDINANCE NO. 20-02
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
DISTRICT MAPS OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, BY
CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.62
ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SAGUARO BOULEVARD
NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SAGUARO
BOULEVARD AND EAST SHEA BOULEVARD (AKA 9637 NORTH
SAGUAGO BOULEVARD; APN#176-10-805) FROM C-1 –
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL ZONING
DISTRICT TO C-2 – INTERMEDIATE COMMERCIAL ZONING
DISTRICT.
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, the Town of Fountain Hills (the “Town”) adopted Ordinance No. 93-22, on
November 18, 1993, adopting the Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills (the
“Zoning Ordinance”); and
WHEREAS, Chapter 2, Procedures, Section 2.01, Amendments or Zone Changes, of
the Zoning Ordinance establishes the authority and procedures for amending the zoning
district boundaries; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to ARIZ. REV.
STAT. § 9-462.04, public hearings were advertised in the January 29, 2020 and the
February 5, 2020 editions of the Times of Fountain Hills;
WHEREAS, public hearings were held by the Fountain Hills Planning & Zoning
Commission on February 13, 2020, and by the Mayor and Council of the Town of
Fountain Hills on March 17, 2020.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS as follows:
SECTION 1. The recitals above are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein.
SECTION 2. The approximately 1.62 acre parcel of real property located at 9637 N
Saguaro Blvd., as more particularly described and depicted on Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is rezoned from “C-1 – Neighborhood
Commercial and Professional Zoning District” to "C-2 – Intermediate Commercial
Zoning District.”
SECTION 3. That rezoning is adopted subject to the following conditions:
2
1. Planting and maintenance of trees along the north property line of a species
that will grow to a height of at least 25-feet and spaced to provide a solid
screen along the property line. The trees when planted shall be a minimum
10-foot tall, 36-inch box tree.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. Approval of the C-2 zoning is conditioned on development of the project
commencing within one year of the effective date of this Ordinance.
1. Prior to the expiration of the one-year time condition, the property owner or
authorized representative may submit an application for an extension to the
Town. A submittal of an application for extension of the one-year time condition
does not toll the running of the time condition. Should the one-year time condition
expire between the submittal of an application for a time extension and the public
hearing on the requested extension, the C-2 zoning designation shall be subject
to reversion as set forth below. Upon receipt of a request for extension, the
Town’s Zoning Administrator shall submit the request to the Town Council for
consideration at a public hearing held as set forth below.
2. The Town Council shall, after notices via certified mail to the property owner and
authorized representative have been provided at least 15 days prior to the date
of the scheduled hearing, hold a public hearing on the extension request. The
Town Council may, in its sole discretion, grant an extension of the time condition,
subject to the limitation on the number of extensions set forth below. If the public
hearing is held after expiration of the time condition, the Town Council may also,
at that public hearing, take action to revert the zoning on the property to its prior
zoning classification.
3. In the event the project has not commenced within the one-year time period and
no request for time extension has been received as provided above, the Zoning
Administrator may submit the C-2 – Intermediate Commercial zoning designation
of the subject property to the Town Council for consideration of reversion,
pursuant to the hearing procedure set forth below.
4. The Zoning Administrator shall notify the property owner and authorized
representative by certified mail of the Town Council’s intention to hold a hearing
to determine compliance with the one-year time condition, and to revert the
zoning on the property to its former classification if the condition is determined by
the Town Council to have not been met. All such notices shall be made at least
15 days prior to the date of the scheduled hearing. The Town Council may, in its
sole discretion, either grant an extension of the time condition, subject to the
3
limitation on the number of extensions set forth below, or revert the zoning on the
property to its prior zoning classification.
5. The Town Council may grant up to two one-year extensions of the time condition.
6. Following the commencement of the project, the Zoning Administrator shall
monitor the project to ensure it continues to completion. Upon the Zoning
Administrator’s initial determination that the project is not being actively pursued,
no further review or approval of any project site plan or plat shall occur until it is
determined that good cause exists for delay in the construction of the project.
Should the project fail to proceed, a public hearing shall be held by the Town
Council to determine the cause of the delay. At the public hearing on the matter,
if the Town Council determines that there is not good cause for the delay, it may
impose additional conditions on the property owner to ensure compliance. If such
additional conditions are not met, the Zoning Administrator may set the matter for
public hearing, according to the process set forth in subsection above, on a
possible reversion from C-2 – Intermediate Commercial zoning to C-1 –
Neighborhood Commercial and Professional zoning.
7. For purposes of this Section, the terms “commence,” “commencing” and
“commencement” shall mean physical vertical construction activity in accordance
with a valid building permit issued by the Town.
SECTION 6. The Mayor, the Town Manager, the Town Clerk and the Town Attorney are
hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents and take all steps necessary to
carry out the purpose and intent of this Ordinance.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
4
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain
Hills, Arizona, this 17th day of March, 2020.
FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO:
Ginny Dickey, Mayor Elizabeth A. Burke, Town Clerk
REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Grady E. Miller, Town Manager Aaron D. Arnson, Town Attorney
Grady Miller, Town Manager Town Attorney