Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.0421.PZCAgendaPacket       NOTICE OF MEETING REGULAR MEETING FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION      Chairperson Dan Kovacevic  Vice Chairperson Clayton Corey Commissioner Mathew Corrigan Commissioner Peter Gray Commissioner Nick Proctor Commissioner Scott Schlossberg Commissioner Phil Sveum      TIME:6:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING WHEN:MONDAY, APRIL 21, 2025 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        1.CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE     2.ROLL CALL     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 AND POSSIBLE ACTION: approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025.     5.CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance 25-02 amending the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance to add Chapter 27, Downtown Overlay District.      6.DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION: Possible modifications to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Communication Towers and Antennas.      7.CONSIDERATION AND DIRECTION: Provide staff with direction on updating the Town's Sign Regulations contained in Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance.     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 April 21, 2025 2 of 3     Dated this ______ day of ____________________, 2025. _____________________________________________  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 April 21, 2025 3 of 3   ITEM 4. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS STAFF REPORT    Meeting Date: 04/21/2025 Meeting Type: Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Type: Submitting Department: Development Services Prepared by: Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant Staff Contact Information: Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant Request to Planning and Zoning Commission (Agenda Language):  CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025. 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 meeting minutes of the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025.   SUGGESTED MOTION MOVE to approve the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025. Attachments Summary Minutes & Verbatim Transcript  TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 10, 2025 A Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning & Zoning Commission was convened at 16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains in open and public session at 6:00 p.m. Members Present: Chairperson Dan Kovacevic; Vice Chairperson Clayton Corey; Commissioner Mathew Corrigan; Commissioner Peter Gray; Commissioner Dan Kovacevic; Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, Economic Development Director Amanda Jacobs and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2025 1. CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Chairperson Kovacevic called the Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on March 10, 2025, to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chairperson Dan Kovacevic; Vice Chairperson Clayton Corey; Commissioner Mathew Corrigan; Commissioner Peter Gray; Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, Economic Development Director Amanda Jacobs, and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. 3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC None 4. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning January 13, 2025. MOVED BY Commissioner Corrigan to approve the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission January 13, 2025. SECONDED BY Commissioner Sveum. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 5. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance 25-02 amending Zoning Ordinance by amending Chapter 25, Entertainment Overlay to Chapter 25, Downtown Overlay District, with associated permitted uses, parking, lot coverage, and setback provisions. The following resident addressed the Commission: Alan Koby Roger Isaacs Larry Meyers MOVED BY Commissioner Sveum to continue agenda item #5 to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, Monday, 4/21/2025. SECONDED BY Commissioner Corey. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 6. REVIEW, DISCUSS, AND PROVIDE DIRECTION: A) Overview of wireless communication ordinances, resolutions, and associated documents and Town Council direction for review and possible modification; and B) Review of Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Telecommunication Towers and Antenna compared to draft Campanelli ordinance. Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025 2 of 2 The following resident addressed the Commission: Lori Troller No Action Taken. 7. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Annual report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. MOVED BY Commissioner Corrigan to recommend the Town Council approve the Annual Report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. SECONDED BY Vice Chair Corey. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 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 Chairperson Kovacevic adjourned the Regular meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on March 10, 2025, at 8:44 p.m. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 59 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hill Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes March 10, 2025 Transcription Provided By: eScribers, LLC * * * * * Transcription is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. * * * * * CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 59 -Gap in recording due to technical difficulties- KOVACEVIC: All right. Item number five. Hold a public hearing consideration possible action regarding ordinance 2502. Amending the zoning ordinance by amending Chapter 25 entertainment overlay. WESLEY: Okay. Chair, Commissioners. Good evening. I will go through a presentation on this. We discussed it briefly last month. So some of this will be a little bit of a repeat. But for those who are here and participating in this. So council l approved a downtown strategy back in September for moving forward to implement the --the plans for the downtown area. The strategy calls, among other things, for an update to the zoning regulations with the goals of providing for a more active and vibrant downtown area, creating more employment opportunities, providing for more mixed use, and to address and maintain vacant properties. Current zoning in the downtown area, as shown here. We've got -- most of it is C2. There's one small area of C3 with a planned development overlay. The area south of Palisades down to Avenue of the fountains from, well, Montana over Saguaro also has two overlay districts. One is an entertainment overlay and the other is a planned shopping plaza overlay. It's proposed that we create a new downtown overlay that we will call downtown overlay, with the goal of replacing the two existing overlays that are in existence and expanding it to include the area north of Palisades. So let me back up, I guess one. So this map does show that there are three proposed districts for this area. The Avenue District along the avenue, the business district through the middle, and then an then an innovation district. I'll review each of these individually. So the Avenue district again is shown as proposed to front along the avenue, but then also include Verde River as it goes north from there, with the idea that that's kind of an extension of the main commercial core that we have in the downtown, the Verde River north and south, and then the Avenue District or the Avenue of the Fountains. So in this District will allow the same uses that are allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-zoning districts, similar to today. The change would be that it would restrict ground floor uses in this area to active uses CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 59 trying to reduce -- eliminate the service type office type uses on the ground floor. So restaurants, cafes, bars, taverns, retail stores, entertainment venues, those types of things to provide that more active area that was envisioned and the feedback we got from the public through the planning process. It would continue to have the entertainment overlay uses just as they are currently outlined and provided for in Chapter 25 of the zoning ordinance. It's proposed that this would -- as drafted, would increase the residential density allowance from the current eight units per acre up to 15. And it would limit steps that are allowed in the area to just increase in the residential district on upper floors. So some comments and questions we've received as we've been able to meet with the public and discuss the impacts of this and what it might mean to them. So one of those questions is, how does this affect current ground floor uses that would be consistent with the zone? So the offices that are on the avenue currently. It would allow them to remain as long as they continue to be there. It's only when a space would become vacant when the ordinance then apply so they could continue on if they're there still 10 or 15 years from now, and that's fine. The ordinance would allow for that to be grandfathered in. Okay. The area limiting ground-floor uses be changed or reduced. So again, this is the map as we put it out. That's as staff looked at it, what we felt was a good area. But could that be changed or reduced? And certainly the answer is yes. That could be changed. That's what we're looking for. Feedback from, from the public and the commission as we go forward. Here are a couple of alternate layouts for that Avenue district. Again, the -- the whole the size of the District itself could stay the same, but the area that's restricted to just the retail restaurant type uses could be reduced from the total area and focus it more on the avenue. That's something that we'd be looking for, any comments or discussion about this evening. It could be more descriptive of the uses that would be allowed on the ground floor? The ordinance language itself is a little bit broad in saying that it would be a commercial or retail type uses. We didn't want to get too prescriptive because as soon as we start a list, we're going to leave something out that would be CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 59 appropriate and things change a little bit over time. But what we can do and have done and had a more detailed list in your packet, looking through the national codes for different types of uses have been identified. Identify the types of uses we do believe would be appropriate, and there's quite a long list of things. So there's been some concern that we're just trying to get bars and restaurants. And that would be a difficult retrofit to lot of the buildings. There's a lot more than just the restaurant type uses that we think are appropriate. Then the other one is with regard to the change in density. Again, currently we allow eight units per acre above the ground floor by right. The proposal when I drafted the ordinance, I thought, well, if I about double that to 15, that seems like a pretty big jump. But in actuality, given the size of the lots involved, it really doesn't make much change at all. Today, with the 1.1 units per acre allowed, contrary to what we usually do, I've rounded that up because I just know it's not practical in most cases to do one. So I've told people they can do two. And that's all the change to 15 units per acre really does is legitimize what we've already been doing and saying that you can do two by right. So I looked at some other options. And using the R4 and R5 density kind of as a guide in terms of the number of units per square foot allowed in those districts. Another option for your consideration would be to change it to allow one unit per every 2,000 square feet of floor area. That'd be the same basically as the R4 zoning district. And so for example, if you had a typical 6,000 square foot lot and about nine -- about 5,000 square foot of floor area per floor on your upper floors, you could have two units by right, or four units total in that 6,000 square foot. And if there's more than that, then that would get you into needing a special use permit. And chairman, if it's okay, I think maybe we can entertain some discussion on those items before we move on to the other districts. Or would you rather me go ahead and go through the rest -- KOVACEVIC: No. We can stop and -- and any -- any comments from the commissioners? Yeah. COREY: Just one comment. So I think if we do go with the option of incorporating CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 59 Avenue District into Verde River and trying to promote some of those businesses that are not foot traffic, creating businesses to go into the next area, then we should -- I would recommend we include that area into Verde River because we want to make that an that an enticing area. We want to promote foot traffic in that area. And I would, you know, prioritize getting that area improved. Otherwise, right now, it's not really a kind of place that you'd think you'd want to walk down at this point, you know. WESLEY: So Chair --Vice Chair Corey. COREY: Yes. WESLEY: So you're suggesting that this ought to stay in if we if we reduce it and maybe cut off some other areas you think we ought to at least maintain? COREY: I think so given that the -- the next two zones are going to be right, we're just we're enhancing all of them. And if we want to bring people into the business district, that really is the gateway. So I would -- I would think that we want to make sure that we prioritize ramping that -- ramping that area up. Yeah. Not close it off, keep it open and kind of make that an entrance to the business district. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Any others? Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: John, the density of housing that we most recently approved, I think, came up to something like 96 units per acre. Right. I mean, was that 12-unit building we did.? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Sveum, those were right around 42 or 43 as I recall, units per acre. The 12 -- because 12-- 12 units on 12,000 feet squared , that's one per 10 -- 1,000 feet squared. So 43,000 feet squared is an acre. So that's 43 units per acre. SVEUM: And that's per acre? WESLEY: Yes. SVEUM: And it doesn't seem to be, you know, extraordinarily dense, but it's just because of the size, obviously, of the -- of the lot. And I did I think I saw in there they could apply for a special use permit to increase it. WESLEY: Yes. We would still keep that option. SVEUM: That would be based probably on the architectural design and the parking structure et cetera, right? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 59 WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: Okay. Have you thought about having -- I think one of the things that concerns me and two things to -- to disclose. I don't own any property on the avenue. I do consulting work for one of the real estate companies there. But my question is from a building -- if a building owners perspective if they lose their office tenant on first floor and the economy is such what it was whether COVID or recession, and they can't find a restaurant to convert that space to, is it kind of onerous on that property owner to be able to survive with -- I mean, none of these -- none of these business owners in this list would probably be able to survive either. I mean, I think that I don't know if there's been conversations with property owners that do have office tenants on first floor, and how this might impact them as their leases expire. But I think it's just something to think about, in my mind. With that in place, though, or with that thought, has there been any thinking about having offices possible for upstairs on second floor so they could -- WESLEY: Yes. SVEUM: Because the conversion costs of these existing buildings is -- is high. It would be much less for an office user than it would be for an apartment. Apartments to be converted, right? WESLEY: So Chair -- Commissioner, yes. This -- the limitation is just for a ground floor trying to have that active uses on the ground floor. So you have people coming and going and generating that traffic on the ground floor. But second, third floors, they're perfectly fine for office or other type service uses. SVEUM: Okay. In the conversion of even the office spaces for first floor to a restaurant or retail. I mean, obviously some of these wouldn't cost much money at all, but also we have such -- it seems to have a hard time finding retail users as it is, and it's expensive. So I guess I'm not -- I understand the kind of the rationale of this of driving business towards sales tax, et cetera, but I just -- I'm concerned about limiting that first floor. Once there's an office user that has to move out or close their business or whatever it might be. So I don't know. I'm not asking you to solve my concern, but I do have that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 59 concern about this -- this overlay. WESLEY: Yes. So Chair, Commissioner and I understand that concern and where it comes from. At the same time, if we just keep letting things go as they are, we'll never really get to that point of having that concentration of the types of uses we want to have, because the office will be the easy thing to just to keep renting it to. SVEUM: Well, I think that that's -- it has to start somewhere, I agree. But I also -- I'm concerned about those property owners that that have that space and may result in a devaluation of their property because they can't -- they can't find a -- the ability to rent. They don't have the ability to rent it out to someone else besides an office user. So anyway, I just like I said, I'm just concerned about that day that comes to comes to pass. Maybe it never will. Thanks, John. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners? WESLEY: Okay. Are we ready to move on, then? KOVACEVIC: No. Just one. I wanted to echo Commissioner Sveum's comments that -- I'm concerned also about that there's more space than we would have potential users. And I'm wondering if the if the town has done a study is staff done a study on what the -- what the demand would be particularly for an entertainment district and for you know, more restaurants and more -- because, I mean, it seems like the town is an early closer. And maybe that would change if we had, you know, a number of the users. But I'm wondering if a study has been done. WESLEY: Chairman, no, we haven't done a specific study that I'm aware of for that in the downtown area. But we do believe that the combination of making these ordinance changes, as well as in the streetscape improvements, will create that district that will help drive the traffic and the interest into the future. KOVACEVIC: And I -- just one more question before we go to other Commissioners. So Commissioner Sveum said if a, if a tenant runs out of their lease and there's but it's currently first floor space is currently being used as office, can they not release to a new tenant? Is that -- does their right to use the office expire with the lease? WESLEY: If it's a different lease with a different business, then yes it would. If it's just CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 59 re-upping a lease for an existing tenant, then no it wouldn't. KOVACEVIC: Oh, okay. Thank you. Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: So regarding the streetscape, are you going to address that coming up? It doesn't look like it's in the slide deck. And that's -- that's my major concern is the cost associated and many other concerns. So are you going to address that chair? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Schlossberg. No, that's not part of this presentation or discussion this evening. This is just about the zoning text amendment. That's a budget item for the town council. There will be a public meeting next week on Wednesday, where we're looking for feedback and we'll have that discussion. SCHLOSSBERG: Okay. So I think that -- basically for I think for our discussion, if I know we're making a recommendation, but I'm concerned, I mean, overly concerned after I saw the numbers for this whole thing. So I'm -- I don't know where I am with that. I'll let you keep going. But that that's a major concern. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners, any other comments? WESLEY: Okay. Then we get to the business district, which is the bulk of the of the middle part of this area. And so fewer changes in this area keeps the same allowed uses as far as the C0, C1, C2 districts. Continues the entertainment overlay for the outdoor activities would again increase the residential to the 15 units per acre or more, as directed by the commissioners we discussed that. And the SUPs for the residential density above the whatever the allowed unit is. And then North Palisades and the Innovation District again, allows the same things that are allowed in the current zones, but increases that by trying to get in a little bit more of the employment type uses with the laboratories, the light manufacturing and assembly and continuing then to allow residential by the SUP. Temporary uses was another item that that came up in the discussions, input from the public. We've got a number of vacant lots in the town center. There are some things we could do to allow for temporary uses of those lots. So they're making some service to the town but not requiring them full improvements. And so we include then a temporary use provision and developed some guidelines that can be used by myself and the town CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 59 engineer to guide those uses. Parking and setbacks. Those are not being changed from what's in the current ordinance. However, there's, again, a modification we could make to the ordinance as it was drafted. So currently we have a minimum setback, which basically allows you to bring a building to the property line or an easement if there's one there, but it doesn't require you to. And so that you can still then end up with buildings that are set back and not creating that urban street wall that would really like to see particularly along the avenue. So maybe we ought to look at having a build to line. So you require the building to be brought up closer to the street, rather than leaving the flexibility. They can put it as far back as they want. And then again, with regard to vacant properties I mentioned earlier, allowing the temporary uses. And then we have on our -- our list to look at other things we might be able to do in town code to address vacant properties and maybe increase some of the property maintenance requirements there just to help them look as good as they can, because a lot of visitors do come to our town center, and we want the vacant properties to look as nice as they can for vacant properties. So with regard to the process and where we're at, so you've got your public hearing this evening for the ordinance. And this evening, you may feel comfortable with making a recommendation to town council, and you may not. In which case you could continue it to a future meeting and continue that discussion and give us direction on -- on -- on modifications that you would like to see. Once council does -- once you do make a recommendation, we'll go to council. Our hope is that would be within the next few months, and we can get it to council before they go on their summer break. But the, contrary to what was in the report and the ordinance, as I have thought this through a little bit further. The proposal had been and what we sent to you and this agendize is amending existing Chapter 25 of the zoning ordinance to switch the entertainment district to this new downtown overlay district. We realize in terms of all the pieces and how this works together, that really doesn't quite work right. And so what we are -- what you're looking at when this comes back, goes on to council will actually be chapter 27 of the zoning ordinance. We'll create a CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 59 new chapter instead of amending chapter 25. And so we'll keep the existing chapter 25 and 26 that are in the code for a period of time. And so then the next step after the adoption of this new overlay district would be the actual rezoning process to notice property and work with property owners, to process that rezoning, to actually apply the overlay to the district and take off the existing overlays and apply the new one so that we envision would happen probably next fall if this moves along in a timely fashion. Questions? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: John, can you bring up the Innovation district, please? What -- can you --so how are the -- how are those tenants affected? The current tenants, because there's a lot of medical people that are -- medical businesses that are there. WESLEY: Those would still remain as allowed uses. SVEUM: Pardon? WESLEY: Those would remain as allowed uses. SVEUM: Well, if -- okay. So what's there right now that would not be able to remain. -- remain as a use if some of those tenants decide to leave? WESLEY: There were a few uses that are allowed through special use permit that haven't been applied that get lost in this, but they were adding in new items that that would be allowed as listed. SVEUM: So what -- what do you imagine this to look like over time? I mean, it's a little employment district. WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: But you've got some residential that's allowed in there, right? WESLEY: Right. Which is today. SVEUM: Pardon? WESLEY: That's allowed today also through the special use permit process. That's no difference. SVEUM: Perhaps a second floor type of residential -- WESLEY: Correct. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 59 SVEUM: -- not converting buildings over to full residential? WESLEY: They could, but it'd be a special use permit that had to be approved by town council building. SVEUM: Vertical building? WESLEY: You could. SVEUM: So we -- but we've got employment space here -- WESLEY: Right. SVEUM: -- that is possible. I think it's -- that would be one of the objectives here is to remain or to retain opportunities for commercial users to come in and for jobs. WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: Rather than convert to more residential. But there could be some that were above first floor. Is that what -- WESLEY: Right. So the zoning ordinance today allows -- so that area north of Palisades is zoned C2. It has no overlay districts with it. So just like any other C2 area, a property owner there today could request a special use permit for residential ground floor, second floor, whatever come through PNC and council and could be approved or denied. This overlay district at this point is not changing that. You could, you could decide that because we of the desired employment district that we don't think residential will ever fit there. And you could remove that option to apply for the special use permit, or you could restrict it to just second floors. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: I just want to back up a little bit, John, to page 3 under the ordinance. WESLEY: Under the ordinance. Okay. I have to go over here to actually get to the ordinance. And that will take me a me a moment. Let's see. Okay. What? CORRIGAN: Yes. On the on the avenue district. It refers to a noise ordinance. And my question is, I'm not familiar with that. The decibel level, there's incremental decibel levels allowed that range from hour to hour. So during certain hours fifty decibels, other hours seventy, and so on. In a practical manner, do we have the facilities on -- for example, a sheriff's MCSO vehicle to monitor that. How is that done? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 59 WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Corrigan. So Section 1117 the town code has the noise ordinance provisions. And as of three or four years ago, we no longer use decibel readings as part of implementation of that ordinance. Part of the challenge is being a little bit where you were headed a moment ago is having the proper equipment, maintaining it in terms of its calibration, and people being properly trained in using that equipment was a challenge, and there's often so much background noise that goes into doing a decibel reading that again, it becomes a challenge in court. So under advisement of the town prosecutor, we no longer use decibels. There's another set of criteria that are used. Basically a reasonable person kind of approach to is this too much noise? Is it causing issues for other people in the area? CORRIGAN: So it's a matter of consensus or complaint, complaint driven. And then there's some sort of an assessment by the officer? WESLEY: Correct. CORRIGAN: Okay. And that assessment is based on? WESLEY: There's a list of criteria in the in the ordinance. CORRIGAN: Okay. So it's based on experience and acceptable common complaints, acceptable noise level, the number of complaints? WESLEY: I don't recall that number is there, but it is based a lot on the situation location. If you are off in some purely residential area, the noise level you would expect there versus what you might expect on the avenue would be different. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Yes. Two quick questions. So the temporary use types, did we say that we were going to have guidelines onto what those types could be. I can't remember? WESLEY: Chair. Vice chair we have some criteria in terms of how the property itself might be developed in terms of kind of the minimum standards that would go with it. It's been a little while since I looked at those draft regulations, but I think if I hit the back button here -- so the temp -- those temporary use guidelines were included in the packet. Okay. And -- CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 59 COREY: Is this packet that was 400 pages or something. WESLEY: Yeah, just a few. So basically it's anything that's allowed in the, in the zoning district itself. So any in this case C2, C1, C2 type uses would be potentially possible again. Can they make it work in a kind of a temporary type setting would become then the challenge. COREY: Okay. And then you commented earlier, do we prefer a build two line or a minimum setback? I don't know about you guys, but I tend to think a build two line would create some consistency and uniformity. Like, I would say that on Avenue of the Fountains we have a build two, right. There's kind of lined up? WESLEY: They are lined up, but they wouldn't have to be. There's nothing there that prohibits somebody building on one of these vacant lots of setting back 10 or 15 feet if they wanted to. COREY: Okay. But the build -- the build to line would keep them all in in a row. WESLEY: At least make sure we could set it at 5 feet or 10 feet or whatever you want to say. COREY: Okay. WESLEY: It would be so that yes, there is more consistency. And again, nobody's setting back too far and creating that break in that. COREY: And I think that -- that might be easier for people who are walking around, because you can kind of visit one to the next without having to, you know, like I think we have the hair studio or which is now the flower shop is kind of way set back. You kind of have to walk back to that. So if they're kind of in a line, then that would make it easier for foot traffic to visit the store. So I that's what I would recommend. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Anyone else? GRAY: Chair I have thoughts are probably unpopular thoughts, but thoughts nonetheless. I agree, I think with the Vice Chair that a build to line for uniformity just makes sense. But. I -- I've always thought that going down this path was warranted. I think that an overhaul of, of this whole, this whole area is something this town should CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 59 strongly consider. But I wonder if -- if we're, we're just trying to dip our toe into this thing. Right? We're trying to you -- can even hear up here, we're talking about, you know, minimalism. We're talking about, you know, noise. We're talking about all the things that we always talk about that kind of keeps this town stagnant. And so I think the question we should ask ourselves is, what's the overall objective? Is the is the objective to gentrify downtown? Is it to bring it forward in time? I'm looking at Amanda to see if she nods or not. Is it to create something that doesn't exist today? Is it to try and mimic downtown Gilbert? you know what, what are we trying to achieve? And for me, I think if I had a magic wand, I would say it's two things. It's one, it's to re gentrify. And by that, I mean a lot of the business placements that are in downtown achieved placement in downturn economies. And I don't think that this Phoenix market is headed back there for a very long time. I don't think we're going to see the cycle that we've always seen. So I think we take a different lens on it this time. And then I think as we're adjusting or proposing to adjust all of this language, the only way that that change comes about is if there's a catalyst that makes that happen, right? And so what can be put in here that is enticing enough to bring capital investment into this market, into this town, into this into this zone that's going to push us over that line, that's going to develop the avenue of the fountains. If I wanted to be overly aggressive. And the only thing I can think of is it's our residential density piece. And I'm not a residential density person. I don't like that generally across most of our, you know, the land holdings in this town. I don't like when we talk about it, but I think if there was a place to talk about it, it's here. And while we're proposing 15 right is what we're proposing? WESLEY: That's what was in the excuse me, Chair. Yes. That's what was in the draft ordinance that went out. I've begun to second guess that and think it should be higher. GRAY: And I think it should be right. So it should be. If we want a catalyst to drive change and the only way that you get there. I don't know that it needs to be the park place 45 is the density of park, but I don't know that it needs to be that. But 35, 40, 45 that's the only language I can see that could be introduced into something like this that's CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 59 going to tell developer X, Y, and Z. I'm, I'm interested in coming into downtown Fountain Hills and playing and revitalizing and investing. And there's a byproduct of that that I don't necessarily like, but if we want to drive change, we've got to find a catalyst. And that's my preamble. WESLEY: Chair, if you don't mind Commissioner Gray along that line. So again, we Because we're dealing with mostly small lots in the downtown area, 6,000 feet squared. Every time someone comes in, we say, okay, well, you know, eight units per acre. Oh, okay. Well, I can do. Well, no, you can't, because you're only you're only this little piece of an acre, that's what I mean because it's harder to like easily understand what you can get from the 2,000, you know, 2,000 feet squared. So on the example given, you have four units on 6,000 acres, that's about 28 units per acre. So if you up that to 1,750 or 1,500 or whatever, you could get up close to that 35 or 40 that you're thinking about. But get us in that ballpark. GRAY: So I agree with that. And I agree with pushing that envelope for the council to -- to consider. I also think we just have to be careful that -- that we should use those terms, but we should also use terms that that the developer market understands as well so that it's, you know, it -- WESLEY: Probably work both ways. GRAY: -- doesn't take a translation exercise. KOVACEVIC: So do we have any we open up the public? WOODWARD: We have three speaker cards. The first speaker is Alan Colby. Second speaker is Roger Isaacs. And on deck after that is Larry Myers. Mr. Colby? COLBY: Thank you. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you, John, for the presentation. Our concern here is -- WESLEY: Close to the microphone. COLBY: Our concern here is in regard to a number of number of questions. Number one, height restrictions on these buildings. Has that been taken into consideration at all, or is it going to remain the same along the different zones that were proposed? And the other thing that I would ask is on the noise. Is that going to be consistent through CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 59 certain hours as it gets later? Does it still allow it to be louder, or how is that going to work? Basically, you know, if you've got residential above or below or next to. I'm sure they're not going to like loud music at two a.m. or whatever it is. So if they're I don't know the particular code, but I was curious about that. And the parking. How is that going to be affected on these smaller lots? And if you combine a couple of lots, you may have, from what I understand or what I've read, and so far you may have to have to provide an equal number of parking spots if you have certain restrictions in the size of your units. So those are the my questions on that. And I agree that the residential density would probably be a good way to start. And the higher -- for the smaller units, a lot of people can't afford a 2,000 square foot unit, but you might get younger people to come in and maybe take a job here if they can rent apartments that are 800 to 1,000, or who knows what if you're single, maybe less. So that was my comments. Otherwise I'm in favor. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. SVEUM: Does he represent the plat 208 or what? What's your what's your position? COLBY: Well, my brother and I, he owns, and we, I managed a couple of units here, the building on the corner of La Montana and Park, North Palisades, the white building now as we used to be red. And we also owned the building on Saguaro and Parkview, the where the Greek restaurant is. So and we have a couple of empty lots, but we're planning on doing something with those, after all, this is kind of settled. Would appreciate clarity on all those issues. Thank you. Any other questions? KOVACEVIC: Thank you. No thank you. SVEUM: You're welcome. COLBY: Thank you. Jeff. WOODWARD: Roger Isaacs? ISAACS: I'm Roger Isaacs. I own the former bank building on the corner by the roundabout just across the street. I served as a board member for plot 208 for the last 16 months. I'm no longer -- I backed out of that at this point. I want to thank all of you for your service, and also acknowledge that John and his staff have been very helpful in CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 59 helping us answer questions and try to make some adjustments. In general, I support the movement towards the overlay. However, there are some serious problems specifically with the Avenue of Fountain. People up here brought up several of those today, and I'll reinforce my perspective on that. And also, many of the other owners that I've talked to that are on plot 208. One of the problems is that this is an ineffective approach, in my opinion, to get what we want. I think if we want to look at past experience, I got very excited a little bit over six years ago when the last overlay went in, and we were going to allow mixed use because I had an office here in town for 25 years, and I have a house in Sunridge for 25 years, and we're ready to downsize and move those together so I can work and do things like that. That's why we bought the bank building. And as I started to look into mixed use and talked to other people and bring architects on and work with the Colbys and others, we found out that effectively it wasn't possible. It wasn't cost effective. It couldn't be done, be approached in most of the properties here. So again, it was a bold move to move to mixed use but ineffective. And I look at this as the same thing. And in my opinion, one of the big problems is you've got the Avenue district, and yet you've only got half the avenue involved. Why isn't the South side on that map as part of the Avenue District? What I believe is going to happen, and we already see it today with our with people moving across, is that you're basically saying you can't have offices and services on the north side of the avenue. South side of the avenue is unlimited. So what are you going to do? Come around the corner down by sports bar, real estate, real estate, real estate. But the names on those buildings are different right now than they were two years ago. So we could expect within two years all those offices are going to empty out, move across the street because you want to be on Avenue. So if I was to predict what we're going to see in the six years of this is we're still going to have empty lots sitting, occupying most of the space there between Chase and our businesses down at the other end. You're going to have all offices on the south side, and you're going to have empty offices on the north side. You might ask why my office is sitting empty after 26 CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 59 months of ownership. My run rate is about 5K a month to hold the building. The reason it is, is because John was honest with me -- thank you for your time. I could spend 30 giving you this. My summary is I think you guys should ask John to go back. We've got a number of inconsistencies in what they're trying to do here that I think could be much improved. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I'd like if you could finish your thought. Finish your thought as to why the building is still vacant and -- ISAACS: Our building is vacant because when we came in, I went to John, and I talked to him about what we're going to do with mixed use. And John explained to me, we'd like to maintain commercial both on -- on both two street sides. Which meant for us to effectively do mixed use, we have to build new construction in the back with the first floor parking and the rest residential above that. I didn't have a problem with doing that, but that was all predicated on the fact that our building could be office. I felt it was a little bit out of out of context with Fountain Hills, because when you say you can't have first floor residential, you're not acknowledging the fact that a lot of our opportunity and need is for handicap enabled access. And so it's very difficult to provide that. If you say, I can't have first floor. So as we got involved with that, we were told, why don't you put a hotel in, you can go to a hotel. otherwise you got to go to a special use. Special use takes one to two years and cost a lot of money. And the entire time you're in that process, you don't know if it's going to be allowed. So I said, I'm not going to go to special use. We'll just do it right and put it in the back. My neighbor Vladimir went over, started to put a hotel in. He spent a year putting a hotel in. Once he put the hotel in, then the town says, we're going to eliminate hotel as a use. And the entire time he was doing that, he really wanted to put in condos and mixed use with residential on the first floor. You guys permitted that. Okay. But he spent a year delay pretending to put a hotel in, in my opinion, that he's never had an intention to do. So you guys and this process is dragging things out ineffectively. And my position now is I don't want to invest a couple million dollars in a new building behind and then have an CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 59 office building that's unoccupied. We have people stop us every day and say, what are you going to put there? Why aren't you doing anything? And we say, because the town won't let us. And I'll answer that question. Why? Why won't the town let us do this? Everyone, without exception, says I want a restaurant here in this building because it's a big building. You guys may not understand that the three big lots on avenues, Allot (ph.), Chase, and where the what do you call it, executive office building is. None of those properties could put a restaurant in. We're prohibited from doing that because by code and town ordinance, this whole thing about the 1992 size restriction, we have 11 parking spaces. By code, I have to have eleven parking spaces. They all have to be on my 24,000 feet squared. Okay. If I was to convert that to a restaurant, I'd need five times that many parking spaces. I don't have that, and I don't have the opportunity. Even though I'm one of the top funders of plot 208, I'm not allowed to use plot 208 as part of my staff. Neither are any of these other three. So if you look at that landscape, when Chase goes out, when the executive officers want to do something because they lose all their people across the street, none of them are going to be restaurants in because your current overlay says they can't. They have to have the parking and they don't have the parking. And in fact, if you look at parking in general, what the town should have done is they should do a parking study to show that we don't have the infrastructure to support bars and restaurants on that site, and we don't have the infrastructure to support an extreme number of mixed use. Mixed use -- bars and restaurants take five times the number of parking spaces that office does by code. Okay. Plot 208 would have to provide that. And they're not going to add any more parking spaces okay. By code, mixed use requires about the same as office, but it can no longer be shared parking. And so again, we're losing the five time multiplier that the town uses when they look at number of parking spaces and what you can use. So again you have very limited amount of parking. Not to get into the fact that you have no gas down there, so you don't have the infrastructure to put commercially viable restaurants in on the north side. On the south side, you've got a much bigger CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 59 space of undeveloped land that could have gas, that could have building spaces bigger than 6,000. Why aren't they part of this? KOVACEVIC: Thank you. SVEUM: What's your vacancy of the office space? ISAACS: Our vacancy? SVEUM: Yeah. ISAACS: Totally. It's totally vacant. We did a demo, and then we just been sitting on it. We have lunch there. We have some of our vehicles and equipment parked there. I'm a general contractor in Arizona. And so I can do that, but like I said, we're kind of on hold because we bought the building with the intent of making an office, but I'm not going to put a bunch of money into someplace that then is grandfathered out and people turn over too quick. It just doesn't make sense. Thank you. MYERS: Chair. Vice chair. Commissioners. So I'm going to approach this from looking at this entire downtown area. In August I'll be -- have been here 44 years. And I know how hard she tried to utilize the entertainment and overlay district, which is in fact, what you really want downtown. He could never get the money to actually do it. I think I agree with Commissioner Gray. This isn't a project where you sort of nudge yourself into it. I think I agree with the two gentlemen -- the last gentleman, Mr. Isaacs. I have no idea why the south side of the street is excluded from this. You're just going to push all of the offices off the north side of the street, over to the south side of the street, and create the same problem over there. You know how much I love apartments. So your mixed use crap. Yeah. Okay. Fine. I'm not a big 800 square foot kind of guy. I sit on the Economic Development Committee, and I have to listen to a business owner who thinks that having an apartment is going to cause somebody to drink a $40 bottle of wine. That's not happening. So an 800 square foot apartment isn't where I come down. I think downtown Gilbert is something you could strive for, except for we don't have -- nobody's coming to Fountain Hills because we're not a hub. Gilbert's sort of a hub, but you could take that model and make it for us. And you might have some people who come out and spend the day. But when I say CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 59 make it for us, I'm talking about the people who already live here and the people who live here. Most of them can afford to afford to live here. So making something, trying to shoehorn something affordable into this plan, and I do like the fact that we're planning then zoning -- pet peeve of mine. I think it's -- I don't know that you can do it like this little at a time. And when you're talking about noise, if you're going to live in an apartment above a bar, then that's what you like, and you're not worried about the sound. And if we're going to cater, if we want to make the town younger, we're going to get loud. And the people who don't like it, then they're just not going to like it. And that's my opinion on this. I just think it needs to be more aggressive. And there's not -- we should have three minutes on each part of this presentation because the other parts I support as well. But you realize why we have -- just give me 30 seconds. The reason why we have to do the other part of this is because we zoned out the places where it should have gone. And I'm talking about the target Plaza where -- what Amanda wants to do, that was what it was intended to do 44 years ago, 50 years ago when MCO master plan. That's where her vision and John's presentation, that's where it was supposed to go. And we thought a shopping center was the answer. Now it's two thirds empty and we're going to slap up a bunch of apartments. So think about -- think about it. The reason why you have to do this. But it's got to be done unless you're going to going to do it somewhere else. And I don't know where that is. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: All right. Commissioners, do we have any additional comments? Yeah. Oh. All right. We'll close the public hearing and then John. WESLEY: So yes, Chair. Commissioners looking for any direction? I -- not sure if you're ready to go ahead and make a recommendation on to council tonight. I think maybe I heard enough discussion that there probably are a few adjustments that I need to make and bring this back at a future meeting but looking for your direction on those items. KOVACEVIC: All right. Commissioner -- Commission vice chair Corey? COREY: Thank you. I did want to just address a couple of things that we heard tonight, if you can clarify. So somebody mentioned, do we have height restrictions? And I saw CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 59 you nodding your head as they were asking. So we do have the height restrictions in place right? WESLEY: So Chair, Vice Chair the zoning ordinance in the C2 district has a maximum height of 40 feet and that's not modified by the overlay. COREY: Thank you. The second comment I heard twice was sound. Once from Larry and once from the other gentleman. And I tend to agree. I think we've talked about this before. If there's residential above commercial, then they know that that's what they're getting into, and we can't -- we shouldn't be applying some sort of a sound ordinance to that area just because people chose to live there. WESLEY: Right. Chair, Vice chair. One of the specific comments, was there a time frame on when the noise is different? The ordinance again has some general criteria. One of those is judging it by the time of day. So noise at 2 in the afternoon versus 2 at night. Yes, it would be different in terms of how it would be looked at. But there's not a specific time like 11:00. It's got to change from this to that. That's not in there. COREY: Okay. And the third comment is involving the south side. And I saw that in your -- in your documents here that that's an option we can consider, right? WESLEY: Chair, Vice Chair. It could be. It hasn't been included at this point for several reasons. One is that it's not in the current overlays and the zoning that's there. The DCCD district mirrors some of the things that are in the other overlays. It does not have the use restriction on the ground floor, but we are talking about lands that do have development agreements on them that would impact the uses as well as then it's got the -- the town campus here that, that, you know, wouldn't be impacted by it. So just the ability to actually apply the overlay on the south side would be a bigger change and more challenging because the development that's there. COREY: I'm sure it would be. But I, I can understand where the residents are coming from that they're just going to move to the to the other side of the street, and we'll have the same problem on the other side. So I think it's something that we should consider. Yeah. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 59 SVEUM: I'm not I'm not so sure that the officers would all move to the south side because of the rents. They're significantly higher over there. However, my -- my question would be why? Or maybe it's possible that this could also go to the Economic Development Committee for them to discuss and maybe have more conversation about some of the nitty gritty about -- well, Mr. -- the gentleman that owns the -- the corner, I think they should be listening to his concerns because obviously he's been through that for the last couple of years. And John, I'm sure you've heard a lot of the concerns. But I think that the People that are on that committee should hear them as well and talk about the economics of, of this whole thing and some of the barriers of success. Looking at it, it's always difficult to forecast, but I don't -- What is -- Amanda, what's the what's the process for economic development committee? AMANDA: So Mr. Chair, Commissioner, there's a narrow focus on the economic Development Advisory Committee. The committee was not appointed by the town council. It was appointed by Mayor Friedel. The scope is to work towards attracting and getting a major employer. They are aware of what Mr. Myers mentioned, of what is the difficult part in attracting a major employer, and we have missed out on opportunities is because we don't have the industrial zoning. And so several of the committee members have said, you know, this is ginormous. This is something -- something separate. So we're going to continue to -- to narrow our focus. So it's -- it's not it's not a traditional commission. This is not something we'll present to them. But they are aware of the innovation district. They're supportive. And as we continue to -- to talk, I appreciate, Commissioner Gray. I think you started with maybe some stuff not being so popular. It was popular with me. But as we continue to talk, as we continue to delay, it's just delaying the economic development efforts in trying to attract a major employer, because, again, we've had a couple of folks that are not just health care, but bioscience. And so when they're meeting with John and myself, John is the zoning administrator. And so if they're saying they have wet labs, you know, clean rooms, that is industrial. And then if just five percent of their model is administrative or commercial, it's again -- we're having to say CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 59 no, because otherwise we're setting them up for -- for failure. And Mr. Myers and I sometimes agree to disagree that, you know, when do you do the zoning. But I've been doing this for over twenty years. I've mentioned that to several of you. And sometimes you can get folks on the hook, but then they have to rely on seven of you and seven of some of my council members and mayor who are here, fourteen people to get the zoning. And so sometimes it hasn't happened here. But it -- it goes into a million pieces because fourteen people say no. So again, hasn't happened here, but just in my history. SVEUM: My -- the issue I've got is that there are already current problems with what with -- with the Code, there's going to be more problems with changing it to the overlay for current office building owner. I mean, how is how is he going to function? He's going to have to turn in that building into a restaurant, right? Or one of the other retail users, correct? WESLEY: So Chair, Commissioners, if you went forward with the ordinance as it's currently laid out, yes, that would be the case. But one of the discussion points this evening is should that be changed, should that area be modified. Maybe this far end of the avenue doesn't need that limitation and could keep offices on this end. So we could adjust that area that has that limitation. SVEUM: I think it's -- it's -- I just think it would be better to take some more time and to hear more -- get some more information from folks that have property there. That -- that we can actually decide on something that doesn't harm a property owner. I mean, right out of the gate, it seems to me and maybe I'm wrong, but I think that there's -- there's still information that needs to be collected to make, at least in my mind, to make a decision on this. AMANDA: I just have a question and it might be rhetorical, you don't have to answer it. But how many business owners is it going to take? And then do we have to do we have to fill up the room and I'll just tell you, and there's some business owners sitting on here that some of our folks because time is money or they're working, they have a family, they have kiddos to take care of. They're like, Amanda, we're not going to show up for planning and zoning. And it's no disrespect to the commission, but they're like, we're CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 59 going to go to council. Like we can only pick one. Or when they see the slide of next steps with John of, well, this can take a couple of months, but as long as we can try to do it before June, unfortunately we can -- we just can't get people to show up. And then I always tell the town council, this is for 24,000 people. I know our council takes an oath. As staff, we don't take an oath, but we're trying to look at the 24,000 and try to grow this town. And so I think as part of the direction, if you guys don't feel comfortable in making a recommendation to the town council, what do you need from staff? How many people need to show up? Do we need to have a full room for you guys to feel comfortable in moving -- in moving forward? And we know this is -- this is a little bit tough, but leadership and change is tough. And if we don't make changes I think Commissioner Gray mentioned this, we're getting the same old, same old. And again as staff and council is dealing with just you with the legislator, we've lost the rental tax. There's talks about losing the food tax. If we don't start making changes at some point. I've told council and I've told our town manager, Rachel Goodwin, we're going to need to have some serious conversations of, are we going to have to start talking about, I'm going to get people shooting stuff in my back, about a property tax. Because what we're trying to do again, with these uses is to generate more sales tax and bring more people here to retain our businesses and to attract major employment. And we need some of these mixed use opportunities. That's all I have to say. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Actually, I agree with Commissioner Sveum. I think rather than making a bold, rash move, we should hear more discussion, we should hear more from the Economic Development Committee, which is newly formed, and I'm anxious to hear about that. I think talking to these people -- we don't want to make the wrong move. Some consider the Target Center a wrong move years ago, that may be. And I think we don't want to make a second wrong move in my opinion before -- and acting too quickly can do that. So I think we should deliberate. I think we should give it an opportunity to hear it out. And those are my thoughts. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 59 KOVACEVIC: All right. I just have -- I have one more question for you. The -- with the parking for the bank building is under the Avenue District overlay, would the property owner still have to provide restaurant parking should he choose to put a restaurant in there, or would they be able to use the plat to avoid parking? WESLEY: So chair, if I may, I'll use the cursor here again a little bit. As Mr. Isaacs mentioned, there were a few lots in here when this was originally platted that are a little bit larger. There are over 10,800 feet squared. And by the ordinance that's been in place those lots are required to provide their own parking. And this lot, when it was originally plated, it's been subdivided now was one of those lots. So they're supposed to provide their own parking. Does that prohibit their customers from parking in the plateau property? No, it does not prohibit them from parking there. But they have to meet their parking requirement on their lot. That's the way the ordinance is currently written and has been. We could change that going forward. That's part of what's on the table. KOVACEVIC: Okay. That answered my question. Thank you. Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I mean, I think that should certainly be something we discuss in the future, but a couple other questions of, I guess their chicken or the egg questions, but I think the point made in the public hearing, you know, regarding public utilities and what's available you know, natural gas in particular, how close has public works looked at, you know, opportunities to support, collaborate to -- to bring additional utility services into this core that that would foster some of this? And then I just keep looking at the map. If we're -- if we're really finally going to go after a big anchor employer in this town, why wouldn't we blend the innovation district in the business district together and create a larger opportunity zone that's broader and can be more things to more folks? And then my final statement is, I know we're going to keep going back to this, you know, how do we please all people? And that that's an Achilles heel of this town that I've never understood. But we do it over and over again. I think you could allow anything to be grandfathered, anything by right. I really think the focus here needs to be what's the catalyst going to CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 59 be to drive the change? Because then market forces will take -- will take their -- will take their path. And we might see a different outcome. KOVACEVIC: All right. So we are looking for a motion or we are -- we need to continue to a date certain? Right. And -- yes we do, the April meeting, I will not I will not be here on the 14th. So if we want to continue this to April, I guess I'll ask the commissioners if they would mind if you would mind meeting on the 21st next month? GRAY: Yeah. Chances are I won't be here. But I would like -- I would like to get some feedback or some discussion about (indiscernible) those. KOVACEVIC: Okay. So yeah. All right. So Commissioner Gray has asked about your thoughts on or Amanda's thoughts on combining the innovation District and the business district, if you have any comments on that? WESLEY: I'll start. I'll see if Amanda walks up here behind me while I'm talking, Chairman. There's a balance there, Commissioner. I see what you're saying. And so at least pulling it apart for part of that business district can make some sense, make that a little bit larger. We were trying to trying to keep the -- there's still a lot that happens in the business district along Parkview in particular. That works well in terms of the continued expansion of that active commercial area. Does it dilute it too much if we make it too big and the lot sizes are so small, over on South of Palisades. Does it really have that same opportunity? It's -- it is a little bit more challenged in that regard. Again, do you have any thoughts about extending part one way or the other? GRAY: Well, I would say it was the inverse, John or the innovation district, would it be afforded more opportunities if it could encroach? WESLEY: Right. Yes, that's what I'm looking at. AMANDA: Mr. Chair, Commissioner, love the idea. I think again, if you're going to bring it back to staff, I'd want to have some more conversations, because when you bring up industrial and I've spoken to lots of residents, businesses at first when you hear industrial, right, you get this and people freak out. So when I said it's just this narrow area, there is calm and support. So we would -- if you're going to kick it back, we would want to float that. But John and I have talked quite a bit. And again, business CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 59 community talking to residents feel comfortable with breaking out this way. GRAY: So my reservation and this is just food for thought. But my reservation is, is that when you look at that innovation district today and the way it's built out, it's largely built out and it's modern. It's, you know, it's -- it's what you would probably want to see, right? So I just wonder, you know, I just wonder if it's lip service. We're creating an innovation district. We're trying to entice a large anchor, you know, to come into the into the jurisdiction. But there's no room in the end, so to speak. And so it seems to me that the business district zone -- I think the avenue is primed to be redeveloped, but I think the business district zone is where you have a lot of redevelopment opportunity as well, through plot combos. et cetera, et cetera. AMANDA: I would just say it wouldn't just be lip service, but I get I get what you're saying. There is also opportunity for some areas to be redeveloped. And yes. We'll leave it at that. KOVACEVIC: Okay. So we're looking for a motion to continue or to recommend or. -- what -- what would the commission like to do here? SVEUM: I'll make a motion to defer. KOVACEVIC: A motion to continue? SVEUM: Continue. KOVACEVIC: And we need a date certain. Is everybody okay with an April 21st date next month? Okay. So we have a motion to continue the hearing until April 21st. WESLEY: Second. COREY: second. KOVACEVIC: Okay. All in favor? ALL: Aye. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Opposed hearing. None were approved. WOODWARD: Six zero WESLEY: So Chairs we wrap that up. So things that that I heard that we will be looking at specifically is any possibility for extending the uses in the business district to include some of the innovation district ideas. We'll look at increased residential densities, a bill CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 59 two line. We will evaluate a little further the size of the Avenue District. Limitation to ground floor, nonoffice uses. I'll just say it that way. And bring some of those things back. Is there anything else in particular that you'd want to hear about that I didn't include? KOVACEVIC: I think the parking requirements. Okay. WESLEY: For the for the large lots. KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? COREY: Yeah. And what about incorporating the south side? WESLEY: Okay. COREY: And I don't know if it's possible, but if we want to bring businesses here, should we have pizza or something? We bring some food in here? WESLEY: Okay. Thank you, Commissioners. KOVACEVIC: Item six. Holding public hearing consideration. Possible action or provide direction. Overview of wireless communication ordinances, resolutions and associated documents, and town council direction for review and possible modification. WESLEY: Okay. Chair, Commissioners. Next item. So wireless communication ordinance. We had fun reviewing this a year ago and let's do it again. So at a recent town council meeting January 21st -- is that what it was? I forget. By motion of the council they directed send back to planning and zoning the review of existing ordinances, resolutions and documents associated with the provision of wireless communication services, to revise these regulations and to release the consultant report for planning, zoning and for the public. So that's what we are beginning this evening, is that review of all the documents and ordinances related to wireless provisions to see what, if any, amendments, adjustments ought to be made in those. And take it back to the council once you've had a chance to do that. So here is a list of the existing documents that relate to this topic. They have been provided to you in your packet. They're available to the public also. In discussions with the Chair on this item. The plan CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 59 that we have put together for moving this moving this forward. Starts tonight with a review of the draft Campanile ordinance. Compared to the most recently adopted Chapter 17 of the zoning ordinance dealing with wireless facilities. In the future, as we have after we finish reviewing the Campanile(indiscernible) ordinance, we'll go back and look at what the P&Z Commission was considering last July, the last time you discussed it, and some of the items that were considered and discussed here that didn't make it into the ordinance as it went to the town council. With those two reviews, we can then make any revisions that this commission would like to see made to Chapter 17. After that, we can look at the small cell and the wireless in the right of way ordinance for possible amendments and consideration, if it should be rolled into Chapter 17. And then after that we'll look at 63, which is the utility service antennas in the right of way. So that's the plan moving forward. I'm sure we can get this all done this year, probably. Okay. So again, after we get draft ordinance, it'll need to go through the legal review. Then we'll hold the public hearings. One of the concerns I've heard is, you know, we might schedule a public hearing and then get timed out like you did last time, of getting something ready for council. We're not under the same kind of time restrictions that we were last time. Plus, we'll wait to hold any public hearings until after we really get to an ordinance that you're feeling good about. And so we won't have that issue. Don't expect that issue. And then we'll send all those to town council. So again, that's the plan for moving this forward. Any comments or questions about what you've been asked to do or what the approach is going to be? Hearing none. I included in your packet. A review of the Campanelli draft ordinance to what was adopted this evening to help us go through that. What I have done is and have available for us to look at on the screen this evening is the draft Campanelli Ordinance, with some highlights that illustrate what's already been included in the existing ordinance to help you see what's not included. So you can begin to pick out and give us direction about those things that you would like to include into the ordinance, or at least have consideration given to how that might be used. And so in here, as we go CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 59 through this, there will be some places where I have comments such as this introductory provision here was in the introduction language to the actual ordinance itself. And there are areas that are kind of grayed out a little bit because they were included in the ordinance that was adopted. And so anything you see just in the regular print here are items that were not included in the ordinance as it was adopted by town council, and are things you may then want to consider as you look through them for somehow including. COREY: Sorry. Excuse me. It doesn't look like this is what was given to us. WESLEY: No, you do not. Right, you did not get it this way. And you got kind of a similar but reverse picture in your packet. It's just I use that to create this. So Chair thought is we can go through these section by section. And Paula, did we get any speaker cards on this? WOODWARD: One speaker card. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Maybe we want to hear the speaker first before we go into this, so that if they have comments on the existing ordinance and what they'd like to change, maybe we can we'll have it covered. WOODWARD: Lori Troller. TROLLER: Good evening, Commission. Just looks all different, which is great. Lori Troller, resident. And I might need an extra minute, might. So I think the strategy of moving forward, John -- which John just told us, it's really important to strategize how you're going to go about this, because this is going to take a lot of time, like you said, probably a year. So going at this at the very start is really important. And I'm happy to see that he's starting with Campanelli's document. So I have gone through our current Chapter 17 and this, this ordinance. You have to understand, I've read over thirty ordinances across the Country, and I've read over one hundred law cases. That is more, almost more paramount to understand how the lawsuits go in and where we need our strengths and make sure we don't go there and write our stuff so it's bulletproof. I've got that experience. So does Campanelli so when he wrote this. That's something you got to consider. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 59 So when -- I feel like we're almost starting in the wrong spot. If we're starting with Chapter 17. I've mentioned this before about starting with an ordinance versus the chapters. Chapters are what you get. Chapters are a child of an ordinance. You -- if we didn't have any ordinance, you'd start out with an ordinance that'd get codified into the chapters. So right now, to go in and change the chapters, that's one thing. If it's a little change, it's another thing about what we're doing because we're going to there's going to be substantial changes to this. So if you start with the ordinance, you'll be able to hit both commercial or sorry, both cellular and broadband, and you'll get it done in one shot. And then it just gets codified out to the two things that you'd be editing right now. So I kind of think the approach is needs to be considered. I took a look at this is John's code. I didn't get very far because it took three hours just to get through several pages, because I wanted to hand -- or write something that I thought, okay, I'll just make a few edits to Chapter 17. Let's try and go the route that you guys are going, despite what I just said. The -- I don't know, there's a lot of red on there. All of those corrections would be had if you started with Campanelli's document, which is kind of I'm glad this is where you're starting. So personally, I would say start with Campanelli's document and then let's take what's in 17 are distances. All those are real particulars and put those into what he's got. If I can just quickly. There's two other ordinances that are excellent, Ithaca and Copake out of New York. They're phenomenal. They're known in the safe tech industry as some of the best, strongest ordinances. They're phenomenal. I'd love to see consideration of those. And something I'd also like to see included in the In the materials that you guys are reviewing are circuit nine appeals. So the circuit nine Court of Appeals, it overrides anything that was decided in the circuit nine, which is Oregon, California, and all the other states that are part of that would override any state law we have. So he has provided the State law in the packet. But what you don't have and what you don't have visibility to is all the court cases that have been won that will overwrite what we can do in the State. There's a lot of strength we can take out of the circuit 9. That brings Campanelli back in. That's where his knowledge is. And so you guys know CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 59 you got time in the bank with him. He's sitting there. He's at least got two hours left to advise you guys. So and then there's one other case. There's a Chevron case in 2024. It was in October. It's extremely important because what's been happening over the last decade is the FCC comes out with their interpretation of the law, and everybody has been writing law according to that. Well, they just had the handcuffs put on them. That is not their place. It never has been their place in the Chevron case finally put them in handcuffs. So a lot of this stuff that it seems like the FCC, oh, it's protected under FCC. It's not. That's new law as of October. So those are huge considerations that Campanelli would know and would be able to tell you. Okay. You have your state law, but you have the 9th circuit of appeals and you have the Chevron case. Both of those tremendously changed this space in the last four months. So within the four months you guys have had it, we have a lot more strength we can bring in. So don't just look at the federal law and the State law. You got to look at those other two things. So -- and again, the Copake and Ithaca, they're out in New York. So that's the Second Court of Appeals. It's not ours. We're not part of that. So I'm not saying that everything that is in that those ordinances can apply. But again, if you bring Campanelli in, he'll bill to say, no, that's not in your bill to know that way sooner than any of us do in research. So that's my advice. KOVACEVIC: All right. Thank you. TROLLER: Thank you. WESLEY: So Chair, Commissioners again, the idea is we can look through here and see are there things that are in the ordinance that you'd like to see, either written as they are, or at least the concepts and ideas that you feel like would be helpful to have in our ordinance as we as we move forward. So this first section is just the basic I guess I should do it this way, is just the basic introduction piece and setting the framework for the ordinance. So I know you've had a little bit of time to read this, but probably maybe not enough time to absorb it as much as you want. But in these introductory pieces here on the purpose and intent. So this first section is very similar to what we have in our ordinance written slightly differently. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 59 GRAY: Why? In 1701 do we get to reference health, safety and general welfare? But we don't get to do that with anything in 16? Just in that first sentence, there seems like trigger language for this topic? WESLEY: Right. So I guess I really couldn't say why it wasn't included in 16 when it was done. But particularly anytime you talk zoning, that's a usually a pretty basic part of zoning. And so it's understandable why it's here. GRAY: I mean, I like it, I just -- we always we've always been told, coach that that those words are kind of off limits in this -- with this topic. WESLEY: So as far as basing a decision on the perceived health impacts, yes, that's specific from the radiation. That specific is off limits. But there are other things that affect the general health and welfare in terms of fall zones or whatever. GRAY: Okay. WESLEY: So this language in here in terms of the basic purpose statement, these four tests were included in the adopted ordinance. Then you get on into some of these philosophical reasons, legal justifications for having such an ordinance. Is this language that you would like to see or don't know at this point, or? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: John, just a question about. It's on page reference, page 33 of -- WESLEY: Of the packet material? CORRIGAN: Correct. Yeah. What I have is -- indicates page 33 local zoning determinations. WESLEY: Let's see here. CORRIGAN: And my reference is Part A, Section II. WESLEY: Let me see here. So I'm going to have to probably get to it a slightly different way. And so I'm trying to understand here. CORRIGAN: 17-10. Okay. So. WESLEY: And seventeen six. Page thirty-three on here. Seventeen. Ten. Must have missed it back the other way. 17-10, okay. Factual determinations. CORRIGAN: So if we go on to page thirty-three. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 59 WESLEY: These numbers may be a little different. Okay. I'm on page 33. CORRIGAN: Okay. And then in my documents it shows part II. So page 33 local zoning determinations. WESLEY: Okay. So that's down here. CORRIGAN: Different page on that one. Okay. So and is this in the new refined document on 17? I mean, that was an essential issue I heard time and time again from the public comments was the effect on real estate value. WESLEY: So we don't have that specifically? No. Our comparable is in 17.05 C where we have the different review criteria. And so you can compare against that section. But that specific one I don't believe is in there. But I'd have to read it again to see. CORRIGAN: Yeah. One of the one of the major concerns I heard in the past was the impact that now this is in regard to 16, but it may also apply to 17. The, you know, devaluation of property values due to location or co-location of towers. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I think what we'd like to do is go through the document and we'll get here, but if we can -- CORRIGAN: I'm jumping ahead. Okay. yeah, I get it. KOVACEVIC: Okay. CORRIGAN: Yeah, I hear you. KOVACEVIC: You've jumped ahead. All right. So any comments on 17.01, the purpose and legislative intent? Okay. Hearing none. Let's go on to 17.2 WESLEY: 1702 is definitions. There are a lot of definitions in here that weren't included in the current ordinance. And I would say this is a section we would come back to as we finalize an ordinance. Because you want definitions that go with your ordinance. And if we do use a lot more of this ordinance and you'll need maybe more of these definitions, and if you don't then you won't necessarily need the definition. So chair, I think we come back to this particular section. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Yeah. And I think we need to incorporate a lot more definite definitions as we get into the topics that we're going to be discussing -- adding. WESLEY: So then we get into the section on application types. So this divides it out into CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 59 four different types of applications. I'll just hit them here briefly. Type one is the co- location of small cell wireless. Two is co-location that aren't small cell wireless. And then it's new small cell wireless, then all other new towers. In the organization of the ordinance for our purposes, we divided it into two basic types. Those that can be reviewed administratively and those that are required to go to a public hearing. We, again, because small cell wireless in the in the right of way is a different piece of the code currently it's not discussed specifically. And so again, we have a similar but different approach. There were some challenges that that I had with this one in terms of what was covered and what was not covered here. And how it was laid out. I think this anticipated there would, would be a lot of existing light poles in town that would be used for small cell wireless, and so they would be co-located in most cases. But that's not the case here. And so the -- any regulation for new small cell wireless in the right of way is basically not existent in this particular code. So we need to if we go with more of this approach, there's a lot of gaps, I think in this that we would need to fill in. KOVACEVIC: The one point with this section and the way Campanella drafted the ordinance, just about everything is a special use permit. WESLEY: Correct. KOVACEVIC: And the way that our ordinance is written, most it's mostly administrative, unless there are exceptions. WESLEY: I think most of it certainly anything new, just about anything new is going to be public review under the current ordinance. Because so much of our land is residential, you have to be at least 300 feet from residential the way it's currently written in order to not be public with a new tower. Anything that's existing and being modified. A lot of those could be done administratively, but follows the same criteria. That's in here, though, for deciding what's administrative and what's not, or if it's exceeding what was specifically approved in the previous step would be back for a minute modification of the Sep. So I think there's more currently on our ordinance that would be public review than maybe what you're expecting. But certainly let's see, I CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 59 guess if we look here at the type two applications again, that's very similar to what we have in our ordinance. Anything here that's meeting these criteria as a co-location on an existing tower would be administrative. And that's the same as our adopted ordinance because we use the same criteria. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. In the commercial zoning and industrial zoning districts, there are administrative and. But then in a residential district, it's a special use permit. WESLEY: Right. Even for the modifications. Other thoughts or comments about this approach? GRAY: I don't see any measurable advantage of doing this versus what we're already doing. WESLEY: Ready to move on, Chair? KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. So next section is on shot clocks. And we did use quite a bit of this in Section 1705(B) of the code. Again, it's structured differently because we have -- don't have the four different application types, but it's the same language was used. The same time frames. And also with the provisions on shot clock tolling. Most of this was used. From there we get into the application requirements. So again we can read through. We didn't really use any direct wording from this section, but most of the items were covered in one way or another. And so you can see where you can find the references to the different sections. This ordinance is drafted, relies on this idea of getting a notice address and doing things through mail. We don't typically do it that way. We do get contact information, and we use emails for most notifications. We do require that we have sign off by a property owner if they're not the applicant. This goes into more detail on what we have in our code about that authorization. KOVACEVIC: I do think we ought to get the proof of authorization and then some level of detail, the redacted document. I think that should be added. WESLEY: Okay. We do require drawn scale depictions and site plans as part of an application requirement. We do require engineers report certifications. We don't currently require an environmental assessment form.` CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 59 KOVACEVIC: What would the environmental assessment form typically include? Would that include expected RF emissions? WESLEY: Chair, I'm not exactly sure what all would be in that. My limited experience with these has been in terms of historic preservation impacts. GRAY: It seems odd that that -- and this just being a generic draft that that references a deck which is obviously an Arizona body. So was this the tailored version or was this the template? WESLEY: This is the draft ordinance that he sent to us. GRAY: Okay. WESLEY: Any other comments questions there? GRAY: I think we should seek the understanding of why that written. WESLEY: Visual impact analysis is next. We do have some similar provisions in the code. It's not quite as quite as detailed as this, and certainly not broken down in the same way because of the -- the types of applications here. GRAY: John, I don't know if we if we want to talk about potential enhancements or flagging sections, but back a couple in the scale drawing section, I thought that a part of that should be a fall zone ring on that drawing. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: And I think the environmental assessment is probably to do like gen set noise study. A backup generator for a -- for a system, but it's the only I could think of. Okay. WESLEY: Any other comments through here? Okay. Alternative site analysis. So again we have similar requirements in the code. The section is listed. This is again probably a little more extensive than what we have in the code, but it's similar. FCC compliance report. You have similar requirements. This has more detail behind it than what we have. Ours is a more simple statement that they provide such a report. Our current ordinance does not require that they submit a copy of their FCC license. KOVACEVIC: I think we should get that. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: Is there a specific template under Section 11 that -- and my version of report is CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 59 different than your version of a report, for example? GRAY: Is there a is there a an FCC template that that that's to be rooted in. In Number 11? WESLEY: I don't know. GRAY: For a set of criteria that either. I guess the fourth paragraph does have a little bit of criteria. WESLEY: So it sounds like you may want to see this added language, because again, our current ordinance just says you shall submit an FCC report. So at least this gives you more of what we're looking for. KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Effective prohibition of claims. This is not anything we have in our ordinance. KOVACEVIC: I think that this would be important. I mean, it seems there's a strong emphasis in the ordinance on effective prohibition and defining it. And what if the carrier is going to claim effective prohibition, what they what they have to do to prove it. And I really think that we ought to include his language, because I think it's just for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. That could be added in. The estimated cost of removal. We don't have that in our current ordinance. KOVACEVIC: And I've looked at a number of ordinances. We had eight sample ordinances the last time that we did the review. And then I have looked at Ithaca and Copake ordinances. And there -- it's there should be an estimate of cost and there should be a bond put up to for removal that should be renewed. The cost estimate should be updated every three years and the bond adjusted accordingly. WESLEY: Okay. Property owner, consent, liability, acknowledgment. And that's not in our current ordinance. Other than just the basic acknowledgment that they submit an application. That's something that should be added. KOVACEVIC: I think -- I think so. I think that if the if something happens to the carrier and there's liability, the property owner should be, should have that liability. WESLEY: Okay. 17.07 Design Standards. So as noted here small cell wireless in the right CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 59 of way in our current ordinances has its own set of design guidelines. Otherwise, small cell wireless would be treated as any other tower and are governed by the design guidelines established in 17.33. GRAY: I think 1707 is one that we want to carve-out and talk about at length in a future session. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: I think design standards is one area that we can influence. WESLEY: So you get to part two -- GRAY: Sorry, John. Let's add to that. Design and engineering standards. We can look at look at utilities associated with towers and how they're treated. WESLEY: So then we get into other telecommunication towers. And so these would be very similar to what we have again in 17.3A3 And there are some specific pieces of this that we did include in the current ordinance. And we do have standards for screening in the adopted ordinance. They didn't use this language, use different language. And we have lighting language in the current ordinance. It's very similar. Just didn't use this exactly. We did not use, however, anything about access or parking in the adopted ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Do we want to require office off street parking for -- these things. If these things are going to be 300 feet away from anything, you know, if they're in a residential neighborhood, they're 300 feet away from anything. Shouldn't a shouldn't there be parking provided off street for when the maintenance people come and -- WESLEY: And yes, as far as we're concerned, that's something that would be part of a site plan. It's obviously a requirement without it being in the code, but if you feel more comfortable putting something specific in the code, we can certainly do that. KOVACEVIC: A number of the codes have that. WESLEY: Yeah. KOVACEVIC: They do require it. WESLEY: Okay. We can put that on the list of things to include. Fencing. We do have requirement for fencing. And then we get into this section on initial town council CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 59 review which is something we don't do here. It would be, I guess just some thoughts about this. One is, in reading through this particular ordinance, it doesn't really seem to anticipate the P&Z Commission being part of the review process. It only talks about town council. And is that the way we want to structure this so it doesn't come through PNC? KOVACEVIC: No. WESLEY: And second is we do have to be careful of the time frames. As stated previously with the review, because time frame is from application to they get their building permit. It's not just through approval of an SP, which by itself can take a lot of that -- that time. And so as we think about adding things to a process where we get an initial council review before we then go on with other parts of the review, is that really necessary? So that's just throwing that out there for your thoughts as you look at whether or not to include something like that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner, I think it should go through our process, whatever, you know, whatever it is that we shouldn't. If -- if there's not an initial council review for anything else, there shouldn't be for this. WESLEY: Then we get into public hearings and notices as we wrote our ordinance and what I would still recommend if we're otherwise keeping things pretty much the same if we're requiring the SUP. The Sup process already describes all the notice requirements, and we start putting notice requirements here. Notice requirements there. You have to make sure that the same you change one, you change the other. Just to me it just makes it more confusing. The Code references special use permit and we follow those notice requirements or having to restate them. Now, this does get into some more specific statements that maybe you think are important as far as very clearly up front saying what the hearing is about, as opposed to, you know, this isn't quite as bold maybe in the notices we send out typically. Any thoughts on adjusting the notice requirements? For a factual termination be written by town council. So we don't have the specific type of statements. For the most part, we did pull in this piece on the coverage maps. When we get down here to factual CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 59 determinations, this would be similar, although different, with what we have in 1705. See, as far as the review and approval criteria, that's what this is getting at. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: John, can we back up a little bit, just maybe a page or two back on what I show is 31? It refers to evidentiary standards part B and part C. That seems to be, at least to me, it seems, a needed factor in verifying the need for additional towers et cetera. That drive by balloon test and the claims of the applicant that they need or may need another tower. I think that should be in there if it's not already. WESLEY: Okay. Yes. Commissioner Corrigan, what's highlighted here? And see, we did use. But the rest of it we did not use. And so, we'll look at adding more of this in it sounds like. KOVACEVIC: The balloon test is an esthetic. It doesn't assess need. It just shows what the height of the tower would be by flying a balloon at that height. And you can see where how high -- the tower would be. CORRIGAN: Okay. And then how about C. Is that the -- KOVACEVIC: And C is in the ordinance. CORRIGAN: Oh C is there? WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. All right. WESLEY: Any thoughts on these factual determinations? GRAY: So are those synonymous with accommodation? Is that -- is that what's used as a -- WESLEY: To me it's the same as the review and approval criteria. These are the -- you have to find that they have met these criteria before you can approve it. GRAY: I think as long as we have approval criteria, that's one and the same. Unless, John, I mean this is another one where it's factual determination is that language that the industry understands versus approval -- I'm just asking. I have no idea. WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Gray, it's been a little while since I've read through some of those other sample ordinances that we've talked about before. I don't recall it CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 59 jumping out to me as the terminology that was used regularly elsewhere, but it may be. That it could be, again, looking at this language here in terms of the TC, a determinations that may be language in the TCA and may help relate back to thereby using the same term here. CORRIGAN: Chair? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: This is the one I brought up earlier and the III. It's in compliance. And in regard to the real estate values, I think that if it's not there now, I think it should be. KOVACEVIC: Yeah, I would agree with that. WESLEY: Okay. Any of these others in here that you would want to see added again, we have similar things on several of them. But you know, particularly this one and two. Probably there's somewhat of four that's in there. I'd have to look at it again and check that wording. But Currently don't have anything about the historic properties. We do have some requirements about ridge lines. KOVACEVIC: Well, these are -- the this is the criteria that would be used to approve or not approve. Right. And it I mean it's it all is pertinent. GRAY: The whole section. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. GRAY: Future consideration. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Yeah. WESLEY: Okay. So more a closer comparison of this language to our existing criteria? KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. And then other TCA determinations. So again, this is nothing that we have in the current ordinance. KOVACEVIC: I this is so much of the Campanelli ordinance. I think it needs to be okay. It just seems to me it's there for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. And so we'll look at doing that. And then retention of consultants. We do have a couple of provisions in the adopted ordinance that allow us to hire consultants as needed. Again, this is a little more extensive description and listing of CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 59 how that would could play out and how it works than what we have in the current ordinance. Include those things? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I think let's move on. WESLEY: Okay. Then we get into setback requirements again for small cell wireless. Or other basic again in Chapter 17, we don't really make the distinction. These distances here are in some ways less than what we currently have. In other ways, they're a little bit more extensive than what we currently have. So going forward, I guess we could look at these a little closer and whatever's more restrictive. Or I think the Commission, as you were talking before, had even more restrictive than these. And what you're talking about in terms of 500 foot separations versus the 300 foot that's listed here. So I think that's something to kind of put on the side. And we'll look at as we pull all the different pieces together. GRAY: Agree. And I think that we should consider pivoting away from these distances and start talking about fall zones related to property lines, possibly. WESLEY: Where we already have that in the code. It has to fall on their property. That's already in the code. I think that's what I think maybe. GRAY: In 17 we do, but not in 16, right? WESLEY: Right. Yeah. Because in sixteen it's in the right of way. We can address that when we get to there. GRAY: But I think that's where a lot of this becomes applicable for -- for me anyway. WESLEY: And then height requirements against a little bit of a mixed bag in terms of this compared to our adopted ordinance. In our ordinance is you meet the -- whatever the height, maximum height is of the District. You can do that if you meet other criteria by right. If you exceed that height, then you need a special use permit. But it doesn't put a maximum on what that height could ultimately be. It's whatever you could get approved through the special use permit. Here they do put some maximum heights on, but the can be kind of tall in some of these areas, such hundred feet. And then we have this section on use restrictions and variances, which I found rather confusing to use because we don't do use variances. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 45 of 59 Maybe he didn't really mean variance when he used the word variance. We allowed -- basically, we allow you to apply for putting a tower most places. And it can either happen by right or through a special use permit. It doesn't take a variance. So again we don't we didn't use any of this. So if you're doing a variance that's something's going to go to the Board of Adjustment and put another layer in there that again didn't seem helpful. Okay. Thoughts on that piece. Environmental impacts. We don't have a similar provision in the adopted ordinance. So I'm guessing you'd like to see us. Include that piece? KOVACEVIC: I -- yeah, I think so. WESLEY: Historic site impacts. We don't have any currently. There's an effort to get the tower designated. Not he tower, the fountain designated. You're not going to get any towers close to that anyway because of the park and whatever's around it. Why? We have historic sites. In the future, we might. So again, this could be included if you want, but it wasn't included because we don't -- don't have them. And it's they're generally reviewed anyway as part of any, any new tower. Any thoughts or questions on including this piece? KOVACEVIC: Without any historic sites, I don't think we need to hang in there, guys. We're almost through. WESLEY: Getting there faster than we thought. So then pretty much the rest of this are all things that that we don't have in the current code, and could be added if you'd like. KOVACEVIC: What about the 11th hour submission? I mean, is that something that -- it seems like we should -- why would they have put that in there? WESLEY: I guess they've experienced challenges in some places where things come in last minute. And then how do you handle it? What authority do you have to -- to say no or to say yes when they do come in late? KOVACEVIC: So I think we -- we probably need that again for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. And then 19 we didn't do this exactly. But there's some portions of this section on the excessive RF radiation that we did use. CORRIGAN: Sure. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 46 of 59 WESLEY: The initial certification piece. KOVACEVIC: And Commissioner, we have Commissioner. CORRIGAN: I think that should probably be something we should consider putting in there. We hear a lot about it. I haven't seen any proof of that. But radiation is a concern for a lot of people, so it really should be I think it should be in the document. KOVACEVIC: I believe we have the right to have it annually tested at the carrier's expense. Correct? WESLEY: Yes. Yes, sir. These two sections were included in the ordinance. So the random RF testing is in the adopted ordinance, and I do believe it allows for annual. So the main piece we didn't include was this introductory provision. And then the bond requirements. So we have something similar but not exactly this. We have similar language on the abandonment of facilities. And then this balancing. General provisions we did not use. So I rushed through that maybe too fast of these last ones, these general provisions. KOVACEVIC: Yeah I agree. I think that there again, for defensive purposes, I think that that -- that's good to include. WESLEY: I think we discussed the bond requirements earlier. So I think that was something that I heard that you'd want to include. Okay. What else? So we -- I will we will email this out to you so you can see it in this version to, in addition to what you had in the staff report of how to look at what's there versus what's in our code, if you want to try to match them up going forward. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: First, I'll just say that seemed easy. It's interesting that it was a year in the making, but it didn't. I didn't see anything in there that said, oh my goodness. So that's good. I'm glad we got here. Makes it a lot easier for us to talk through this not thinking there's something still behind the curtain. Question I had that's not addressed here. That we talked about in the past is in, in definitions, and we specifically definitions of, of utilities. And I believe it's I don't couldn't tell you where, but I think it's been referenced before that we have language on the books that effectively says utilities in this town CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 47 of 59 have to be buried. Right. At some point in this process, I'd like to tackle that piece head on. Because I think that's how we start to tease out the difference between broadband utilization as a utility versus, you know, everything gets rolled into this 5(G) telecommunications small cell and it all gets really blurry. But I think if we can if we can talk through definitions of, of what's a utility versus what's a communication we might be able to do something with that. So maybe not. Maybe yes, maybe no. But I think at some point we should talk about that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: John, is it possible that we could somehow, you know, acquire a map of all, you know, like a footprint or a map of all available underground utilities, you know, SRP, Cox, What is the Southwest Gas? Verizon, all of those things that are now underground. I think it might be helpful if we could visibly see that on a map or a plot, how those are circuitous out throughout the town. So we get a better feel, I think, of where we are now versus where we can go give us some parameters there. And then just a second thought off of that, I've heard I just want to clarify this kind of clear the air. I've heard some concerns or thoughts about the SRP, you know, Saguaro Cactus and those locations. How many are there? you know, what are the exact locations of those? Maybe consistent with that, we could see to get a better feel for where we are. Maybe we could get that also, you know, as a, as some sort of a layout or plot or map. I think that would help us all visualize. I'm a very visual person. For me, it's seeing is believing and understanding that maybe you indicated that there were specifications engineering drawings of components that are required, which is in here which is great. Maybe we can look at the same thing with the Saguaro Cactus and understand those a little bit better. I have no idea what the what they are other than they're SRP monitoring or emitting stations. That's all I know. So I think we need a little more information on that. That's it. KOVACEVIC: Okay. I have three points that weren't addressed in here that I've seen in other ordinances. And I'd like to see them included in ours. The first permit. The permit should indemnify the town, period, end of story. If -- if the town approves us a CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 48 of 59 tower and gets sued for its approval that tower, the permit should defend it. They should defend the town. And that is in a number of the ordinances. Number two, insurance requirements. In general, it's a million occurrence. Three million aggregate, 25,000 deductible, five million umbrella. The there's specifications if it's a claims made form. If you look at the Ithaca ordinance, their insurance requirements are very explicit and very good. And with the State land property up, we may want to require -- have a have something in the ordinance that says any new development over 50 acres or some number of acres should provide for a tower location. So I think those should be in the ordinance as well. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: I'm wondering if the language should be that they would reimburse all of our legal expenses rather than them representing us. I wouldn't want. -- KOVACEVIC: Probably. Probably. But they should hold. We should be held harmless. SVEUM: Right? There you go. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: So any other comments? Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I just -- I think procedurally, most of us this is a this is still a lot. Right? It's complex. There's a ton going on here. I think we've gotten better and better, but we spent a year getting to where we are. So I think that we need to be smart about taking this in bite sized chunks as we work through it. And then I think we need to the piece that I still don't quite have my head wrapped around is the value of separating 16 from 17. Now versus looking at that kind of in the that was always my thought once we once we finally understood that piece. I've always thought that 16 and 17 they're on paper separately, but they're so intertwined. And so either we're going to say, hey, 17, we're going to work on 17, and then we're going to lift all that language and we're going to drop it in on 16 or I think we need to talk about them in a little more intermingled fashion. WESLEY: Yes, chair. Commissioner, I believe that's the plan as we move forward, is that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 49 of 59 we will get to that point and see. Do they remain separate or are they better to put together? KOVACEVIC: So do we -- we don't need any kind of a motion or anything that you haven't. I hope we've given you enough to chew on for the next month or two. Okay. So we can close this one. WESLEY: Close this one. KOVACEVIC: Yeah, we have one more. Yeah. The general plan is incorrect. Yeah, they went ahead for daylight savings time. Okay. Let's move on to item number 7. Consideration of possible action. Annual report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. Farhad? TAVASSOLI: Oh. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the commission. Well, it's that time of year. Year again. Where I come up before you and go over some of the progress made in terms of implementation of the general plan. And this is always in regards to the previous calendar year. So what I'll be presenting to you is the progress report for the 2024 calendar year. And since there are at least a couple new members here on the commission today I always like to start off with a just a bit of a review of the general plan. You know, how we came to -- how we came to be. And before I get into some of the implementation activities, some of the more notable implementation activities. So the purpose of this annual report is to is to adhere to the State statutes, which requires a governing body to receive an annual report on the implementation of the general plan. Now that government governing body is the Town Council. But we always -- like to filter it through the planning and Zoning Commission. And the action that we're looking for at the conclusion of my presentation is whether or not the Commission would like to forward this to the -- the town council. It's not an approval or denial, per se. But -- but more than anything else we'd like to garner some discussion. So the report that you have before you there are there's an introductory section. There are there are four additional sections. So it discusses the adoption of the 2020 general plan. And it goes on to discuss eight general plan elements that are within three CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 50 of 59 overarching principles. Those three overarching principles are thriving neighborhoods, thriving environment, and thriving economy. And I have in section two of the report that I provided to you it discusses those three overarching principles. The subheadings for those principles are underlined. And each of those below each of those overarching principles are the elements that pertain to each. So I won't go over them one by one unless you have -- if you have any questions within any one of them, I'll be more than happy to answer them. And then within each of those sections, I discuss some of the implementation progress made as they pertain to each of those principles and elements. So again, the general plan was approved back in May of 2020 by the town council and then subsequently ratified in November of 2020 by the Fountain Hills voters. The plan is organized in such a way. As I mentioned, the is organized according to the three overarching principles neighborhoods, environment and economy prefixed by the word thriving and identifies various character areas. What are those character areas? Well, a few of them are we're sitting in one now, the town center. It also goes over some different sections segments of the town, such as the Shay corridor and also specific points such as the two gateways on either side of Shay. You got the eastern gateway and the, the one over further or rather the western gateway and then further east, but the just past the 87 State route eighty-seven intersection. It also finally at the -- the report establishes amendment procedures and the requirements for an annual and the requirement for the annual report, which is the reason I'm before you. So at the end of the general plan, I specified the pages here, and I and I know most of you, if not all of you, don't have the general plan right in front of you. But I'll just go over to the next slide here, because this slide more or less explains what I'm about to show you. But at the end of the general plan is the implementation strategy. And so it kind of in a in a table format, discusses each of those overarching principles and those elements. And goes over, I apologize for flipping through pages here, but it -- okay. So the implementation strategy at the end of the general plan covers each of the elements of the plan. It provides steps to achieve goals and CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 51 of 59 implementation -- how to implement the policy. So just as an example here, I took this page out of the implementation strategy. You know, if you look down here one of the, one of the goals and I believe this is under the yeah, this is under the thriving environment principle. One of the goals is to evaluate flood control measures as part of the site review process through the design review process, just to pick one out of many in this section. And it says here the lead agency to address that is the development Services Department, the anticipated time frame. Well there are four or five anticipated time frames, but there are some that are contiguous, like contiguous like the one that I just read to you. It's an ongoing goal. It does mention potential funding sources. I don't quite have the footnote explanations in front of me, but it also discusses some of the other departments or entities that may be involved as well. But this is just an example of an ongoing goal that we basically aspire achieve in our day- to-day activities when we're reviewing plans or you know, including rezones subdivision plats and so on. An example of a long range goal. You can see right before that, working with Arizona State Land Department in preparation of a feasible land use and circulation plan. Continues a little bit more detail there, but that's basically the how the implementation strategy is broken down. I mentioned there were four or five anticipated time frames for each of those elements of the implementation strategy, beginning with ongoing immediate short range, mid-range and long range, which is intended to be achieved within ten years. So the annual report requirements we would be every year we'd come to you and report to you the amendments that have been processed during the previous calendar year. Well, there have been none and there have been none for quite some time. More on that a little bit. We also would be we're also here to report to you the progress and status of any implementation activities. And I've highlighted a few review some of the policy issues that have come up during our in putting together this review and recommendations for amendment -- amendments. So as you can see in that ten page report, I go over quite a bit. Of some of the more notable implementation activities that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 52 of 59 have taken place, and I've highlighted them here. Probably one of the most notable is the downtown strategy that was approved just after the summer break in September. One of the steps implementation steps will John presented one of those steps before you earlier in the his earlier presentation that's specifically addresses, for example, the overarching principle of great places. And you can find that under that subheading in the general plan. The pump out pump house pilot art project. I brought that up last year. It's been continued. It's been popular. I've mentioned that in the report as well highlighted it here. The sidewalk infill project continues. Last year, we added about a little over a mile of new segments of sidewalk. And with the sidewalk infill project continues to this date. Three new trails have been completed. We have received over $130,000 in grants that were awarded to the town. About $60,000 was of that was awarded by the salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation. And about $70,000 was awarded by the Arizona Office of Tourism. We didn't receive any grant funding from the Fort McDowell-Yavapai Nation this time. The downtown parking study has been completed, although that has yet to be presented by our Public Works Department. Hopefully in the near future. The grand opening of the fitness park at Desert Vista Park occurred, I believe it was late last spring. There are efforts continue to add the found to the National Register of Historic Places. It is a process. I believe we've gone through the necessary process with the -- the State Historic Preservation Office here in Arizona. So that is you know, there's progress. Certainly progress has been made at the -- the State level. So what remains I guess you know, another laborious task for our historic preservation Commission. And the villages of Four Peaks. The PAD was approved, which addresses the thriving neighborhoods principal, you know, a divisive, controversial PAD case approved last year, but still worthwhile to report, at least. I mentioned the ongoing time frames. Again, there are a few that I guess you could say have not addressed specifically as of yet and kind of have fallen outside the time frame that I've discussed here, beginning with some of the more immediate actions one of which is to consider employing a part CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 53 of 59 time grant writer. We find you know, various departments have delegated grant writing proposals to various folks within the Department. And you know, they have risen up to -- when called upon to apply for grants wherever available. But town just doesn't find it feasible to hire a part time grant writer. At least not at this point. And also to establish a general plan monitoring system to coordinate with the capital improvements plan to see whether or not -- to see that both are consistent. You know, whatever public works activities that we're implementing, we'd like to note that in that they're consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the -- of the general plan. And so we initially thought that we would have an ad hoc committee to look into this, but since our new finance director came on board early last year, we have a capital improvements review Committee. And that involves pretty much every department here in town, including myself representing planning and zoning and just, you know, I the goal for me is to monitor some of the public works activities and make sure that we're also crossing off some or you know, crossing out some boxes and making sure that we're meeting the goals and objectives of the general plan. There are some short-term actions that you know, could spend a little bit more time on to see how we can if there are any creative ways that we can address or implement them such as developing -- developing and or implementing an investment plan that responds to the economic development plans priorities and that prioritizes infrastructure improvements. The commission can also -- rather we could also consider commissioning a cost benefit study to identify gaps between actual subdivision regulations and infrastructure specifications to determine the cost of meeting such specifications. Now, here's worthwhile noting that. The one area here in town that many of you are aware of, that is the has the most potential of large scale development is the State land piece on the northeast side of town. Otherwise there are a few rather modestly sized larger parcels within town that have the potential for being subdivided further into single family lots. But when we're talking about commissioning a cost benefit study I think as we get closer or as we know more about the State land piece and what the CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 54 of 59 status is right now, there are no auctions scheduled. And we haven't gotten any word about when that might, you know, might that might occur. But I think once we have a better idea of what kind of potential that state land piece brings forth, and we might consider commissioning such a study. And also a couple other ones. We and I talked about this a little bit last year as well. One of the implementation strategies is to amend the zoning ordinance to include, at a minimum, safe by design concepts and also similarly low impact development which is, I guess, more of a civil engineering parlance from their professional organization where they look at different ways of managing water resources or managing storm water. Well, we do that on a day-to-day basis. So you know, as far as amending the zoning ordinance to include a safe by design by that name or low impact development, I think it, you know, may not be may not be practical or feasible at this point when it's already being in some form or another. Implemented as part of our day-to-day review tasks. And finally work with the Arizona State Land Department to prepare a feasibility study for state trust land based on the results of cost recovery study. We did -- we did have one inquiry in the past year where there was some interest in the State land piece up in the northeast part of town. Which at least in my five years here, haven't gotten any inquiries until then. And so is that an indication that we might be hearing something soon about the State land piece? Perhaps. But you know, nothing formal has been submitted. And like I said, there's no rumblings from the State Land Department that that that piece is going to be in the auction as one of one of their auctions anytime soon. So again just looking for to as far as this being an action item, just looking to you know, get any input and then if the commission is satisfied we can go ahead and forward this over to the town council to fulfill the State requirement. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners. Any questions? Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Just a suggestion on the Arizona Land Department property. There's -- there's the graduate program at Arizona State University in real estate development. They do three presentations a year, and they do various real properties throughout many of Prescott, all the way down to Mesa. There's been things south of Phoenix. I would CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 55 of 59 certainly, and I can connect you if you'd like to talk with the program director there. This could be something that they could bring up, perhaps as a project for the third presentation they'll do a year from now, probably in May of 2026. They do an excellent job. And it would be something that you could get a good idea of what could be done with the property. And of course, they work several times with the State Land Department. And so if you're interested, you can make that introduction. TAVASSOLI: Okay. Thank you. I'll note that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: That state trust land is about what is it, 1300 or 1900 1300 or 1900 acres. TAVASSOLI: Just under 1300. CORRIGAN: And then. Gosh, I like that. That's a fantastic idea. That's a great opportunity. Expose the availability of that. My second question is grant writers, are they -- they're contractors who work on commission or percentage or how does that work? Because we're farming out, you know, I mean, it's a great idea. So what is it? What's the general thing, ten percent or. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman Commissioner Corrigan? Well, without having a job description or because I don't think our human resources has a job description created for grant writer, but I think it really -- it really differs from one jurisdiction to another as far as how they're compensated. But yeah, it, you know, if the human resources department would like to formulate a job description, it certainly would address how they'd be compensated and what kind of qualifications would. CORRIGAN: Yeah. Gosh, it's certainly an opportunity for the methodology of replacing the sales tax option. We've got a long way to go. If they could write a lot of grants and do the infill for what was missing, what will be missing in the future, that'd be terrific. I it sounds interesting. TAVASSOLI: That's it. KOVACEVIC: Any other comments? Paula, do we -- COREY: Oh. I'm sorry. I had it on, but I think I hit the wrong button. KOVACEVIC: Vice Chair Corey? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 56 of 59 COREY: I was like, why isn't he calling me? Every time you say Corrigan, it sounds like sounds like Corey. I'm trying to get used to that. Just two things I thought last year at this time when we reviewed this status, we were looking at the monitoring system -- the general plan monitoring system, like getting something going. So none of that, none of that happened this year? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey. No, we -- if by monitoring system, you mean like a, like a formal, ad hoc you know, group, that's I guess you know, specifically I guess goes for what the general plan describes as what. -- COREY: I just remember we had this item last year, and I thought we -- TAVASSOLI: Were. No, no, I think I think the, you know, the closest we've come to that, as I, as I mentioned earlier is a Public works review committee where we take a look at the cost of projects and perhaps, you know, identify ways in which we could share costs, either through an intergovernmental agreement or through some other method. But -- COREY: Okay. Can we get the file? I know in the PowerPoint, we had a teaser of all of the items. Where is that master file? Is that something that we can get? TAVASSOLI: The master file? COREY: That shows all of the -- TAVASSOLI: Implementation strategies or -- COREY: Yeah, it's in the -- it was in the general plan, which is online, but I can -- I can I mean, don't. COREY: Don't worry about it. If it's in there, I can get it. Yeah. TAVASSOLI: Okay. Yeah. It's towards the end of the -- the general plan for that one. And that was one page that I showed you earlier out of I believe it's like 15 or 20 pages all together. COREY: And then just one more thing. So you mentioned that we could implement Safe by design and low impact development. But you said when you're talking with builders, you incorporate that in? Can you just give us an example of what, you know, give us an example of what that would be? TAVASSOLI: Yeah, yeah. Well, for example the stormwater for pollution and prevention CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 57 of 59 plan, for example, that's just good practice among the civil engineering field. Where, you know, the -- as part of the construction document set, for example, for a single family home, they would need to demonstrate you know, how during construction, the stormwater is going to be managed to, I guess, mitigate, like, debris and erosion and sedimentation during that process because after all the, you know, soil is not compacted. You know, there's construction vehicles on the property. So these are all environmental considerations. COREY: Okay. So you think that's pretty much covered, then? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. COREY: Okay. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray. GRAY: Farhad, I'm just going off of memory. But it seems like this year's reports truncated quite a bit compared to last year's. I think last year had a lot of economic development criteria layered in. Does that does that go -- is there -- well, I guess is that is that a true statement? I suppose that it looks like we're just we're narrowing in on what, what development services has governance over versus kind of the more macro picture. And I think that's fine. And just an observation. My question was going to be, you know, State land, State land. We always talk about the State land. Is that a target for economic development, to find suitors, to marry up with the State land Department? Because you, know, State Land Department isn't going to just say, hey, we're going to hold an auction for 1300 acres on the northeast side of Fountain Hill. Somebody has to go solicit that -- that auction. So is that an objective of -- of economic development? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Gray, I -- well, I -- yeah, I guess, Amanda left, I don't know if I could speak for her, but there have been no discussions between either -- - at least I can just speak for myself, between myself and the economic -- economic development department. But that's certainly something that might be worthwhile. GRAY: Yeah, it just feels like. I mean, you you've got goals in here, but you're constrained by that entity not materializing. And that entity doesn't materialize unless economic development is actively seeking them out to marry them up with state land CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 58 of 59 and development services. So -- KOVACEVIC: Anybody else? Paula, do we have any speaker cards? WOODWARD: No. Chair. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Can I have a motion to send this on to town council? CORRIGAN: So moved. KOVACEVIC: Second. COREY: Second. KOVACEVIC: All in favor? IN UNISON: Aye. KOVACEVIC: Opposed? WOODWARD: Six, zero. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Item 8. Commission discussion. Request for research to staff. Anybody have anything for John? Commissioner, Vice Chair Corey? COREY: Well, I'm looking at our website here, and I see that we have a vacant seat. Is that new? Did we lose someone? WESLEY: Yes, Chair. Vice Chair. I guess we thought we mentioned that earlier, but Commissioner DePaul (ph.) resigned last week, so I'll be looking for an additional member. COREY: Okay. Well, we'll miss him. And I looked quickly to see if I could find this list in all the documents. I can't find it. Could you send that to me? Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Anything else for John? Director Wesley, anything for us. WESLEY: Chair. So just to finish up where we were discussing earlier. So your April meeting will be April 21st. At this point, it looks like we'll have two items for discussion. Both continuances from tonight. Farhad can bring something. You can move it on, I bring it. You got to talk about it longer. So we'll come back and we'll talk about the downtown overlay district, continue that continued that public hearing and also a next installment on the wireless ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Then anybody want to make a motion to adjourn? COREY: Motion to adjourn. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 59 of 59 KOVACEVIC: All right. We're done. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS _______________________ Dan Kovacevic, Chairperson ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: _______________________________ Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of Fountain Hills in the Town Hall Council Chambers on the 10th day of March 2025. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 10th Day of March 2025. _______________________________ Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant ITEM 5. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS STAFF REPORT    Meeting Date: 04/21/2025 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):  CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance 25-02 amending the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance to add Chapter 27, Downtown Overlay District.  Staff Summary (Background) Staff presented a preliminary draft of the proposed ordinance to the P&Z Commission at their meeting on January 13, 2025, to inform the Commission and public about the proposed ordinance and seek early feedback.  A public hearing was held at the March 10, 2025 P&Z Commission meeting.  At this meeting, several Commissioners and members of the public provided feedback and requested additional information on the proposed new overlay district.  The Commission voted to continue their review and discussion until the April 21, 2025, Commission meeting. Discussion Key points from the March meeting and responses are:  Increasing the number of residents in the downtown area can and should be a catalyst for the rest of the development; increase the proposed density.  The ordinance as presented increased the residential density by right from 8 units per acre to 15 units per acre, but staff had determined it should be even higher to be effective.  Using the Zoning Ordinance's R-5 density as a guide, the revised ordinance is now suggesting allowing one unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor, or approximately 30 units per acre as the allowed residential density by right.  Density higher than that would require approval of a Special Use Permit. Adjust the setback requirements, at least along the Avenue to establish a build-to line to ensure buildings create the desired street wall.  A revision has been made to include a "built to" line to maintain a uniform street front. Extend the employment uses allowed in the Innovation District south into the Business District.  The lot and building sizes generally do not support these types of uses; there are other areas of Town with C-2 and C-3 zoning that would be better suited for these light industrial/employment uses; not necessarily consistent with the commerce-focused area desired.  No change has been made with regards to this comment. A comment was made about the larger corner lots having to provide all their own parking.  This statement is not totally correct.  The ordinance was changed a few years ago to allow submittal of an application for a Special Use Permit to shift up to a 50% reduction in the required of an application for a Special Use Permit to shift up to a 50% reduction in the required off-street parking for these lots. The entertainment area for the Avenue is too large; it should not extend the full length of the Avenue or include Verde River.  The final recommendation this is still open for discussion and direction from the Commission.  The ordinance has been amended, however, to reduce the area which is restricted to the active commercial uses to just a 50' depth from the adjacent ROW.  Further, the revised ordinance allows all of the restricted uses to be considered through a Special Use Permit. Include the south side of the Avenue in the overlay.  The existing DA locks the development of these properties into the zoning as it existed at the time the DA was approved.   Revised Draft Ordinance It has been determined the new ordinance should be adopted as a new chapter of the Zoning Ordinance.  The draft ordinance has now been changed to Chapter 27.  As a new chapter, it will not be adopted using the strikethrough method showing the changes.  Attached to this report is a copy of the strikethrough version of Chapter 25 as presented last month and the new Chapter 27 without any strikethroughs.  The following is a list of the changes that have been made to the ordinance as presented in March.  Uses permitted in the Avenue District  Adjusted the numbering scheme for greater consistency and clarity.  What was 1. is now 1. a. Adjusted the limitation to active commercial uses on the first floor to just those buildings or portions of buildings within 50' of the right-of-way along the nearest adjacent street. Adjusted the maximum density from 15 units per acre to one unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor (approximately 30 units per acre) Uses allowed through a Special Use Permit in the Avenue District  The C-2 uses excluded within 50' of the street. Residential use in excess of that permitted by right. In the Business District, adjusted the maximum density consistent with the Avenue District. Innovation District, no changes Temporary Use, adjusted the wording for greater clarity. Section 27.09 B. 1. a. iii. establishes a "build-to" line for the area south of Palisades for at least 70% of the front lot line. Next Steps Following Council approval of the new overlay district, the next step will be to process a rezoning case to apply the overlay to the area shown on the map.  This step will also remove the existing two overlay districts.  Staff anticipates beginning this process in September with the citizen participation process.  Hearings for the rezoning will likely be in October and November. Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle Zoning Ordinance Chapters 12, 25, and 26 Council approved Downtown Strategy 2020 Fountain Hills General Plan Risk Analysis N/A Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s) N/A Staff Recommendation(s) Staff recommends approval subject to any final discussion and modifications by the Planning and Zoning Commission. SUGGESTED MOTION MOVE to recommend adoption of Ordinance #25-02. Attachments Draft Chapter 27  Draft Ordinance from March meeting  ORDINANCE NO. 25-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE FOUNTAIN HILLS ZONING ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 27, DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT ENACTMENTS: NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 27, Downtown Overlay District, is added to the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is provided in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Fountain Hills, Maricopa County, Arizona, this day of, 2025. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: ___________________________________ __________________________________ Gerry M. Friedel, Mayor Bevelyn Bender, Town Clerk REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ __________________________________ Rachael Goodwin, Town Manager Aaron D. Arnson, Town Attorney ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 2 Exhibit A Chapter 27 Downtown Overlay District Section 27.01 Purpose and Intent The Downtown Overlay District is an overlay zoning district for development of the downtown area of Fountain Hills. The intent of this district is to integrate commercial activity and professional offices with residential uses, visitor attractions and parks as appropriate for the established districts within the downtown area. The Downtown Overlay District modifies the underlying zoning district regulations only to the extent specifically set forth in this Chapter. If not specifically modified in this Chapter, all of the regulations in effect in the underlying zoning districts will remain in full force and effect. Section 27.02 Permitted Uses Uses permitted in the Downtown Overlay District shall be: A. The Avenue District: 1. Permitted uses: a. Uses listed in Zoning Ordinance Sections 12.02 B. and C. provided, however, that ground floor uses within fifty feet (50’) of the right-of-way for the nearest adjacent street shall be limited to restaurants and cafes; bars and taverns; gift shops, apparel stores, variety stores and similar retail commercial stores; entertainment venues; or similar uses. b. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service with associated outdoor entertainment subject to the following requirements. i. Any recorded or live music or sound that is electronically amplified and played outside an establishment shall only be permitted at establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 3 ii. Establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with the sound level requirements set forth in the Fountain Hills Town Code Section 11-1-7, as amended. iii. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with any applicable barrier requirements from the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. iv. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service are allowed within the sidewalk areas, provided an encroachment permit is approved by the Town Engineer pursuant to Town Code Article 16-1, for any seating areas located in a public right-of-way. Such outdoor seating areas must be properly maintained to ensure safe access and mobility for business patrons. c. Museums d. Multifamily residential up to one (1) unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor (approximately 30 units per acre) above the ground floor. 2. Uses permitted by special use permit. a. Uses listed in Zoning Ordinance Sections 12.02 B. and C. not permitted by right on the ground floor b. Multifamily residential above the ground floor at a density more than one (1) unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor (approximately 30 units per acre). B. The Business District: 1. Those uses permitted in Zoning Ordinance Sections 12.02 A., B., and C. a. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service with associated outdoor entertainment subject to the following requirements: i. Any recorded or live music or sound that is electronically amplified and played outside an establishment shall only be permitted at establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service. ii. Establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with the sound level requirements set forth in the Fountain Hills Town Code Section 11-1-7, as amended. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 4 iii. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with any applicable barrier requirements from the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. b. Multifamily residential up to one (1) unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor (approximately 30 units per acre) above the ground floor. 2. Uses permitted by special use permit shall be residential uses on the ground floor or at a density more than one (1) unit per 1,742 sq. ft. of floor area per floor (approximately 30 units per acre). c. The Innovation District: 1. Those uses permitted in Zoning Ordinance Sections 12.02 A., B., and C. a. Laboratories, (research, experimental and testing). b. Manufacture and assembly of nonhazardous and nontoxic materials. c. Light assembly and storage as an accessory use if all of the following criteria are met: i. Any assembly or storage areas associated with assembly activities shall not occupy more than fifty (50%) percent of enclosed building space used for the business; and, ii. There shall be no use of hazardous materials involved in the assembly operation(s). 2. Uses permitted by special use permit shall be residential uses. Illustration 27.02. Downtown District Boundaries ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 5 Section 27.03 Temporary Uses Uses allowed by Zoning Ordinance Section 2.03 are allowed to be established as temporary uses on vacant lots provided they comply with the adopted Downtown Temporary Use Guidelines and receive approval from the Zoning Administrator and Town Engineer. Section 27.04 General Provisions Except as may be modified by this overlay district, the general provisions in chapter 5 shall apply. Section 27.05 Signs The regulations in Chapter 6, Signs, shall apply. Section 27.06 Parking and Loading A. Area south of Palisades Boulevard. 1. The parking regulations in Chapter 7, Parking and Loading Requirements, shall apply to all lots over 10,800 square feet in area as of January 1, 1992. The Council may approve up to a fifty percent (50%) reduction in required on-site parking through approval of a special use permit. 2. For lots 10,800 square feet or less as of January 1, 1992, the common parking lot areas shall satisfy all of the off-street parking requirements regardless of the land use. Any elimination of parking spaces in the common parking area by a lot owner or user is required to be replaced by adding the lost spaces on site or on another lot in the same block. B. Area north of Palisades Boulevard. The regulations in Chapter 7, Parking and Loading Requirements, shall apply. Section 27.07 Outdoor Lighting The provisions of Chapter 8, Outdoor Lighting Control, shall apply. Section 27.08 Plan Review The provisions of Section 2.04, Site Plan Review Regulations, shall apply. Section 27.09 Density, Area, Building and Yard Regulations A. Building height: Building height allowances shall be the same as permitted in the underlying zoning district. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 6 B. Building setbacks: 1. Area south of Palisades Boulevard. a. Front yard: i. Lots 10,800 square feet and under do not have a front yard setback requirement but must meet sight triangle requirements when a corner lot (see Chapter 7, Exhibit 7.03 g). must not encroach into platted easements. ii. Lots over 10,800 square feet must provide a 10-foot front yard and must meet sight triangle requirements when a corner lot. must not encroach into platted easements. iii. At least 70% of the first floor of the building must be within five feet of any street facing property line b. Side yard. None required except on corner lots as required by Chapter 12, Section 12.13., street side yards must meet sight triangle requirements; must not encroach into platted easements. c. Rear yard. None required; must not encroach into platted easements. 2. Area north of Palisades Boulevard. As required by the underlying zoning district. C. Maximum lot coverage: 1. South of Palisades Boulevard. Lots may have one hundred percent (100%) lot coverage exclusive of any easements or required setbacks. 2. North of Palisades Boulevard. As required by the underlying zoning district. ORDINANCE NO. 25-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE FOUNTAIN HILLS ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 25, ENTERTAINMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO CHAPTER 25, DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT ENACTMENTS: NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 25, Entertaiment Overlay District, of the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is amended as provided in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Fountain Hills, Maricopa County, Arizona, this 15th day of April, 2025. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: ___________________________________ __________________________________ Gerry M. Friedel, Mayor Kandace French Contreras, Town Clerk REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ __________________________________ Rachael Goodwin, Town Manager Aaron D. Arnson, Town Attorney ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 2 Exhibit A Chapter 25 Entertainment DOWNTOWN Overlay District Section 25.01 Purpose and Intent The Entertainment DOWNTOWN Overlay District is an overlay zoning district covering portions of downtown within the Downtown Area Specific Plan area, as shown in Figure 25-1 below; any property located either partially or wholly within the district is allowed the uses in this Chapter. The overlay district is intended to allow for outdoor entertainment and uses to establish a more vibrant and active downtown area. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA OF FOUNTAIN HILLS. THE INTENT OF THIS DISTRICT IS TO INTEGRATE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES WITH RESIDENTIAL USES, VISITOR ATTRACTIONS AND PARKS AS APPROPRIATE FOR THE ESTABLISHED DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. The EntertainmentDOWNTOWN Overlay District modifies the underlying zoning district regulations only to the extent specifically set forth in this Chapter. If not specifically modified in this Chapter, all of the regulations in effect in the underlying zoning districts will remain in full force and effect. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 3 Section 25.02 Provisions Applicable to all PERMITTED Uses USES PERMITTED IN THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT SHALL BE: A. THE AVENUE DISTRICT: 1. USES PERMITTED IN ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS 12.02 B. AND C. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT GROUND FLOOR USES SHALL BE LIMITED RESTAURANTS AND CAFES; BARS AND TAVERNS; GIFT SHOPS, APPAREL STORES, VARIETY STORES AND SIMILAR RETAIL COMMERCIAL STORES; ENTERTAINMENT VENUES; OR SIMILAR USES. A2. Outdoor Entertainment is permitted at any establishment with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service WITH ASSOCIATED OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS. BA. Any recorded or live music or sound that is electronically amplified and played outside an establishment shall only be permitted at establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service. CB. Establishments with dedicated outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with the sound level requirements set forth in the Fountain Hills Town Code Section 11- 1-7, as amended. DC. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service shall comply with any applicable barrier requirements from the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. ED. Outdoor seating areas for food and beverage service are allowed within the sidewalk areas, provided an encroachment permit is approved by the Town Council, in its sole discretion, for any seating areas located in a public right-of-way. Such outdoor seating areas must be properly maintained to ensure safe access and mobility for business patrons. 3. MUSEUMS 4. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UP TO 15 UNITS PER ACRE ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR. 5. USES PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR AT A DENSITY MORE THAN 15 UNITS PER ACRE. B. THE BUSINESS DISTRICT: 1. THOSE USES PERMITTED IN ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS 12.02 A. B. AND C. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 4 2. OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE WITH ASSOCIATED OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: A. ANY RECORDED OR LIVE MUSIC OR SOUND THAT IS ELECTRONICALLY AMPLIFIED AND PLAYED OUTSIDE AN ESTABLISHMENT SHALL ONLY BE PERMITTED AT ESTABLISHMENTS WITH DEDICATED OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE. B. ESTABLISHMENTS WITH DEDICATED OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SOUND LEVEL REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN CODE SECTION 11-1-7, AS AMENDED. C. OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE SHALL COMPLY WITH ANY APPLICABLE BARRIER REQUIREMENTS FROM THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. 3. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UP TO 15 UNITS PER ACRE ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR. 4. USES PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR OR IN EXCESS OF 15 UNITS PER ACRE. C. THE INNOVATION DISTRICT: 1. THOSE USES PERMITTED IN ZONING ORDINANCE SECTIONS 12.02 A. B. AND C. 2. LABORATORIES, (RESEARCH, EXPERIMENTAL AND TESTING). 3. MANUFACTURE AND ASSEMBLY OF NONHAZARDOUS AND NONTOXIC MATERIALS. 4. LIGHT ASSEMBLY AND STORAGE AS AN ACCESSORY USE IF ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE MET: A. ANY ASSEMBLY OR STORAGE AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH ASSEMBLY ACTIVITIES SHALL NOT OCCUPY MORE THAN FIFTY (50%) PERCENT OF ENCLOSED BUILDING SPACE USED FOR THE BUSINESS; AND, B. THERE SHALL BE NO USE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INVOLVED IN THE ASSEMBLY OPERATION(S). 5. USES PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE RESIDENTIAL USES. ILLUSTRATION 25.02. DOWNTOWN DISTRICT BOUNDARIES ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 5 Section 25.03 Permitted TEMPORARY Uses TEMPORARY USES ARE PERMITTED AS ALLOWED BY ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 2.03. IN ADDITION, VACANT LOTS MAY ESTABLISH TEMPORARY USES AS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND TOWN ENGINEER CONSISTENT WITH ADOPTED GUIDELINES. A. Any permitted use identified in the underlying zoning districts. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 6 B. Single- or multifamily residential dwellings located on the second story or above of a building, so long as the residential dwelling and the underlying use/structures are in compliance with the following: 1. The technical codes set forth in Article 7-1 of the Town Code. 2. The height and coverage restrictions in the underlying zoning districts. 3. A maximum of eight dwelling units per acre. SECTION 25.04 GENERAL PROVISIONS EXCEPT AS MAY BE MODIFIED BY THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE GENERAL PROVISIONS IN CHAPTER 5 SHALL APPLY. SECTION 25.05 SIGNS THE REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 6, SIGNS, SHALL APPLY. SECTION 25.06 PARKING AND LOADING A. AREA SOUTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. 1. THE PARKING REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 7, PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS, SHALL APPLY TO ALL LOTS OVER 10,800 SQUARE FEET IN AREA AS OF JANUARY 1, 1992. THE COUNCIL MAY APPROVE UP TO A FIFTY PERCENT (50%) REDUCTION IN REQUIRED ON-SITE PARKING THROUGH APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. 2. FOR LOTS 10,800 SQUARE FEET OR LESS AS OF JANUARY 1, 1992, THE COMMON PARKING LOT AREAS SHALL SATISFY ALL OF THE OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS REGARDLESS OF THE LAND USE. ANY ELIMINATION OF PARKING SPACES IN THE COMMON PARKING AREA BY A LOT OWNER OR USER IS REQUIRED TO BE REPLACED BY ADDING THE LOST SPACES ON SITE OR ON ANOTHER LOT IN THE SAME BLOCK. B. AREA NORTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. THE REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 7, PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS, SHALL APPLY. SECTION 25.07 OUTDOOR LIGHTING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 8, OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONTROL, SHALL APPLY. SECTION 25.08 PLAN REVIEW THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2.04, SITE PLAN REVIEW REGULATIONS, SHALL APPLY. ORDINANCE 25-02 PAGE 7 SECTION 25.09 DENSITY, AREA, BUILDING AND YARD REGULATIONS A. BUILDING HEIGHT: BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWANCES SHALL BE THE SAME AS PERMITTED IN THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT. B. BUILDING SETBACKS: 1. AREA SOUTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. A. FRONT YARD: I. LOTS 10,800 SQUARE FEET AND UNDER DO NOT HAVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT BUT MUST MEET SIGHT TRIANGLE REQUIREMENTS WHEN A CORNER LOT (SEE CHAPTER 7, EXHIBIT 7.03 G). MUST NOT ENCROACH INTO PLATTED EASEMENTS. II. LOTS OVER 10,800 SQUARE FEET MUST PROVIDE A 10-FOOT FRONT YARD AND MUST MEET SIGHT TRIANGLE REQUIREMENTS WHEN A CORNER LOT. MUST NOT ENCROACH INTO PLATTED EASEMENTS. B. SIDE YARD. NONE REQUIRED, EXCEPT ON CORNER LOTS AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 12, SECTION 12.13. STREET SIDE YARDS MUST MEET SIGHT TRIANGLE REQUIREMENTS. MUST NOT ENCROACH INTO PLATTED EASEMENTS. C. REAR YARD. NONE REQUIRED; MUST NOT ENCROACH INTO PLATTED EASEMENTS. 2. AREA NORTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. AS REQUIRED BY THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT. C. MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 1. SOUTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. LOTS MAY HAVE ONE HUNDRED PERCENT (100%) LOT COVERAGE EXCLUSIVE OF ANY EASEMENTS OR REQUIRED SETBACKS. 2. NORTH OF PALISADES BOULEVARD. AS REQUIRED BY THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT. ITEM 6. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS STAFF REPORT    Meeting Date: 04/21/2025 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):  DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION: Possible modifications to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Communication Towers and Antennas.  Staff Summary (Background) At the March 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed the draft ordinance provided by Mr. Campanelli and identified some sections of that ordinance that should be considered for inclusion in the Town's ordinance.  The next step in the review process is to compare the existing ordinance to the comments, questions, and suggestions considered by the Commission during their review last July.  The following is a summary of the items discussed that were not included in the ordinance that was sent to the Council. Review of Approved Ordinance and Previous Commission Discussion Section 17.01 Purpose, Intent, and Applicability Section A.  2. Change "Encourage" to "Promote" 3. Change "Minimize" to "Limit" 5. Change "Encourage" to "Require" 6. Change "Encourage" to "Require" Section 17.02 Definitions  No changes Section 17.03 Requirements Section A. General Requirements  There was discussion at the July 8 meeting regarding "stealth" design of the towers and antenna.  Related to this were mentions of not allowing lattice towers, ensuring maintenance of the towers, and removing graffiti from the tower and associated structures.  17.03 A. 3. a - d contains the current requirements for the design aesthetics to reduce the visual impact of new towers. What was "e." in the draft ordinance submitted to the Commission in July was modified and added to the end of "d." to address Commission comments and concerns with stealth design.  The Town has a graffiti ordinance to address that issue.  There is general language in design.  The Town has a graffiti ordinance to address that issue.  There is general language in the Zoning Ordinance about the need to maintain a property, specific language could be added. 3. j. i. regarding utility service antennas in the right-of-way was removed from Chapter 17 and placed in Town Code Section 16.03 because it addresses this topic. Landscaping. What was #11. in the ordinance as reviewed by the P&Z Commission was removed because it was determined to cause confusion with other landscape provisions in the ordinance. 11. Noise.  There was interest on the part of some Commissioners to better define what the noise limitation would be.  The Commission seemed to agree to setting a standard of a maximum 50 decibels reading outside the equipment enclosure.  It should be noted that our Town Prosecutor has expressed his concerns with using decibel sound measurements for violations, the Town does not have a sound meter, and no one on staff is trained in using this type of equipment. Section B. Minimum Setbacks and Separations  2. a. The Commission discussed increasing the separation distance from towers to residential properties to a minimum of 500'.  The final consensus seemed to be to require a Special Use Permit for all towers, set some barriers to require increased justification for any tower closer than 500' to the nearest residence, and absolutely not allow them within 300' of a residence.  Given the limited non-residential zoning in town, most towers are in residential areas; most are within 500' of residences and many are within 300' of residences. 2. b. The Commission discussed increasing the separation distances between towers in Table 2 to 1/2 mile, 2,000', 1,500', and 1,000'. Section D. Co-location  1.  Based on Commission discussion, a sentence was added to further define what is required for co-location.  The requirement now includes the applicant submit information showing there will be sufficient room on the ground for additional equipment for a second user, the structure is designed to support a second user, and that the electrical service will also be sufficient for a second user.  Related to this, there was interest in the power and decibel output for both individual providers and the total for all providers if there was more than one set of antenna. Section 17.04 Application Types Section B. Public Review  There was an error made in the ordinance as it went to Council that rolled items 1 and 2 together.   Section 17.03 B includes setback and separation requirements.  By the ordinance, these distances must be met unless the Council finds the goals of the ordinance would be better served by allowing a deviation.  If the proposed tower does not otherwise require Council review, there was no mechanism in the code to get these towers to the Council for review and determination of these deviations.  Therefore, this section was amended to add in the ability to go through the public review process for towers that do not meet the separation requirements.  This section may address the comments mentioned above about raising the bar to allow a new antenna between 500' and 300' of a residence, or may need to be re-worded to accomplish the goals of the Commission. Section 17.05 Application Submittal, Review, and Processing Section A. 4. Utility Service Antennas. What was "a." was taken out and moved to Town Code Sec. 16.03 for Utility Service Antennas in the right-of-way. Section C. 3. c. i. This section states that part of the review of a site can include whether the antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with other towers and antennas.  There was discussion about better defining what level of interference is allowed or acceptable, possibly requiring a third-party reviewer to provide the analysis, or requiring validation by an electrical engineer. Section C. 3. c. viii. This section allows the Town Council to require a drive test to verify a gap in service to justify the need for the additional tower.  There was discussion about other options such as a dropped call list or other more definitive ways to document a true gap.  There may need to be companion documentation on the power outputs and other factors that may affect the quality of the drive test if that is used. Section 17.06 Maintenance and Operation Section D. Noise.  This is another area where a specific requirement could be added about the noise limitations.  A suggestion was made to require the equipment to be placed in an underground vault. Other items discussed at the July 8, 2024, Commission meeting that may or may not be sufficiently addressed in the adopted ordinance include:  Requiring some kind of security from the owner for maintenance of tower, equipment and landscaping Security for removal of the tower and antenna if not being used.  Section 17.06 A requires a tower to be removed if not operated for a period of 90 days, but does not include requiring a surety should the Town have to remove the structure. Annual RF testing at permittee's expense.  There are requirements for testing by the permittee in 17.06 B. 2.  The requirements are for testing at 45 days after beginning operation and then randomly as required by the Town. Compliance with building codes specific for towers; structural compliance.  Sections 17.03 A. 12. and 13. require that application information of an engineering nature be certified by an Arizona licensed professional engineer and that the Town Engineer shall verify the information.  Section 17.06 C requires compliance with building codes. All power and fiberoptics to be underground to the tower.  Town Code Section 7-5-2 already requires lines to be placed underground. Requiring back up power.  Current FCC rules are that cell towers have backup generators to provide at least 8 hours of operation. Require parking adjacent to a tower to allow for maintenance.  Require an indemnification agreement with the Town. Include provision that the service cannot interfere with government emergency communications Require insurance Specifically state any lighting must be dark sky compliant. Require developments over a certain size set aside area(s) for future tower locations Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17 Risk Analysis N/A Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s) N/A Staff Recommendation(s) N/A SUGGESTED MOTION This is a discussion item, no motions will be made. Attachments Draft Ordinance for July 2024 P&Z Commission meeting  Adopted Chapter 17  July 8 Minutes  Page 1 of 28 Chapter 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Section 17.01 Purpose, Intent, and Applicability A. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications towers and antennas. The goals of this ordinance are to: 1. Protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of towers and antennas; 2. Encourage the location of towers in nonresidential areas; 3. Minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; 4. Strongly encourage the joint use of new and existing tower sites as a primary option rather than construction of additional single-use towers; 5. Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 6. Encourage users of towers and antennas to conflgure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas through careful design, siting, landscape screening, and innovative camoufiaging techniques; 7. Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efflciently; 8. Consider the public health and safety of communication towers; and 9. Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failure through engineering and careful siting of tower structures. In furtherance of these goals, Town of Fountain Hills shall give due consideration to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan, the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, existing land uses, and environmentally sensitive areas in approving sites for the location of towers and antennas. B. It is the intent of this ordinance: Page 2 of 28 1. That no wireless communication towers or antenna be sited, constructed, reconstructed, installed, materially changed, expanded, or used unless in conformity with this Chapter. 2. To achieve a balance between the need to provide wireless services with the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of Fountain Hills the by balancing four (4) simultaneous objectives: a. Enabling personal wireless service providers to provide adequate personal wireless services throughout the Town so that Town residents can enjoy the beneflts of same, from any FCC-licensed wireless carrier from which they choose to obtain such services; b. Minimizing the number of cell towers and/or other personal wireless service facilities needed to provide such coverage; c. Preventing, to the greatest extent reasonably practical, any unnecessary adverse impacts upon the Town’s communities, residential areas, and individual homes; and, d. Complying with all the legal requirements which the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended (“TCA”) imposes upon the Town, when the Town receives, processes and determines applications seeking approvals for the siting, construction and operation of cell towers and/or other personal wireless service facilities. C. Applicability. New Towers and Antennas: All new towers or antennas in Town of Fountain Hills shall be subject to these regulations. The following exceptions apply: 1. Amateur Radio Station Operators/Receive Only Antennas. This ordinance shall not govern any tower, or the installation of any antenna, that is under the maximum building height of the zoning district in which such structure is located and which is owned and operated by a federally-licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only operations. 2. Preexisting Towers or Antennas. Legally established preexisting towers and preexisting antennas shall not be required to meet the requirements of this ordinance, other than the requirements of Sections 17.06 B. and C. 3. AM Array. For purposes of implementing this ordinance, an AM array, consisting of one or more tower units and supporting ground system which functions as one AM Page 3 of 28 broadcasting antenna, shall be considered one tower. Measurements for setbacks and separation distances shall be measured from the outer perimeter of the towers included in the AM array. Additional tower units may be added within the perimeter of the AM array by right. 4. Small Cell Towers in the Right-of-Way. Wireless communication towers and antenna meeting the deflnition of small wireless facilities as contained in A.R.S. 9-591 are subject to the requirements of Article 16-2, Small Wireless Facilities, of the Town Code. 5. Mobile or Temporary Towers. Mobile wireless facilities when placed on site for seven (7) consecutive days or less, provided any necessary building permit or encroachment permit is obtained. Section 17.02 Definitions As used in this ordinance, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: Alternative Tower Structure: means man-made trees, clock towers, bell steeples, light poles and similar alternative-design mounting structures that camoufiage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers. Antenna: means any exterior transmitting or receiving device mounted on a tower, building or structure and used in communications that radiates or captures electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signals, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communication signals. Backhaul network: means the lines that connect a provider's towers/cell sites to one or more cellular telephone switching offlces, and/or long distance providers, or the public switched telephone network. Existing Structure: means light poles, power poles, chimneys, billboards, and other similar structures, which are placed, within the Town at the time of adoption of this Chapter, except existing buildings. FAA: means the Federal Aviation Administration. FCC: means the Federal Communications Commission. Page 4 of 28 Height: means, when referring to a tower or other structure, the vertical distance measured from the natural grade level to the highest point of the structure directly above the natural grade when such structure is not located in a platted subdivision. If the structure is located in a platted subdivision, the height shall be the vertical distance measured from the flnished grade as shown on the subdivision grading plans or flnished grade as shown on the individual lot's grading plans, (whichever is lower), to the highest point of the structure directly above the flnished grade. In the event that terrain problems prevent an accurate determination of height, the Zoning Administrator shall rule as to height and appeal from that decision shall be to the Board of Adjustment. Pre-existing towers and preexisting antennas: means any tower or antenna for which a building permit has been properly issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance, including permitted towers or antennas that have not yet been constructed so long as such approval is current and not expired. Tower: means any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for telephone, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers, or monopole towers. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, alternative tower structures, and the like. The term also includes the structure and any support thereto. Utility service antennas: means antenna attached to utility boxes, poles, switches, storage tanks, etc. and used by a utility provider to facilitate the operation of the utility system. Wireless communication: means the transmission of voice or data without cable or wires. Wireless facility: means wireless communication facilities including, but not limited to, facilities that transmit and/or receive electromagnetic signals for cellular radio telephone service, personal communications services, enhanced specialized mobile services, paging systems, and related technologies. Such facilities also include antennas, microwave dishes, parabolic antennas, and all other types of equipment used in the transmission or reception of such signals; telecommunication towers or similar structures supporting said equipment; associated equipment cabinets and/or buildings; and all other accessory development used for the provision of personal wireless services. These facilities do not include radio and television broadcast towers and government-operated public safety networks. Page 5 of 28 Section 17.03 Requirements A. General Requirements 1. Principal or Accessory Use: Antennas and towers may be considered either principal or accessory uses. A different existing use of an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or tower on such lot. 2. Lot Size: For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna complies with district development regulations, including but not limited to setback requirements, lot-coverage requirements, and other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even though the antennas or towers may be located on leased parcels within such lot. 3. Aesthetics: Towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements: a. Towers shall, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce visual obtrusiveness. b. At a tower site, the design of the buildings and related structures shall, to the extent possible, use materials; colors, textures, screening, and landscaping that will blend them into the natural setting and surrounding buildings. c. If an antenna is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. d. The choice of design for installing a new personal wireless service facility or the substantial modiflcation of an existing personal wireless service facility shall be chosen to minimize the potential adverse impacts that the new or expanded facility may, or is likely to, infiict upon nearby properties. Page 6 of 28 e. Unless speciflcally required by other regulations, a telecommunications tower shall have a flnish (either painted or unpainted) that minimizes its degree of visual impact. f. Accessory Structures i. Accessory structures shall maximize the use of building materials, colors, and textures designed to blend with the natural surroundings. The use of camoufiage communications towers may be required by the Council to blend the communications tower and/or its accessory structures further into the natural surroundings. "Camoufiage" is deflned as the use of materials incorporated into the communications tower design that give communications towers the appearance of tree branches and bark coatings, church steeples and crosses, sign structures, lighting structures, or other similar structures. ii. Accessory structures shall be designed to be architecturally similar, compatible with each other, and shall be no more than twelve (12) feet high. The buildings shall be used only for housing equipment related to the particular site. Whenever possible, the buildings shall be joined or clustered so as to appear as one building. iii. No portion of any telecommunications tower or accessory structure shall be used for a sign or other advertising purpose, including but not limited to the company name, phone numbers, banners, and streamers, except the following. A sign of no greater than two square feet indicating the name of the facility owner(s) and a twenty-four-hour emergency telephone shall be posted adjacent to any entry gate. In addition, "no trespassing" or other warning signs may be posted on the fence. All signs shall conform to the sign requirements of the Town. g. Towers must be placed to minimize visual impacts. Applicants shall place towers on the side slope of the terrain so that, as much as possible, the top of the tower does not protrude over the ridgeline, as seen from public ways. h. Existing vegetation. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. No cutting of trees shall take place on a site connected with an application made under this article prior to the approval of the special use permit use. i. Screening. Page 7 of 28 i. Tree plantings may be required to screen portions of the telecommunications tower and accessory structures from nearby residential property as well as from public sites known to include important views or vistas. Additional palm trees may be required to accompany towers which use a palm tree stealth design. ii. Where a site adjoins a residential property or public property, including streets, screening suitable in type, size and quantity shall be required by the Town Council. iii. The applicant shall demonstrate to the approving board that adequate measures have been taken to screen and abate noise emanating from on-site equipment, including but not limited to heating and ventilating units, air conditioners, and emergency power generators. Telecommunications towers shall comply with all applicable sections of this chapter as it pertains to noise control and abatement. j. Utility Services Antennas i. For antenna placed in the Town’s right-of-way with the top of the antenna less than six (6’) feet above ground level, the support structure and antenna shall be painted a neutral color to blend with the surrounding area. If the top of the antenna is six (6’) feet or more above ground level, the antenna and support structure shall utilize the approve Saguaro cactus stealth design. ii. For antenna placed on private property: 1. If placed on another utility structure such as a water tower, the antenna shall be painted to blend with the building or equipment it placed on. 2. If a separate tower structure is used, the antenna design shall comply with the provisions above in this section. 4. Lighting: Towers shall not be artiflcially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the lighting alternatives and design chosen must cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views. Page 8 of 28 5. Measurement: For purposes of measurement, tower setbacks and separation distances shall be calculated and applied to facilities located in the Town of Fountain Hills irrespective of municipal and county jurisdictional boundaries. 6. Not Essential Services: Towers and antennas shall be regulated and permitted pursuant to this chapter and shall not be regulated or permitted as essential services, public utilities, or private utilities. 7. Franchises: Owners and/or operators of towers or antennas shall certify that all franchises required by law for the construction and/or operation of a wireless communication system in the Town of Fountain Hills have been obtained and shall flle a copy of all required franchises with the Community Development Director. 8. Signs: No signs shall be allowed on an antenna or tower. 9. Co-location and Multiple Antenna/Tower Plan: The Town of Fountain Hills encourages tower and antenna users to submit a single application for approval of multiple towers and/or antenna sites and to submit applications, which utilize co-location with an existing wireless telecommunications provider. Applications for approval of multiple sites or for co- location with an existing provider shall be given priority in the review process. 10. Security fencing: Towers shall be enclosed by security fencing not less than six (6) feet in height and no more than eight (8) feet in height, shall be constructed of a block or masonry, and shall be equipped with an appropriate anti-climbing device; provided however, that the Town Council may waive such requirements, as it deems appropriate. 11. Landscaping: The following requirements shall govern the landscaping surrounding towers; provided, however, that the Town Council may waive such requirements if the goals of this chapter would be better served thereby. a. Tower facilities shall be landscaped with a buffer of plant materials that effectively screens the view of the tower compound from residential property. The standard buffer shall consist of a landscaped strip at least four (4) feet wide outside the perimeter of the compound. b. In locations where the visual impact of the tower would be minimal, the landscaping requirement may be reduced or waived. Page 9 of 28 c. Existing mature plant growth and natural landforms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. 13. Noise: Submission of applications for towers and associated equipment shall include noise and acoustical information, prepared by a qualifled flrm or individual, for the base transceiver station(s), equipment buildings, and associated equipment such as air conditioning units and backup generators. The Town may require the applicant to incorporate appropriate noise baffiing materials and/or strategies to avoid any ambient noise from equipment reasonably likely to exceed the applicable noise regulations contained in Section 11-1-7 of the Town Code. 14. Any information of an engineering nature that the applicant submits, whether civil, mechanical, or electrical, shall be certifled by an Arizona Licensed Professional Engineer. 15. Application approval issued under this Chapter shall be conditioned upon veriflcation by the Town Engineer or designee that such tower structure is structurally sound. Such veriflcation shall be received by the applicant prior to submission. B. Minimum Setbacks and Separations 1. Setbacks: Except for utility service antennas, the following setback requirements shall apply to all towers; provided, however, that the Town Council may reasonably reduce the standard setback requirements if the goals of this chapter would be better served thereby: a. Towers must be set back a distance equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the height of the tower from any adjoining lot line. Provided, however, that separation distances from residential uses shall be in accordance with Table 1 set forth below. b. Accessory buildings must satisfy the minimum zoning district setback requirements. 2. Separation: Except for utility service antennas, the following separation requirements shall apply to all towers and antennas provided, however, that the Town Council may reasonably reduce the standard separation requirements if the goals of this chapter would be better served thereby. a. Separation from off-site uses/designated areas. Page 10 of 28 i. Tower separation shall be measured from the base of the tower to the lot line of the off-site uses and/or designated areas as specifled in Table 1, except as otherwise provided in Table 1. ii. Separation requirements for towers shall comply with the minimum standards established in Table 1. Table 1. Separation Requirements from Offsite Uses/Areas Off-site Use/Designated Area Separation Distance Single-family or duplex residential units1 200 feet or 300% of tower height, whichever is greater Vacant single-family or duplex residentially zoned land which is either platted or has preliminary plat approval which is not expired 200 feet or 300% of tower height, whichever is greater2 Vacant unplatted residentially zoned lands3 100 feet or 100% of tower height, whichever is greater Existing multifamily residential units greater than duplex units 100 feet or 100% of tower height, whichever is greater Nonresidentially zoned lands or nonresidential uses None, only setbacks apply 1 Includes modular homes and mobile homes used for living purposes. 2 Separation measured from base of tower to closest building setback line. 3 Includes any unplatted residential use properties without a valid preliminary subdivision plan or valid development plan and any multifamily residentially zoned land greater than a duplex. b. Separation distances between towers: Separation distances between towers shall be applicable for and measured between the proposed tower and preexisting towers. The separation distances shall be measured by drawing or following a straight line between the base of the existing tower and the proposed base, pursuant to a site plan, of the proposed tower. The separation distances (listed in linear feet) shall be as shown in Table number 2. Page 11 of 28 Table 2. Separation Distances between Towers Monopole 65 ft. in height or greater Monopole less than 65 ft. in height but greater than 40 ft. in height Monopole less than 40 ft. in height Monopole 65 ft. in height or greater 2,000 feet 1,500 feet 1,000 feet Monopole less than 65 ft. in height but greater than 40 ft. in height 1,500 feet 1,500 feet 1,000 feet Monopole less than 40 ft. in height 1,000 feet 1,000 feet 750 feet C. Buildings or Other Equipment Storage 1. Antennas Mounted on Structures or Rooftops: The equipment cabinet or structure used in association with antennas shall comply with the following: a. The cabinet or structure shall not contain more than one hundred-twenty (120) square feet of gross fioor area or be more than eight (8) feet in height and shall be located on the ground. b. Equipment storage buildings or cabinets shall comply with all applicable building codes. 2. Antennas Mounted on Utility Poles, Light Poles, or Towers: The equipment cabinet or structure used in association with antennas shall be located in accordance with the following: a. In residential districts, the equipment cabinet or structure may be located: i. In a required front yard or required street side yard, provided the cabinet structure is no greater than three and one-half (3.5) feet in height and twenty (20) Page 12 of 28 square feet of gross fioor area and the cabinet/structure is located a minimum of three (3) feet from all lot lines. The cabinet/structure shall be screened by sight obscuring landscaping which obscures at least ninety-flve percent (95%) of the structure at planting and throughout the duration of the cabinet or structure’s existence with an ultimate height not to exceed forty-two (42) inches. ii. In a required rear yard, provided the cabinet or structure is no greater than flve (5) feet in height or one hundred-twenty (120) square feet in gross fioor area. The cabinet/structure shall be screened by sight obscuring landscaping which obscures at least ninety-flve percent (95%) of the structure at planting and throughout the duration of the cabinet or structure’s existence with an ultimate height of six (6) feet. iii. The entry or access side of a cabinet or structure shall be gated by a solid, sight- obscuring gate that is separate from the cabinet or structure. b. In commercial or industrial districts the equipment cabinet or structure shall be no greater than fourteen (14) feet in height or three hundred (300) square feet in gross fioor area. The structure or cabinet shall be screened by sight-obscuring landscaping with an ultimate height of sixteen (16) feet and a planted height of at least six (6) feet. The entry or access side of a cabinet or structure shall be gated by a solid, sight- obscuring gate that is separate from the cabinet or structure. Such access way shall not face residentially zoned property. 3. Modiflcation of Building Size Requirements: The requirements of Sections 17.03 C 1 and 2 may be modifled by the Town Council in the case of uses permitted by special use to encourage collocation. D. Co-location 1. Any new telecommunications tower shall be designed to accommodate future shared use by other communications providers. 2. Good Faith: Applicants and permittees shall cooperate and exercise good faith in co- locating wireless telecommunications facilities on the same support structures or site, if the Town so requests. Good faith shall include sharing technical information to evaluate the feasibility of co-location, and may include negotiations for erection of a replacement support structure to accommodate co-location. A competitive confiict to co-location or Page 13 of 28 flnancial burden caused by sharing such information normally will not be considered as an excuse to comply with this section. 3. Third Party Technical Review: In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the Town may require the applicant to obtain a third-party technical study at the applicant’s expense. The Town may review any information submitted by the applicant and permittee(s) in determining whether good faith has been exercised. 4. Exceptions: No co-location may be required where the shared use would or does result in signiflcant interference in the broadcast or reception capabilities of the existing wireless telecommunications facilities or failure of the existing wireless telecommunications facilities to meet federal standards for emissions. 5. Violation; penalty: Failure to comply with co-location requirements when feasible may result in denial of a permit request or revocation of an existing permit. Section 17.04 Application Types A. Administrative: The following types of applications are processed administratively by staff: 1. Applications to change or modify an existing administratively approved wireless communication facility that remains in compliance with all ordinance requirements. 2. Applications to change or modify an existing wireless communication facility approved through public review, provided that the modiflcation will not: a. Increase the approved height of the supporting structure by more than 10% or twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; b. Cause the original approved number of antennas to be exceeded by more than 50%; c. Increase the original approved square footage of accessory buildings by more than 200 square feet; Page 14 of 28 d. Add new, additional, or larger microwave antenna dishes; e. Expand the footprint of said support structure; or f. Potentially cause signiflcant adverse impacts on the existing support structure or the surrounding area. 3. Applications for co-location of additional antenna for an additional service provider on an existing administratively approved tower that remains in compliance with all ordinance requirements. 4. Applications for co-location of additional antenna for an additional service provider on an existing tower approved through public review, provided that the modiflcation will not: a. Increase the approved height of the supporting structure by more than 10% or twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; b. Cause the original approved number of antennas to be exceeded by more than 50%; c. Increase the original approved square footage of accessory buildings by more than 200 square feet; d. Add new, additional, or larger microwave antenna dishes; e. Expand the footprint of said support structure; or f. Potentially cause signiflcant adverse impacts on the existing support structure or the surrounding area. 5. Applications for new utility service antenna that comply with the height and setback requirements of the zoning district in which they are located. Page 15 of 28 6. Applications for mobile or temporary wireless facilities for more than seven (7) consecutive days. 7. Applications for new towers in the following locations: a. Town property with the tower located at least three hundred (300’) from a residential zoning boundary. b. On commercial, industrial, utility, or lodging zoned property and located at least three hundred feet (300’) from a residential zoning boundary. c. Alternative tower structures when such structures and their accompanying equipment are appropriately blended into the surrounding terrain, are within the height limitations of the underlying zoning district and are at least three hundred feet (300’) from a residential zoning boundary. B. Public Review: The following types of applications require review and approval by the Town Council: 1. Towers on Town property when the tower will be located less than 300’ from a residential zoning boundary. 2. All other towers and antenna not meeting the requirements in Sec. 17.04 A or Sec. 17.04 B 1. Section 17.05 Application Submittal, Review, and Processing A. General: The following provisions shall govern the review of all wireless communication facility applications: 1. Complete Application. Applications for wireless communication facilities shall be flled electronically on the Town’s website by an owner of real property and shall contain the area proposed for the wireless communication facility using the process established by the Page 16 of 28 Director for such applications. All such applications shall include the information required in this section. Applications flled on behalf of the property owner by a third party shall include a statement from the property owner authorizing the submittal of the application. 2. Applications shall include documentation of compliance with items listed in Section 17.03 A as applicable to the application submitted. 3. Inventory of Existing Sites: Each applicant for a new tower or co-location of new antenna on an existing tower shall provide to the Development Services Director an inventory of its existing towers, antennas, or sites approved for towers or antennas, that are either within the jurisdiction of the Town of Fountain Hills or within one mile of the border thereof, including speciflc information about the location, height, and design of each tower. Each applicant shall also provide a one-year build-out plan for all other wireless communications facilities within the Town. The Development Services Director may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or special use permits under this ordinance or with other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the jurisdiction of Town of Fountain Hills, provided, however that the Development Services Director is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable. 4. Utility Service Antennas: a. Located in public right-of-way. These types of application are reviewed and approved through the Town’s Encroachment Permit process as provided in Town Code Article 16-1, Encroachments. b. Located on property owned by the utility company. i. If the antenna complies with the height requirements of the underlying zoning district, the plans for the antenna will be reviewed and approved with the overall site development plans if the site is being developed concurrently. If the antenna is being added to an existing utility site, the plans will be reviewed and processed consistent with the requirements of Section 17.05 C. ii. If the antenna does not comply with the height requirements of the underlying zoning district, the plans for the antenna will be reviewed and processed consistent with the requirements of Section 17.05 D. Page 17 of 28 5. Applications Using Existing Towers: a. Dimensioned, to-scale drawings showing the existing and proposed antenna on the tower including the height of the tower and the antennas. b. The number and type of existing and proposed antenna. c. Engineering calculations documenting the structural changes and certifying the tower’s ability to carry the new antennas. d. Dimensioned, to-scale drawings illustrating modiflcation of ground equipment, if any. 6. Applications Using New Towers: Information required. In addition to any information required for applications for special use permits pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 2.02 of this Zoning Ordinance, applicants for a special use permit for a tower shall submit the following information: a. A site Plan as required in Section 2.04 plus zoning, General Plan classiflcation of the site and all properties within the applicable separation distances set forth in Section 17.03 B., adjacent roadways, proposed means of access, elevation drawings of the proposed tower and any other structures, photo simulations showing the tower in the proposed location from at least four directions, and other information deemed by the Development Services Director to be necessary to assess compliance with this chapter. b. The setback distance between the proposed tower and the nearest residential unit and residentially zoned properties. c. The separation distance from other towers described in the inventory of existing sites submitted pursuant to Section 17.03 B. shall be shown on an updated site plan or map. The applicant shall also identify the type of construction of the existing tower(s) and the owner/operator of the existing tower(s), if known. d. Method of fencing, and flnished color and, if applicable, the method of camoufiage and illumination. e. A description of compliance with Sections 17.03 C. 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 17.03 B. and 17.05 A. 3, and 17.06 A. and B., and all applicable federal, state or local laws. Page 18 of 28 f. A notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the tower will accommodate collocation of additional antennas for future users. g. Identiflcation of the entities providing the backhaul network for the tower(s) described in the application and other cellular sites owned or operated by the applicant in the municipality. h. A description of the suitability of the use of existing towers, other structures or alternative technology not requiring the use of towers or structures to provide the services to be provided through the use of the proposed new tower. i. A description of the feasible alternative location(s) of future towers or antennas within the Town of Fountain Hills based upon existing physical, engineering, technological or geographical limitations in the event the proposed tower is erected. j. A statement of compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Radio Frequency (RF) exposure standards. 7. Filing Fee. Payment of a flling fee in an amount established by a schedule adopted by resolution of the Council and flled in the offlces of the Town Clerk. No part of the flling fee shall be returnable. B. Shot Clocks and Tolling. To comply with the requirements of Section 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA, the following shot clock periods set forth herein below shall be presumed to be reasonable periods within which the Town shall render determinations upon applications for wireless communication facilities. The Town shall render determinations upon such applications within the periods set forth hereinbelow, unless the applicable shot clock period listed below is tolled, extended by agreement or the processing of the application is delayed due to circumstances beyond the Town’s controls. 1. Application Shot Clocks. a. Receipt of Initial Application. Upon receipt of an application, the Development Services Director, or designee, shall review the application for completeness. If the Director determines the application is: (a) incomplete, (b) missing required application Page 19 of 28 materials, (c) is the wrong type of application, or (d) is otherwise defective, then, within ten (10) days for administrative applications and thirty (30) days for public hearing applications of the Town’s receipt of the application, the Director, or their designee, shall notify the applicant of the flnding and state what is needed to have a complete application. The notice of incompleteness shall toll the shot clock, which shall not thereafter resume running unless and until the applicant tenders an additional submission to the Director to remedy the issues identifled in the notice of incomplete application. The submission of any responsive materials by the applicant shall automatically cause the shot clock period to resume running. If upon receipt of any additional materials from the applicant, the Director determines that the application is still incomplete and/or defective, then the Director shall, once again notify the applicant within ten (10) days for administrative applications and thirty (30) days for public hearing applications of the applicant having flled its supplemental or corrected materials to the Town and the shot clock shall once again be tolled, and the same procedure provided for hereinabove shall be repeated. b. Application Review. The shock clock for Administrative applications which do not involve new towers is ninety (90) days. The shot clock for Administrative applications with new towers and Public Review applications is one hundred flfty (150) days. 2. Shot Clock Tolls, Extensions & Reasonable Delay Periods Consistent with the letter and intent of Section 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA, each of the shot clock periods set forth within Section 17.05 B. hereinabove shall generally be presumed to be sufflcient periods within which the Town shall render decisions upon applications. Notwithstanding same, the applicable shot clock periods may be tolled, extended by mutual agreement between any applicant and/or its representative and the Town, and the Town shall not be required to render its determination within the shot clock period presumed to be reasonable for each type of application, where the processing of such application is reasonably delayed, as described hereinbelow. Page 20 of 28 a. Tolling of the Applicable Shot Clock Due to Incompleteness and/or Applicant Error As provided for within Section 17.05 B. 1. hereinabove, in the event that the Development Services Director deems an application incomplete, the Director shall send a Notice of Incompleteness to the applicant to notify the applicant that its application is incomplete and/or contains material errors, and shall reasonably identify the missing information and/or documents and/or the error(s) in the application. If the Director sends a Notice of Incompleteness as described hereinabove, the applicable shot clock shall automatically be tolled, meaning that the applicable shot clock period within which the Town is required to render a flnal decision upon the application shall immediately cease running, and shall not resume running, unless and until the Town receives a responsive submission from the applicant. If and when the applicant thereafter submits additional information in an effort to complete its application, or cure any identifled defect(s), then the shot clock shall automatically resume running, but shall not be deemed to start running anew. The applicable shot clock period shall, once again, be tolled if the Director thereafter provides a second notice that the application is still incomplete or defective, despite any additional submissions which have been received by the Town, from the applicant, up to that point. b. Shot Clock Extension by Mutual Agreement The Town shall be free to extend any applicable shot clock period by mutual agreement with any respective applicant. This discretion on the part of the Town shall include the Town’s authority to request, at any time, and for any period of time the Town may deem reasonable or appropriate under the circumstances, consent from a respective applicant to extend the applicable shot clock period to enable the Town, the applicant, or any relevant third party, to complete any type of undertaking or task related to the review, analysis, processing, and determination of the particular application, which is then pending before the Town, to the extent that any such Undertaking, task, or review is consistent with, or reasonably related to, compliance with any federal, state, or local law and/or the requirements of any provision of the Town Code, including but not limited to this Chapter. Page 21 of 28 In response to any request by the Town, the applicant, by its principal, agent, attorney, site acquisition agent, or other authorized representative, can consent to any extension of any applicable shot clock by afflrmatively indicating its consent either in writing or by afflrmatively indicating its consent on the record at any public hearing or public meeting. The Town shall be permitted to reasonably rely upon a representative of the applicant indicating that they are authorized to grant such consent on behalf of the respective applicant, on whose behalf they have been addressing the Town within the review process. c. Reasonable Delay Extensions of Shot Clock Periods The Town recognizes that there may be situations wherein, due to circumstances beyond the control of the Town and/or the Town Council, the review and issuance of a flnal decision upon an application for a wireless communication facility cannot reasonably be completed within the application shot clock periods delineated within Section 17.05 B hereinabove. If, despite the exercise of due diligence by the Town, the determination regarding a speciflc application cannot reasonably be completed within the applicable shot clock period, the Town shall be permitted to continue and complete its review and issue its determination at a date beyond the expiration of the applicable period, if the delay of such flnal decision is due to circumstances including, but not limited to, those enumerated hereinbelow, each of which shall serve as a reasonable basis for a reasonable delay of the applicable shot clock period. i. In the event that the rendering of a flnal decision upon an application under this Chapter is delayed due to natural and/or unnatural events and/or forces which are not within the control of the Town, such as the unavoidable delays experienced in government processes due to the COVID 19 pandemic, and/or mandatory compliance with any related federal or state government orders issued in relation thereto, such delays shall constitute reasonable delays which shall be recognized as acceptable grounds for extending the period for review and the rendering of flnal determinations beyond the period allotted under the applicable shot clock. ii. In the event that applicant tenders eleventh-hour submissions to the Town in the form of (a) expert reports, (b) expert materials, and/or (c) materials which Page 22 of 28 require a signiflcant period for review due either to their complexity or the sheer volume of materials which an applicant has chosen to provide to the Town at such late point in the proceedings, the Town shall be afforded a reasonable time to review such late-submitted materials. If reasonably necessary, the Town shall be permitted to retain the services of an expert consultant to review any late-submitted expert reports which were provided to the Town, even if such review or services extend beyond the applicable shot clock period, so long as the Town completes such review and retains and secures such expert services within a reasonable period of time thereafter and otherwise acts with reasonable diligence in completing its review and rendering its flnal decision. C. Review and Processing of Applications 1. Conformity to the following shall be considered in review of all applications: a. The application is consistent with the objectives of this ordinance. b. The height of the proposed tower. c. The adequacy of the proposed site, considering such factors as the sufficiency of the size of the site to comply with the established criteria, the configuration of the site, and the extent to which the site is formed by logical boundaries (e.g., topography, natural features, streets, relationship of adjacent uses, etc.) that provide for the ability to comply with the provisions of this ordinance. d. The extent to which the proposal responds to the impact of the proposed development on adjacent land uses, especially in terms of visual impact. e. The extent to which the proposed telecommunications facility is camouflaged (i.e., use of stealth technology). f. The extent to which the proposed facility is integrated with existing structures (i.e., buildings, signs, utility poles, etc.) with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness. g. An applicant's compliance with all town requirements with respect to previous applications. Page 23 of 28 2. Review of Administrative Applications. a. Administrative applications will be reviewed by staff using the Town’s standard permit plan review processes. Applications for new towers shall provide staff with the same information as required in Section 17.05 C 3 for Public Review Applications. b. Applications for mobile or temporary wireless facilities which remain in place for more than seven (7) consecutive days must submit a request for a Temporary Use Permit as provided in Section 2.03 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Review and Processing of Public Review Applications a. Applications which require public hearing review and approval on private property will be processed as Special Use Permits and follow the requirements listed in Section 2.02 of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance for Special Use Permits. Applications on Town owned property will not require a Special Use Permit but will follow the same requirements for notice for review by the Town Council. b. In addition to the factors listed in 17.05 C 1 for review of applications, public review applications will also be subject to the standards for consideration of special use permit applications pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 2.02 of this Zoning Ordinance c. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers, Other Structures, or Alternative Technology: No new tower shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Town Council that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology that does not require the use of towers or structures can accommodate the applicant's a proposed antenna. An applicant shall submit information requested by the Town Council related to the availability of suitable existing towers, other structures or alternative technology. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: i. No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area, which meet applicant's engineering requirements. ii. Existing towers or structures are not of sufflcient height to meet applicant's engineering requirements. Page 24 of 28 iii. Existing towers or structures do not have sufflcient structural strength to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment. iv. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. v. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. vi. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable. vii. The applicant demonstrates that an alternative technology that does not require the use of towers or structures, such as a cable micro cell network using multiple low-powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wire line system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology unsuitable. viii. If the applicant asserts a claim that a proposed facility is necessary to remedy one or more existing signiflcant gaps in an identifled wireless carrier’s personal wireless services, the Council may require the applicant to provide drive-test generated coverage maps, as opposed to computer-generated coverage maps, for each frequency at which the carrier provides personal wireless services, to show signal strengths in bins of three (3) DBM each, to enable the Council to assess the existence of such signiflcant gaps accurately, and/or whether the carrier possesses adequate coverage within the geographic area which is the subject of the respective application. 4. In granting a permit, the Town may impose conditions to the extent such conditions are necessary to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed tower on adjoining properties. Page 25 of 28 Section 17.06 Maintenance and Operation A. Removal of Abandoned Antennas and Towers. Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of ninety (90) days shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such antenna or tower shall remove the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice from the Town of Fountain Hills notifying the owner of such abandonment. Failure to remove an abandoned antenna or tower within said ninety (90) day period shall be grounds to remove the tower or antenna at the owner's expense. If there are two or more users of a single tower, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the tower for the prescribed period. B. State or Federal Requirements: All towers must meet or exceed current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, and any other agency of the state or federal government with the authority to regulate towers and antennas. If such standards and regulations are changed, then the owners of the towers and antennas governed by this chapter shall bring such towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations within six (6) months of the effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a different compliance schedule is mandated by the controlling state or federal agency. Failure to bring towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for the removal of the tower or antenna at the owner's expense. To ensure continuing compliance with such limits by all owners and/or operators of wireless communication facilities within the Town, all owners, and operators of wireless communication facilities shall submit reports as required by this section. As set forth hereinbelow, the Town may additionally require, at the owner and/or operator’s expense, independent veriflcation of the results of any analysis set forth within any reports submitted to the Town by the owner and/or operator. 1. Certiflcation of Compliance with Applicable RF Radiation Limits Within forty-flve (45) days of initial operation or a substantial modiflcation of a wireless communication facility, the owner and/or operator of each telecommunications antenna shall submit to the Development Services Director a written certiflcation by a licensed professional engineer, sworn to under penalties of perjury, that the facility’s radio frequency emissions comply with the limits codifled within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1), Table 1 Sections (i) and (ii), as made applicable pursuant to 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(3). Page 26 of 28 The engineer shall measure the emissions of the approved facility, including the cumulative impact from other nearby facilities, and determine if such emissions are within the limits described hereinabove. A report of these measurements and the engineer’s flndings with respect to compliance with the FCC’s Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits shall be submitted to the Development Services Director. If the report shows that the facility does not comply with applicable limits, then the owner and/or operator shall cease operation of the facility until the facility is brought into compliance with such limits. Proof of compliance shall be a certiflcation provided by the engineer who prepared the original report. The Town may require, at the applicant’s expense, independent veriflcation of the results of the analysis. 2. Random RF Radiofrequency Testing At the operator’s expense, the Town may retain an engineer to conduct random unannounced RF Radiation testing of such facilities to ensure the facility’s compliance with the limits codifled within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq. The Town may cause such random testing to be conducted as often as the Town may deem appropriate. However, the Town may not require the owner and/or operator to pay for more than one test per facility per calendar year unless such testing reveals that one or more of the owner and/or operator’s facilities are exceeding the limits codifled within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., in which case the Town shall be permitted to demand that the facility be brought into compliance with such limits, and to conduct additional tests to determine if, and when, the owner and/or operator thereafter brings the respective facility and/or facilities into compliance. 3. Actions for Non-compliance If the Town at any time flnds that there is good cause to believe that a wireless communication facility and/or one or more of its antennas are emitting RF radiation at levels in excess of the legal limits permitted under 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., then a hearing shall be scheduled before the Town’s Zoning Administrator at which the owner and/or operator of such facility shall be required to show cause why any and all permits Page 27 of 28 and/or approvals issued by the Town for such facility and/or facilities should not be revoked, and a flne should not be assessed against such owner and/or operator. The owner and/or operator shall be afforded not less than two (2) weeks' written notice of the hearing. At such hearing, the burden shall be on the Town to show that, by a preponderance of the evidence, the facilities emissions exceeded the permissible limits under 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq. In the event that the Town establishes same, the owner and/or operator shall then be required to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that a malfunction of equipment caused their failure to comply with the applicable limits through no fault on the part of the owner/operator. If the owner and/or operator fails to establish same, the Town shall have the power to revoke any permit, building permit, and/or any other form of approval(s) which the Town Council or any other representative of the Town may have then issued to the owner and/or operator, for the respective facility. The Zoning Administrator may revoke an administrative approval. The decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Town Manager. If the tower or antenna was approved by the Town Council, revocation will be considered by the Town Council in the same manner as the original approval. In addition, the Town may issue a civil citation for non-compliance as provided in Section 1- 8-3 of the Town Code. In the event that an owner or operator of one or more wireless communication facility is found to violate subparagraph 1. hereinabove three or more times within any flve (5) year period, then in addition to revoking any zoning approvals for the facilities which were violating the limits codifled in 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., the Town Council shall render a determination within which it shall deem the owner/operator prohibited from flling any applications for any new wireless personal services facilities within the Town for a period of flve (5) years. C. Building Codes; Safety Standards: To ensure the structural integrity of towers, the owner of a tower shall ensure that it is maintained in compliance with standards contained in applicable state or local building codes and the applicable standards for towers that are published by the Page 28 of 28 Electronic Industries Association, as amended from time to time. If, upon inspection, the Town of Fountain Hills concludes that a tower fails to comply with such codes and standards and constitutes a danger to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the owner shall have thirty (30) days to bring such tower into compliance with such standards. Failure to bring such tower into compliance within said thirty (30) days shall constitute grounds for the removal of the tower or antenna at the owner's expense. D. Noise: Wireless facilities and all related equipment must comply with all noise regulations and shall not exceed such regulations, either individually or collectively. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and/or for testing and maintenance purposes between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Section 17.07 Nonconforming Uses A. Not Expansion of Nonconforming Use: Towers that are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use or structure. B. Pre-existing towers: Pre-existing towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Routine maintenance (including replacement with a new tower of like construction and height) shall be permitted on such preexisting towers. New construction other than routine maintenance on a preexisting tower shall comply with the requirements of this chapter. C. Rebuilding Damaged or Destroyed Nonconforming Towers or Antennas: Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, bona flde nonconforming towers or antennas that are damaged or destroyed may be rebuilt without having to flrst obtain a special use permit and without having to meet the separation requirements specifled in Sections 17.03. The type, height, and location of the tower onsite shall be of the same type and intensity as the original facility approval; provided, however, that any destroyed lattice or guyed tower shall be replaced with a monopole structure only. Building permits to rebuild the facility shall comply with the then applicable building codes and shall be obtained within ninety (90) days from the date the facility is damaged or destroyed. If no permit is obtained or if said permit expires, the tower or antenna shall be deemed abandoned as specifled in Section 17.16 A. Chapter 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Section 17.01 Purpose, Intent, and Applicability A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications towers and antennas. The goals of this chapter are to: 1. Protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of towers and antennas; 2. Encourage the location of towers in nonresidential areas; 3. Minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; 4. Strongly encourage the joint use of new and existing tower sites as a primary option rather than construction of additional single-use towers; 5. Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; 6. Encourage users of towers and antennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas through careful design, siting, landscape screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques; 7. Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efficiently; 8. Consider the public health and safety of communication towers; and 9. Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failure through engineering and careful siting of tower structures. In furtherance of these goals, Town of Fountain Hills shall give due consideration to the Town of Fountain Hills General Plan, the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, existing land uses, and environmentally sensitive areas in approving sites for the location of towers and antennas. B. It is the intent of this chapter: 1. That no wireless communication towers or antenna be sited, constructed, reconstructed, installed, materially changed, expanded, or used unless in conformity with this chapter. 2. To achieve a balance between the need to provide wireless services with the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of Fountain Hills by balancing four (4) simultaneous objectives: Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 1 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. a. Enabling personal wireless service providers to provide adequate personal wireless services throughout the Town so that Town residents can enjoy the benefits of same from any FCC-licensed wireless carrier from which they choose to obtain such services; b. Minimizing the number of cell towers and/or other personal wireless service facilities needed to provide such coverage; c. Preventing, to the greatest extent reasonably practical, any unnecessary adverse impacts upon the Town’s communities, residential areas, and individual homes; and d. Complying with all the legal requirements which the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended (“TCA”) imposes upon the Town, when the Town receives, processes and determines applications seeking approvals for the siting, construction and operation of cell towers and/or other personal wireless service facilities. C. Applicability. New Towers and Antennas. All new towers or antennas in Town of Fountain Hills shall be subject to these regulations. The following exceptions apply: 1. Amateur Radio Station Operators/Receive Only Antennas. This chapter shall not govern any tower, or the installation of any antenna, that is under the maximum building height of the zoning district in which such structure is located and which is owned and operated by a federally licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only operations. 2. Pre-existing Towers or Antennas. Legally established pre-existing towers and pre-existing antennas shall not be required to meet the requirements of this chapter, other than the requirements of Sections 17.06(B)(1) and 17.06(C). 3. AM Array. For purposes of implementing this chapter, an AM array, consisting of one (1) or more tower units and supporting ground system which functions as one (1) AM broadcasting antenna, shall be considered one (1) tower. Measurements for setbacks and separation distances shall be measured from the outer perimeter of the towers included in the AM array. Additional tower units may be added within the perimeter of the AM array by right. 4. Small Cell Towers in the Right-of-Way. Wireless communication towers and antenna meeting the definition of small wireless facilities as contained in A.R.S. 9-591 are subject to the requirements of Article 16-2, Small Wireless Facilities, of the Town Code. 5. Mobile or Temporary Towers. Mobile wireless facilities, when placed on site for seven (7) consecutive days or less, provided any necessary building permit or encroachment permit is obtained. 6. Utility Service Antennas in the Right-of-Way. Utility service antennas as defined in this chapter placed in the public right-of-way are subject to the requirements of Article 16-3, Utility Service Antenna, of the Town Code. (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 2 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Section 17.02 Definitions As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: “Alternative tower structure” means man-made trees, clock towers, bell steeples, light poles and similar alternative-design mounting structures that camouflage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers. “Antenna” means any exterior transmitting or receiving device mounted on a tower, building or structure and used in communications that radiates or captures electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signals, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communication signals. “Backhaul network” means the lines that connect a provider’s towers/cell sites to one (1) or more cellular telephone switching offices, and/or long distance providers, or the public switched telephone network. “Existing structure” means light poles, power poles, chimneys, billboards, and other similar structures, which are placed, within the Town at the time of adoption of this chapter, except existing buildings. “FAA” means the Federal Aviation Administration. “FCC” means the Federal Communications Commission. “Height” means, when referring to a tower or other structure, the vertical distance measured from the natural grade level to the highest point of the structure directly above the natural grade when such structure is not located in a platted subdivision. If the structure is located in a platted subdivision, the height shall be the vertical distance measured from the finished grade as shown on the subdivision grading plans or finished grade as shown on the individual lot’s grading plans (whichever is lower), to the highest point of the structure directly above the finished grade. In the event that terrain problems prevent an accurate determination of height, the Zoning Administrator shall rule as to height and appeal from that decision shall be to the Board of Adjustment. “Pre-existing towers and pre-existing antennas” means any tower or antenna for which a building permit has been properly issued prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, including permitted towers or antennas that have not yet been constructed so long as such approval is current and not expired. “Tower” means any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one (1) or more antennas for telephone, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers, or monopole towers. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, alternative tower structures, and the like. The term also includes the structure and any support thereto. “Utility service antennas” means antenna placed on or near utility boxes, poles, switches, storage tanks, etc., and used by a utility provider to facilitate the operation of the utility system. “Wireless communication” means the transmission of voice or data without cable or wires. “Wireless communication facility” means wireless communication facilities including, but not limited to, facilities that transmit and/or receive electromagnetic signals for cellular radio telephone service, personal communications Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 3 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. services, enhanced specialized mobile services, paging systems, and related technologies. Such facilities also include antennas, microwave dishes, parabolic antennas, and all other types of equipment used in the transmission or reception of such signals; telecommunication towers or similar structures supporting said equipment; associated equipment cabinets and/or buildings; and all other accessory development used for the provision of personal wireless services. These facilities do not include radio and television broadcast towers and government-operated public safety networks. (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Section 17.03 Requirements A. General Requirements. 1. Principal or Accessory Use. Antennas and towers may be considered either principal or accessory uses. A different existing use of an existing structure on the same lot shall not preclude the installation of an antenna or tower on such lot. 2. Lot Size. For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna complies with district development regulations, including but not limited to setback requirements, lot coverage requirements, and other such requirements, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even though the antennas or towers may be located on leased parcels within such lot. 3. Aesthetics. Towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements: a. Towers shall, subject to any applicable standards of the FAA, be painted a neutral color so as to reduce visual obtrusiveness. b. At a tower site, the design of the buildings and related structures shall, to the extent possible, use materials, colors, textures, screening, and landscaping that will blend them into the natural setting and surrounding buildings. c. If an antenna is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the color of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. d. The choice of design for installing a new wireless communication facility or the substantial modification of an existing wireless communication facility shall be chosen to minimize the potential adverse impacts that the new or expanded facility may, or is likely to, inflict upon nearby properties. Stealth designs such as mono-palms or flagpoles should be utilized to camouflage the pole and antennas. e. Accessory Structures. i. Accessory structures shall maximize the use of building materials, colors, and textures designed to blend with the natural surroundings. The use of camouflage communications towers Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 4 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. may be required by the Council to blend the communications tower and/or its accessory structures further into the natural surroundings. “Camouflage” is defined as the use of materials incorporated into the communications tower design that give communications towers the appearance of tree branches and bark coatings, church steeples and crosses, sign structures, lighting structures, or other similar structures. ii. Accessory structures shall be designed to be architecturally similar, compatible with each other, and shall be no more than 12 feet high. The buildings shall be used only for housing equipment related to the particular site. Whenever possible, the buildings shall be joined or clustered so as to appear as one (1) building. iii. No portion of any telecommunications tower or accessory structure shall be used for a sign or other advertising purpose, including but not limited to the company name, phone numbers, banners, and streamers, except the following. A sign of no greater than 2 square feet indicating the name of the facility owner(s) and a twenty-four (24) hour emergency telephone shall be posted adjacent to any entry gate. In addition, “no trespassing” or other warning signs may be posted on the fence. All signs shall conform to the sign requirements of the Town. f. Towers must be placed to minimize visual impacts. Applicants shall place towers on the side slope of the terrain so that, as much as possible, the top of the tower does not protrude over the ridgeline, as seen from public ways. g. Existing Vegetation. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. No cutting of trees shall take place on a site connected with an application made under this chapter prior to the approval of the application. h. Screening. i. Tree plantings may be required to screen portions of the telecommunications tower and accessory structures from nearby residential property as well as from public sites known to include important views or vistas. The standard buffer shall consist of a landscaped strip at least 4 feet wide outside the perimeter of the compound. Additional palm trees may be required to accompany towers which use a palm tree stealth design. ii. Where a site adjoins a residential property or public property, including streets, screening suitable in type, size and quantity shall be required by the Town Council. iii. The applicant shall demonstrate to the approving board that adequate measures have been taken to screen and abate noise emanating from on-site equipment, including but not limited to heating and ventilating units, air conditioners, and emergency power generators. Telecommunications towers shall comply with all applicable sections of this chapter as it pertains to noise control and abatement. i. Utility Services Antennas. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 5 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. i. If placed on another utility structure such as a water tower, the antenna shall be painted to blend with the building or equipment it is placed on. ii. If a separate tower structure is used, the design shall comply with the provisions in this section. 4. Lighting. Towers shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the lighting alternatives and design chosen must cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views. 5. Measurement. For purposes of measurement, tower setbacks and separation distances shall be calculated and applied to facilities located in the Town of Fountain Hills irrespective of municipal and county jurisdictional boundaries. 6. Not Essential Services. Towers and antennas shall be regulated and permitted pursuant to this chapter and shall not be regulated or permitted as essential services, public utilities, or private utilities. 7. Franchises. Owners and/or operators of towers or antennas shall certify that all franchises required by law for the construction and/or operation of a wireless communication system in the Town of Fountain Hills have been obtained and shall file a copy of all required franchises with the Community Development Director. 8. Signs. No signs other than those required by law shall be allowed on an antenna or tower. 9. Co-location and Multiple Antenna/Tower Plan. The Town of Fountain Hills encourages tower and antenna users to submit a single application for approval of multiple towers and/or antenna sites and to submit applications, which utilize co-location with an existing wireless telecommunications provider. Applications for approval of multiple sites or for co-location with an existing provider shall be given priority in the review process. 10. Security fencing. Towers shall be enclosed by security fencing not less than 6 feet in height and no more than 8 feet in height, shall be constructed of a block or masonry, and shall be equipped with an appropriate anti-climbing device; provided, however, that the Town Council may waive such requirements, as it deems appropriate. 11. Noise. Submission of applications for towers and associated equipment shall include noise and acoustical information, prepared by a qualified firm or individual, for the base transceiver station(s), equipment buildings, and associated equipment such as air conditioning units and backup generators. The Town may require the applicant to incorporate appropriate noise baffling materials and/or strategies to avoid any ambient noise from equipment reasonably likely to exceed the applicable noise regulations contained in Section 11-1-7 of the Town Code. 12. Any information of an engineering nature that the applicant submits, whether civil, mechanical, or electrical, shall be certified by an Arizona licensed professional engineer. 13. Application approval issued under this chapter shall be conditioned upon verification by the Town Engineer or designee that such tower structure is structurally sound. Such verification shall be received by the applicant prior to submission. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 6 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. B. Minimum Setbacks and Separations. 1. Setbacks From Property Lines. Except for utility service antennas, the following setback requirements shall apply to all towers; provided, however, that the Town Council may reasonably reduce the standard setback requirements if the goals of this chapter would be better served thereby: a. Towers must be set back a distance equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the height of the tower from any adjoining lot line; provided, however, that the setback distance shall be increased as required to comply with the separation distances from residential uses in accordance with Table 1 set forth below. b. Accessory buildings must satisfy the minimum zoning district setback requirements. 2. Separations From Adjacent Uses. Except for utility service antennas, the following separation requirements shall apply to all towers and antennas; provided, however, that the Town Council may reasonably reduce the standard separation requirements if the goals of this chapter would be better served thereby. a. Separation From Off-Site Uses/Designated Areas. i. Tower separation shall be measured from the base of the tower to the lot line of the off-site uses and/or designated areas as specified in Table 1, except as otherwise provided in Table 1. ii. Separation requirements for towers shall comply with the minimum standards established in Table 1. Table 1. Separation Requirements From Offsite Uses/Areas Off-Site Use/Designated Area Separation Distance Single-family or duplex residential buildings1 200 feet or 300% of tower height, whichever is greater Vacant single-family or duplex residentially zoned land which is either platted or has preliminary plat approval which is not expired2 200 feet or 300% of tower height, whichever is greater2 Vacant unplatted residentially zoned lands3 100 feet or 100% of tower height, whichever is greater Existing multifamily residential units greater than duplex units 100 feet or 100% of tower height, whichever is greater Nonresidentially zoned lands or nonresidential uses None, only setbacks apply 1 Includes modular homes and mobile homes used for living purposes. Separation measured from base of tower to the closest building wall. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 7 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 2 Separation measured from base of tower to closest building setback line. 3 Includes any unplatted residential use properties without a valid preliminary subdivision plan or valid development plan and any multifamily residentially zoned land greater than a duplex. b. Separation Distances Between Towers. Separation distances between towers shall be applicable for and measured between the proposed tower and pre-existing towers. The separation distances shall be measured by drawing or following a straight line between the base of the existing tower and the proposed base, pursuant to a site plan, of the proposed tower. The separation distances (listed in linear feet) shall be as shown in Table 2. Table 2. Separation Distances Between Towers Monopole 65 ft. in height or greater Monopole less than 65 ft. in height but greater than 40 ft. in height Monopole less than 40 ft. in height Monopole 65 ft. in height or greater 2,000 feet 1,500 feet 1,000 feet Monopole less than 65 ft. in height but greater than 40 ft. in height 1,500 feet 1,500 feet 1,000 feet Monopole less than 40 ft. in height 1,000 feet 1,000 feet 750 feet C. Buildings or Other Equipment Storage. 1. Antennas Mounted on Structures or Rooftops. The equipment cabinet or structure used in association with antennas shall comply with the following: a. The cabinet or structure shall not contain more than 120 square feet of gross floor area or be more than 8 feet in height and shall be located on the ground. b. Equipment storage buildings or cabinets shall comply with all applicable building codes. 2. Antennas Mounted on Utility Poles, Light Poles, or Towers. The equipment cabinet or structure used in association with antennas shall be located in accordance with the following: a. In residential districts, the equipment cabinet or structure may be located: i. In a required front yard or required street side yard, provided the cabinet structure is no greater than 3.5 feet in height and 20 square feet of gross floor area and the cabinet/structure is located a minimum of 3 feet from all lot lines. The cabinet/structure shall be screened by sight obscuring landscaping which obscures at least ninety-five percent (95%) of the structure at planting Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 8 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. and throughout the duration of the cabinet or structure’s existence with an ultimate height not to exceed forty-two (42) inches. ii. In a required rear yard, provided the cabinet or structure is no greater than 5 feet in height or 120 square feet in gross floor area. The cabinet/structure shall be screened by sight obscuring landscaping which obscures at least ninety-five percent (95%) of the structure at planting and throughout the duration of the cabinet or structure’s existence with an ultimate height of 6 feet. iii. The entry or access side of a cabinet or structure shall be gated by a solid, sight-obscuring gate that is separate from the cabinet or structure. b. In commercial or industrial districts the equipment cabinet or structure shall be no greater than 14 feet in height or 300 square feet in gross floor area. The structure or cabinet shall be screened by sight- obscuring landscaping with an ultimate height of 16 feet and a planted height of at least 6 feet. The entry or access side of a cabinet or structure shall be gated by a solid, sight-obscuring gate that is separate from the cabinet or structure. Such access way shall not face residentially zoned property. 3. Modification of Building Size Requirements. In the case of wireless facilities considered by the Town Council, the requirements of subsections (C)(1) and (C)(2) of this section may be modified by the Town Council to address site specific conditions and requirements. D. Co-location. 1. Any new telecommunications tower shall be designed to accommodate future shared use by other communications providers. Design considerations shall include sufficient area for additional ground equipment, structural design of the tower, and sufficient electrical power available for the load of at least two (2) additional wireless service providers. 2. Good Faith. Applicants and permittees shall cooperate and exercise good faith in co-locating wireless telecommunications facilities on the same support structures or site, if the Town so requests. Good faith shall include sharing technical information to evaluate the feasibility of co-location, and may include negotiations for erection of a replacement support structure to accommodate co-location. A competitive conflict to co- location or financial burden caused by sharing such information normally will not be considered as an excuse to comply with this section. 3. Third Party Technical Review. In the event a dispute arises as to whether a permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the Town may require the applicant to obtain a third-party technical study at the applicant’s expense. The Town may review any information submitted by the applicant and permittee(s) in determining whether good faith has been exercised. 4. Exceptions. No co-location may be required where the shared use would or does result in significant interference in the broadcast or reception capabilities of the existing wireless telecommunications facilities or failure of the existing wireless telecommunications facilities to meet federal standards for emissions. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 9 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 5. Violation; penalty. Failure to comply with co-location requirements when feasible may result in denial of a permit request or revocation of an existing permit. (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Section 17.04 Application Types A. Administrative. The following types of applications are processed administratively by staff: 1. Applications to change or modify an existing administratively approved wireless communication facility that remains in compliance with all chapter requirements. 2. Applications to change or modify an existing wireless communication facility approved through public review; provided, that the modification will not: a. Increase the approved height of the supporting structure by more than ten percent (10%) or 20 feet, whichever is greater; b. Cause the original approved number of antennas to be exceeded by more than fifty percent (50%); c. Increase the original approved square footage of accessory buildings by more than 200 square feet; d. Add new, additional, or larger microwave antenna dishes; e. Expand the footprint of said support structure; or f. Potentially cause significant adverse impacts on the existing support structure or the surrounding area. 3. Applications for co-location of additional antenna for an additional service provider on an existing administratively approved tower that remains in compliance with all chapter requirements. 4. Applications for co-location of additional antenna for an additional service provider on an existing tower approved through public review; provided, that the modification will not: a. Increase the approved height of the supporting structure by more than ten percent (10%) or 20 feet, whichever is greater; b. Cause the original approved number of antennas to be exceeded by more than fifty percent (50%); c. Increase the original approved square footage of accessory buildings by more than 200 square feet; d. Add new, additional, or larger microwave antenna dishes; e. Expand the footprint of said support structure; or f. Potentially cause significant adverse impacts on the existing support structure or the surrounding area. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 10 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 5. Applications for new utility service antenna that comply with the height and setback requirements of the zoning district in which they are located. 6. Applications for mobile or temporary wireless facilities for more than seven (7) consecutive days. 7. Applications for new towers in the following locations: a. Town property with the tower located at least 300 feet from a residential zoning boundary. b. On commercial, industrial, utility, or lodging zoned property and located at least 300 feet from a residential zoning boundary. c. Alternative tower structures when such structures and their accompanying equipment are appropriately blended into the surrounding terrain, are within the height limitations of the underlying zoning district and are at least 300 feet from a residential zoning boundary. B. Public Review. 1. Any new tower or modification to existing towers or antennas that do not meet the requirements in subsection (A) of this section for administrative review shall require review and approval as provided in subsection 17.05(C)(2). Any new tower not meeting the setback or separation requirements in Section 17.03(B). (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Section 17.05 Application Submittal, Review, and Processing A. General. The following provisions shall govern the review of all wireless communication facility applications: 1. Complete Application. Applications for wireless communication facilities shall be filed electronically on the Town’s website by an owner of real property and shall contain the area proposed for the wireless communication facility using the process established by the Director for such applications. All such applications shall include the information required in this section. Applications filed on behalf of the property owner by a third party shall include a statement from the property owner authorizing the submittal of the application. 2. Applications shall include documentation of compliance with items listed in Section 17.03(A) as applicable to the application submitted. 3. Inventory of Existing Sites. Each applicant for a new tower or co-location of new antenna on an existing tower shall provide to the Development Services Director an inventory of its existing towers, antennas, or sites approved for towers or antennas, that are either within the jurisdiction of the Town of Fountain Hills or within one (1) mile of the border thereof, including specific information about the location, height, and design of each tower. Each applicant shall also provide a one (1) year build-out plan for all other wireless communications facilities within the Town. The Development Services Director may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or special use permits under this chapter or with Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 11 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the jurisdiction of Town of Fountain Hills; provided, however, that the Development Services Director is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable. 4. Utility Service Antennas. a. If the antenna complies with the height requirements of the underlying zoning district, the plans for the antenna will be reviewed and approved with the overall site development plans if the site is being developed concurrently. If the antenna is being added to an existing utility site, the plans will be reviewed and processed consistent with the requirements of subsection (C)(2) of this section. b. If the antenna does not comply with the height requirements of the underlying zoning district, the plans for the antenna will be reviewed and processed consistent with the requirements of subsection (C)(3) of this section. 5. Applications Using Existing Towers. a. Dimensioned, to-scale drawings showing the existing and proposed antenna on the tower including the height of the tower and the antennas. b. The number and type of existing and proposed antennas. c. Engineering calculations documenting the structural changes and certifying the tower’s ability to carry the new antennas. d. Dimensioned, to-scale drawings illustrating modification of ground equipment, if any. 6. Applications Using New Towers – Information Required. In addition to any information required for applications for special use permits pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 2.02, applicants for a new wireless facility shall submit the following information: a. A site plan as required in Section 2.04 plus zoning, General Plan classification of the site and all properties within the applicable separation distances set forth in Section 17.03(B)(1), adjacent roadways, proposed means of access, elevation drawings of the proposed tower and any other structures, photo simulations showing the tower in the proposed location from at least four (4) directions, and other information deemed by the Development Services Director to be necessary to assess compliance with this chapter. b. The setback distance between the proposed tower and the nearest residential unit and residentially zoned properties. c. The separation distance from other towers described in the inventory of existing sites submitted pursuant to Section 17.03(B)(2) shall be shown on an updated site plan or map. The applicant shall also identify the type of construction of the existing tower(s) and the owner/operator of the existing tower(s), if known. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 12 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. d. Method of fencing, and finished color and, if applicable, the method of camouflage and illumination. e. A description of compliance with Sections 17.03(A)(3), 17.03(A)(4), 17.03(A)(5), 17.03(A)(7), 17.03(A)(8), 17.03(A)(9), 17.03(A)(10), 17.03(A)(11), 17.03(B), subsection (A)(3) of this section, Sections 17.06(A) and 17.06(B) and all applicable federal, state or local laws. f. A notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the tower will accommodate collocation of additional antennas for future users. g. Identification of the entities providing the backhaul network for the tower(s) described in the application and other cellular sites owned or operated by the applicant in the municipality. h. A description of the suitability of the use of existing towers, other structures or alternative technology not requiring the use of towers or structures to provide the services to be provided through the use of the proposed new tower. i. A description of the feasible alternative location(s) of future towers or antennas within the Town of Fountain Hills based upon existing physical, engineering, technological or geographical limitations in the event the proposed tower is erected. j. A statement of compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) radio frequency (RF) exposure standards. 7. Filing Fee. Payment of a filing fee in an amount established by a schedule adopted by resolution of the Council and filed in the offices of the Town Clerk. No part of the filing fee shall be returnable. B. Shot Clocks and Tolling. To comply with the requirements of Section 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA, the following shot clock periods set forth hereinbelow shall be presumed to be reasonable periods within which the Town shall render determinations upon applications for wireless communication facilities. The Town shall render determinations upon such applications within the periods set forth hereinbelow, unless the applicable shot clock period listed below is tolled, extended by agreement or the processing of the application is delayed due to circumstances beyond the Town’s control. 1. Application Shot Clocks. a. Receipt of Initial Application. Upon receipt of an application, the Development Services Director, or designee, shall review the application for completeness. If the Director determines the application is: (i) incomplete, (ii) missing required application materials, (iii) is the wrong type of application, or (iv) is otherwise defective, then, within ten (10) days for administrative applications and thirty (30) days for public hearing applications of the Town’s receipt of the application, the Director, or their designee, shall notify the applicant of the finding and state what is needed to have a complete application. The notice of incompleteness shall toll the shot clock, which shall not thereafter resume running unless and until the applicant tenders an additional submission to the Director to remedy the issues identified Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 13 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. in the notice of incomplete application. The submission of any responsive materials by the applicant shall automatically cause the shot clock period to resume running. If upon receipt of any additional materials from the applicant, the Director determines that the application is still incomplete and/or defective, then the Director shall, once again notify the applicant within ten (10) days for administrative applications and thirty (30) days for public hearing applications of the applicant having filed its supplemental or corrected materials to the Town and the shot clock shall once again be tolled, and the same procedure provided for hereinabove shall be repeated. b. Application Review. The shot clock for administrative applications which do not involve new towers is ninety (90) days. The shot clock for administrative applications with new towers and public review applications is one hundred fifty (150) days. 2. Shot Clock Tolls, Extensions and Reasonable Delay Periods. Consistent with the letter and intent of Section 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(ii) of the TCA, each of the shot clock periods set forth within subsection (B) of this section shall generally be presumed to be sufficient periods within which the Town shall render decisions upon applications. Notwithstanding the same, the applicable shot clock periods may be tolled, extended by mutual agreement between any applicant and/or its representative and the Town, and the Town shall not be required to render its determination within the shot clock period presumed to be reasonable for each type of application, where the processing of such application is reasonably delayed, as described hereinbelow. a. Tolling of the Applicable Shot Clock Due to Incompleteness and/or Applicant Error. As provided for within subsection (B)(1) of this section, in the event that the Development Services Director deems an application incomplete, the Director shall send a notice of incompleteness to the applicant to notify the applicant that its application is incomplete and/or contains material errors, and shall reasonably identify the missing information and/or documents and/or the error(s) in the application. If the Director sends a notice of incompleteness as described hereinabove, the applicable shot clock shall automatically be tolled, meaning that the applicable shot clock period within which the Town is required to render a final decision upon the application shall immediately cease running, and shall not resume running, unless and until the Town receives a responsive submission from the applicant. If and when the applicant thereafter submits additional information in an effort to complete its application, or cure any identified defect(s), then the shot clock shall automatically resume running, but shall not be deemed to start running anew. The applicable shot clock period shall, once again, be tolled if the Director thereafter provides a second notice that the application is still incomplete or defective, despite any additional submissions which have been received by the Town, from the applicant, up to that point. b. Shot Clock Extension by Mutual Agreement. The Town shall be free to extend any applicable shot clock period by mutual agreement with any respective applicant. This discretion on the part of the Town shall include the Town’s authority to request, at any time, and for any period of time the Town may deem Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 14 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. reasonable or appropriate under the circumstances, consent from a respective applicant to extend the applicable shot clock period to enable the Town, the applicant, or any relevant third party, to complete any type of undertaking or task related to the review, analysis, processing, and determination of the particular application, which is then pending before the Town, to the extent that any such undertaking, task, or review is consistent with, or reasonably related to, compliance with any federal, state, or local law and/or the requirements of any provision of the Town Code, including but not limited to this chapter. In response to any request by the Town, the applicant, by its principal, agent, attorney, site acquisition agent, or other authorized representative, can consent to any extension of any applicable shot clock by affirmatively indicating its consent either in writing or by affirmatively indicating its consent on the record at any public hearing or public meeting. The Town shall be permitted to reasonably rely upon a representative of the applicant indicating that they are authorized to grant such consent on behalf of the respective applicant, on whose behalf they have been addressing the Town within the review process. c. Reasonable Delay Extensions of Shot Clock Periods. The Town recognizes that there may be situations wherein, due to circumstances beyond the control of the Town and/or the Town Council, the review and issuance of a final decision upon an application for a wireless communication facility cannot reasonably be completed within the application shot clock periods delineated within subsection (B) of this section. If, despite the exercise of due diligence by the Town, the determination regarding a specific application cannot reasonably be completed within the applicable shot clock period, the Town shall be permitted to continue and complete its review and issue its determination at a date beyond the expiration of the applicable period, if the delay of such final decision is due to circumstances including, but not limited to, those enumerated hereinbelow, each of which shall serve as a reasonable basis for a reasonable delay of the applicable shot clock period. i. In the event that the rendering of a final decision upon an application under this chapter is delayed due to natural and/or unnatural events and/or forces which are not within the control of the Town, such as the unavoidable delays experienced in government processes due to the COVID 19 pandemic, and/or mandatory compliance with any related federal or state government orders issued in relation thereto, such delays shall constitute reasonable delays which shall be recognized as acceptable grounds for extending the period for review and the rendering of final determinations beyond the period allotted under the applicable shot clock. ii. In the event that applicant tenders eleventh-hour submissions to the Town in the form of (a) expert reports, (b) expert materials, and/or (c) materials which require a significant period for review due either to their complexity or the sheer volume of materials which an applicant has chosen to provide to the Town at such late point in the proceedings, the Town shall be afforded a reasonable time to review such late-submitted materials. If reasonably necessary, the Town shall be permitted to retain the services of an expert consultant to review any late-submitted expert reports which were provided to the Town, even if such review or services extend beyond the applicable shot clock period, so long as the Town completes such review and retains and secures such expert services within a reasonable period of time thereafter Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 15 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. and otherwise acts with reasonable diligence in completing its review and rendering its final decision. C. Review and Processing of Applications. 1. Conformity to the following shall be considered in review of all applications: a. The application is consistent with the objectives of this chapter. b. The height of the proposed tower. c. The adequacy of the proposed site, considering such factors as the sufficiency of the size of the site to comply with the established criteria, the configuration of the site, and the extent to which the site is formed by logical boundaries (e.g., topography, natural features, streets, relationship of adjacent uses, etc.) that provide for the ability to comply with the provisions of this chapter. d. The extent to which the proposal responds to the impact of the proposed development on adjacent land uses, especially in terms of visual impact. e. The extent to which the proposed telecommunications facility is camouflaged (i.e., use of stealth technology). f. The extent to which the proposed facility is integrated with existing structures (i.e., buildings, signs, utility poles, etc.) with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness. g. An applicant’s compliance with all town requirements with respect to previous applications. 2. Review of Administrative Applications. a. Administrative applications will be reviewed by staff using the Town’s standard building permit review processes. b. Applications for new towers shall provide staff with the same information as required in subsection (C)(3) of this section for public review applications. c. Applications for mobile or temporary wireless facilities which remain in place for more than seven (7) consecutive days must submit a request for a temporary use permit as provided in Section 2.03. 3. Review and Processing of Public Review Applications. a. Applications which require public review and approval on private property will be processed as special use permits and follow the requirements listed in Section 2.02 for special use permits. Applications on Town owned property will not require a special use permit but will follow the same requirements for notice for review by the Town Council. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 16 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. b. In addition to the factors listed in subsection (C)(1) of this section for review of applications, public review applications will also be subject to the standards for consideration of special use permit applications pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 2.02 of this chapter. c. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers, Other Structures, or Alternative Technology. No new tower shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Town Council that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology that does not require the use of towers or structures can accommodate the applicant’s proposed antenna. An applicant shall submit information requested by the Town Council related to the availability of suitable existing towers, other structures or alternative technology. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology can accommodate the applicant’s proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: i. No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area, which meet applicant’s engineering requirements. ii. Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant’s engineering requirements. iii. Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant’s proposed antenna and related equipment. iv. The applicant’s proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant’s proposed antenna. v. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. vi. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable. vii. The applicant demonstrates that an alternative technology that does not require the use of towers or structures, such as a cable micro cell network using multiple low-powered transmitters/ receivers attached to a wire line system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology unsuitable. viii. If the applicant asserts a claim that a proposed facility is necessary to remedy one (1) or more existing significant gaps in an identified wireless carrier’s personal wireless services, the Council may require the applicant to provide drive-test generated coverage maps, as opposed to computer- generated coverage maps, for each frequency at which the carrier provides personal wireless services, to show signal strengths in bins of three (3) DBM each, to enable the Council to assess the existence of such significant gaps accurately, and/or whether the carrier possesses adequate coverage within the geographic area which is the subject of the respective application. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 17 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 4. In granting a permit, the Town may impose conditions to the extent such conditions are necessary to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed tower on adjoining properties. (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Section 17.06 Maintenance and Operation A. Removal of Abandoned Antennas and Towers. Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of ninety (90) days shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such antenna or tower shall remove the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice from the Town of Fountain Hills notifying the owner of such abandonment. Failure to remove an abandoned antenna or tower within said ninety (90) day period shall be grounds to remove the tower or antenna at the owner’s expense. If there are two (2) or more users of a single tower, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the tower for the prescribed period. B. State or Federal Requirements. 1. All towers must meet or exceed current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, and any other agency of the state or federal government with the authority to regulate towers and antennas. If such standards and regulations are changed, then the owners of the towers and antennas governed by this chapter shall bring such towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations within six (6) months of the effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a different compliance schedule is mandated by the controlling state or federal agency. Failure to bring towers and antennas into compliance with such revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for the removal of the tower or antenna at the owner’s expense. 2. To ensure continuing compliance with such limits by all owners and/or operators of wireless communication facilities within the Town, all owners, and operators of wireless communication facilities shall submit reports as required by this section. As set forth hereinbelow, the Town may additionally require, at the owner and/or operator’s expense, independent verification of the results of any analysis set forth within any reports submitted to the Town by the owner and/or operator. a. Certification of Compliance with Applicable RF Radiation Limits. Within forty-five (45) days of initial operation or a substantial modification of a wireless communication facility, the owner and/or operator of each telecommunications antenna shall submit to the Development Services Director a written certification by a licensed professional engineer, sworn to under penalties of perjury, that the facility’s radio frequency emissions comply with the limits codified within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1), Table 1 Sections (i) and (ii), as made applicable pursuant to 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(3). The engineer shall also measure the emissions of the approved wireless facility, including the cumulative impact from other nearby wireless facilities, and determine if such emissions are within the limits described hereinabove. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 18 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. A report of these measurements and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the FCC’s maximum permissible exposure (MPE) limits shall be submitted to the Development Services Director. If the report shows that the facility does not comply with applicable limits, then the owner and/or operator shall cease operation of the facility until the facility is brought into compliance with such limits. Proof of compliance shall be a certification provided by the engineer who prepared the original report. The Town may require, at the applicant’s expense, independent verification of the results of the analysis. b. Random RF Radiofrequency Testing. At the operator’s expense, the Town may retain an engineer to conduct random unannounced RF radiation testing of such wireless facilities to ensure the facility’s compliance with the limits codified within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq. The Town may cause such random testing to be conducted as often as the Town may deem appropriate. However, the Town may not require the owner and/or operator to pay for more than one (1) test per facility per calendar year unless such testing reveals that one (1) or more of the owner and/or operator’s facilities are exceeding the limits codified within 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., in which case the Town shall be permitted to demand that the wireless facility be brought into compliance with such limits, and to conduct additional tests to determine if, and when, the owner and/or operator thereafter brings the respective wireless facility and/or facilities into compliance. 3. Actions for Noncompliance. If the Town at any time finds that there is good cause to believe that a wireless communication facility and/or one (1) or more of its antennas are emitting RF radiation at levels in excess of the legal limits permitted under 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., then a hearing shall be scheduled before the Town’s Zoning Administrator at which the owner and/or operator of such facility shall be required to show cause why any and all permits and/or approvals issued by the Town for such facility and/or facilities should not be revoked, and a fine should not be assessed against such owner and/or operator. The owner and/or operator shall be afforded not less than two (2) weeks’ written notice of the hearing. At such hearing, the burden shall be on the Town to show that, by a preponderance of the evidence, the facilities emissions exceeded the permissible limits under 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq. In the event that the Town establishes same, the owner and/or operator shall then be required to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that a malfunction of equipment caused their failure to comply with the applicable limits through no fault on the part of the owner/operator. If the owner and/or operator fails to establish same, the Town shall have the power to revoke any permit, building permit, and/or any other form of approval(s) which the Town Council or any other representative of the Town may have then issued to the owner and/or operator, for the respective facility. The Zoning Administrator may revoke an administrative approval. The decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Town Manager. If the tower or antenna was approved by the Town Council, revocation will be considered by the Town Council in the same manner as the original approval. In addition, the Town may issue a civil citation for noncompliance as provided in Section 1-8-3 of the Town Code. Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 19 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. In the event that an owner or operator of one (1) or more wireless communication facility is found to violate subsection (B)(1) of this section three (3) or more times within any five (5) year period, then in addition to revoking any zoning approvals for the facilities which were violating the limits codified in 47 CFR §1.1310(e)(1) et seq., the Town Council shall render a determination within which it shall deem the owner/operator prohibited from filing any applications for any new wireless personal services facilities within the Town for a period of five (5) years. C. Building Codes; Safety Standards. To ensure the structural integrity of towers, the owner of a tower shall ensure that it is maintained in compliance with standards contained in applicable state or local building codes and the applicable standards for towers that are published by the Electronic Industries Association, as amended from time to time. If, upon inspection, the Town of Fountain Hills concludes that a tower fails to comply with such codes and standards and constitutes a danger to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the owner shall have thirty (30) days to bring such tower into compliance with such standards. Failure to bring such tower into compliance within said thirty (30) days shall constitute grounds for the removal of the tower or antenna at the owner’s expense. D. Noise. Wireless facilities and all related equipment must comply with all noise regulations and shall not exceed such regulations, either individually or collectively. Backup generators shall only be operated during power outages and/or for testing and maintenance purposes between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Section 17.07 Nonconforming Uses A. Not Expansion of Nonconforming Use. Towers that are constructed, and antennas that are installed, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter shall not be deemed to constitute the expansion of a nonconforming use or structure. B. Pre-existing Towers. Pre-existing towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. Routine maintenance (including replacement with a new tower of like construction and height) shall be permitted on such pre-existing towers. New construction other than routine maintenance on a pre-existing tower shall comply with the requirements of this chapter. C. Rebuilding Damaged or Destroyed Nonconforming Towers or Antennas. Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, bona fide nonconforming towers or antennas that are damaged or destroyed may be rebuilt without having to first obtain a special use permit and without having to meet the separation requirements specified in Section 17.03. The type, height, and location of the tower on site shall be of the same type and intensity as the original facility approval; provided, however, that any destroyed lattice or guyed tower shall be replaced with a monopole structure only. Building permits to rebuild the facility shall comply with the then applicable building codes and shall be obtained within ninety (90) days from the date the facility is damaged or destroyed. If no permit is obtained or if said permit expires, the tower or antenna shall be deemed abandoned as specified in Section 17.06(A). (24-08, Amended, 09/04/2024, Deleted and replaced) Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 20 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Disclaimer: The town clerk’s office has the official version of the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance. Users should contact the town clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. Town Website: www.fh.az.gov Hosted by General Code. Section 17.08 Reserved Section 17.09 Reserved Section 17.10 Reserved Section 17.11 Reserved Ch. 17 Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 21 of 21 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Planning and Zoning Commission July 8, 2024 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 8, 2024 1. CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Vice Chairperson Watts called the Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on July 8, 2024, to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence. 2. ROLLCALL Commissioners Present: Chairperson Peter Gray (telephonically); Vice Chairperson Rick Watts; Commissioner Clayton Corey; Commissioner Patrick Dapaah; Commissioner Dan Kovacevic, Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum (telephonically) Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. 3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC None 4. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning June 10, 2024. MOVED BY Commissioner Corey to approve the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning June 10, 2024 SECONDED BY Commissioner Dapaah. Vote: 6-0, Commissioner Sveum abstained. 5. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance #24-08 amending Chapter 17, Wireless Telecommunication Towers and Antenna. The following residents addressed the Commission: Lori Troller 6. MOVED BY Chair Gray to forward a recommendation of no recommendation to the Town Council regarding Ordinance #24-08 amending Chapter 17, Wireless Telecommunication Towers and Antenna. SECONDED BY Commissioner Dapaah. Vote:7-0 Unanimously Commissioner Corey Aye Commissioner Dapaah Aye Commissioner Kovacevic Aye Commissioner Schlossberg Aye Commissioner Sveum Aye Vice Chair Watts Aye Chair Gray Aye Planning and Zoning Commission July 8, 2024 2 of 2 7. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff. Vice Chair Watts mentioned bicycles and pedestrians. 8. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director. 9. REPORT from Development Services Director. Mr. Wesley stated that the August meeting will include two Special Use Permits and one text amendment. 10. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Watts adjourned the Regular meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on July 8, 2024 at 8:11 p.m. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Chairperson Peter Gray ATTESTED AND PREPARED BY: Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting held by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Fountain Hills in the Town Hall Council Chambers on July 8, 2024. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this day of July 8, 2024 Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 54 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes July 8, 2024 Transcription Provided By: eScribers, LLC * * * * * Transcription is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. * * * * * TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: Why don't we call this July 8th, 2024, Planning and Zoning meeting to order? And please stand and we'll do the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. ALL: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. Paula, can I get a rollcall, please? WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Here. WESLEY: Vice Chair Watts? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Here. WOODWARD: Chairman Gray? CHAIR GRAY: Here. WOODWARD: Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And with that, I had this splendid introduction for Phil, but seeing as he's not here. Sorry, Phil, we'll wait till next time. But nice to meet you. SVEUM: Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Paula, do we have any cards for call to the public? WOODWARD: No, Chair (sic). VICE CHAIR WATTS: No speakers. Thank you. Then, let's move on to item number 4, consideration of the minutes. Can I have a motion for approving the minutes? Don't everybody speak up at once. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 54 COREY: I'll motion to approve minutes. DAPAAH: I'll second that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Sounds good. Thank you. And do we have to do a rollcall on the minutes or just -- WOODWARD: No, you could do "all in favor". VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- consensus? Right. We're all in favor. Consensus. KOVACEVIC: Aye. COREY: Aye. DAPAAH: Aye. SCHLOSSBERG: Aye. WOODWARD: I didn't hear Phil or Chair Gray regarding the meeting minutes. CHAIR GRAY: Aye, Paula. WOODWARD: Okay. SVEUM: I'll abstain. WOODWARD: Okay. Six-zero. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. So let's go to item number 5: consideration and possible action regarding ordinance 24-08, amending chapter 17 wireless telecommunication towers and antenna. All yours, John. WESLEY: Thank you, Chair. Commissioners, thank you for being here on a hot evening. Just waiting for this PowerPoint to start here. Let's host it here. Here we go. Yes, it is. Feels good. Okay. So as stated, we're here this evening to continue our discussion of proposed changes to Chapter 17 of the Zoning Ordinance dealing with wireless telecommunication facilities. Just a little background here just to keep the record going. We began discussion of this topic back in early 2022 when we received some comments and concerns regarding cell towers. Some of the specific concerns expressed were regarding concerns about them catching fire, providing hierarchy of the site, the spacing, and requiring drive-tests to TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 54 document a need, a need for pollution emission insurance, having a clear administrative process and shot clocks, and concern that we didn't really proper staff to be able to handle this topic. And both small cell and regular cell towers were part of the discussion. As we continued moving forward from there, council getting involved and folks showing up there and expressing some concerns, focus was more on 5G and the number of 5G towers that could come into town and possible health impacts from 5G. And then also, by May of 2023 we're hearing about concerns of undergrounding of utilities. From the concerns being expressed the town council hired Andrew Campanelli to draft an ordinance. We received that ordinance last year and it was reviewed by staff and the council had some discussions with Mr. Campanelli on the ordinance. Just a few things from that ordinance. It allowed colocation of small cell wireless facilities in the right-of-way by right, just get a building permit for those. It was silent, did say anything about how we would regular small cell in the right-of-way that required a new pole. Did not address broadband or separate out data services in any way. It did not address or require underground services. And --- although NEPA requirements were with regard to initial application, review, and approval. Following the review with council, council directed staff to continue working on an ordinance based on the things that we had learned. And so that's where we've been since then, began in January meeting this year, seeking commission and public input on what changes were needed to the codes so we know what to focus on. And most of the comments that we'd received related back to broadband service. We continued review in March and April, and you held a public hearing at your May meeting of a draft ordinance. Over the course of these various meetings, we have heard and understand that there is concerns about our small cell in the right-of-way regulations and a desire to see an increase in updates to that. That's not part of this project right now, it is something that council could direct us to do at some point in the future. And we have heard concerns about the need to make a better distinction between voice and broadband services; TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 54 that's not in our current ordinance. As we have looked at other ordinances, looked at what the consultant provided, we have not really found any direction on how we can do that. In order to do that, if that is a desire of council, we really would need to hire a consultant to bring in and focus on that type of regulation. We've also heard the concern about undergrounding broadband service, certainly that is a better way to provide the service, if it could be done. But that's really a separate topic in terms of how one would go about, how the town would initiate that and manage that type of system. So that's, again, that's really not a part of what's discussed this evening. But again, it's understood that it's a topic of interest. The goals we have had are to balance needs for quality of service with public safety, limiting towers in or near residential, establishing that clear and manageable review process, providing for the maintenance and ongoing compliance, aesthetics, and addressing the concerns that we've heard. So with that bit of a background, we can get into, then, the ordinance that's evolved from the discussions that we've had. And most of this is going to be things we've talked about the last few months. There are a few things that I have heard over the last couple of meetings that I've put into the report, and we'll discuss this evening about some policy modifications but a lot of it, again, is the same thing that we've been reviewing. So this is the outline. The current ordinance on the left, the proposed outline on the right. So Section 17.01 sets forth the purpose, intent, and applicability with subsection A being the purpose. Now there was some mention at one of the previous meetings that some of the statements in there could maybe be a little stronger. And so I took a stab at doing four of those. Instead of saying "encourage", promote; instead of "minimize", limit; instead of "encourage", require in a couple of statements. Any thoughts, feelings on those? Any others that -- amendments that could be made there? Comments? Questions? VICE CHAIR WATTS: John, I'm personally glad to see changing "encourage" to "require". I think that strengthens it a lot. So I appreciate that. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 54 WESLEY: Okay. Moving on to B, about the intent. It includes a four-part balancing test in there. There was some comments and questions about that test and how it is used. It's really a test of the ordinance itself. Letting anybody in the industry that's looking at this know what went in to drafting the ordinance and what we're trying to do and accomplish with the ordinance. And so the four-part test really applies to looking at the ordinance itself and is it doing the things it says: enabling the services, minimizing the towers, minimizing impacts, and complying with the TCA. And we feel it does those things. And the next part of 17.01 is applicability. The first part to that, just moving from another portion of the code with current requirements. There are a couple of additional sections that's been in there since we began. One was to -- because of the separation of the different elements of our wireless communication ordinance having the small cellular right-of-way in a different location, we added that statement in here, so anybody looking in this ordinance would know where to look for the small cell right-of- way. And then we've also had some questions over time about what are often called COWs, cells on wheels. When we have special events or we have outages in some places, or they're changing out a tower, then you bring in the temporary on-wheels tower and you have your regulations for those. So we've added some of that in here. The first one being that if it's for seven days or less, you basically can do. Things that are longer than that would require any further review. From there we move into Section 17.02, definition section. We propose to add three additional definitions to what is in the current ordinance. One is for utility service antennas. These are those little antennas you'll see on utility boxes around some places. There's one out here off of La Montana by the bus stop. Those types of things have been cropping up lately as the utilities put in communication devices between different boxes, just put switches, and turn it on and off valves and those types of things. And so we didn't really have those covered in any way in the ordinance. So we've added that language in here and it starts with this definition. And then just basic definition of what we mean by wireless communication and wireless TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 54 facility. Those weren't in the current ordinance. Going on from there, we move into Section 17.03, which is the general requirements section. And so this provides this kind of overall list of the types of things that we typically need to see and review with regard to different types of cell tower applications. They're not all required in every case but gives an overall view of what we're looking for. And so again, here's a list, not comprehensive but some of the main things that are covered in this particular section. In the current ordinance we did add some more details with regard to aesthetics than what's in the current ordinance, to try to minimize those adverse impacts on the views that might happen with cell towers. And again a section on utility service antennas because that's a new piece. KOVACEVIC: Do you want comments now or you want them later -- WESLEY: Now, is fine with me if it's okay with the chairman. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Any time you're ready. KOVACEVIC: So in the -- we were given model ordinances, for lack of a better term. A number of the other ordinances required monopole towers and prohibited lattice towers, and also required stealth technology. And I don't see where we've made that restriction. Is that intentional or is that -- and what's -- if not, why not? WESLEY: Vice Chair, Commissioner Kovacevic, so we haven't taken the step of monopoles. I think we could. I think that's what we're most likely going to see anyway. But if we could look at a place to add the monopoles, most of the aesthetic design criteria in here are getting towards making it stealth by hiding it, disguising it. Again, maybe, that could be a little bit stronger, but that's the intent of a lot of the aesthetic standards, they just don't use the word "stealth" anywhere. VICE CHAIR WATTS: You have question, Patrick? DAPAAH: John, I noticed this letter that you sent to us today addressed a lot in regards to Section 17.03. What are your thoughts on some of these federal requirements that is mentioned here? WESLEY: Vice Chair, Commissioner Dapaah, I'll make a brief comment now. I put a slide TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 54 at the end to kind of cover it a little bit more comprehensively. But with regard to this particular piece, all the standards we pulled in here were from the consultant's draft that they sent us. And again, that's a professional in the field who's worked these kind of ordinances elsewhere, so we feel pretty confident that they ought to be appropriate and ought to be within the law. It's something, given this comment, we will go back and review with our attorney just to make sure. But I think we're pretty comfortable. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And John, a couple of questions -- and a couple may go back a little bit. But can you define "stealth"? What does that mean? I mean camouflage is one thing. Impersonating a cactus is another. What is "stealth"? WESLEY: If you're asking me? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes. WESLEY: Vice Chair, stealth and camouflage are the same things. You're trying to hide it so it's not as obvious that it's there. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Because I think that the -- I'm not sure if it's the Vulcans or the Romulans had the stealth technology. I didn't know if we were incorporating that or not. Another one is, how many providers can be on every tower? And along those lines, is the output accretive? Do we look at it from that perspective or do we look at it in a singularity? WESLEY: So Chairman, with regard to the first question, I think it would come down to the design of the pole and what it was designed to hold in terms of the number of providers that can go on there. Technology's also evolved a little bit and so it may change. Mostly, we're seeing antennas get smaller and more compact but not always. Sometimes they are bigger. And so again, those things may affect the ultimate number of providers that can go on a pole. And with regard to your second question, which I couldn't repeat because I can't exactly remember how you said it, but again, it gets into a level of technology that I probably can't really answer. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Well, I think it's something to consider because if everything has -- if it's linear and something has an output of 50, whatever that might be -- 50 decibels, 85 decibels, but if you have four and the accumulation is based on the 85 -- 340 is that TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 54 something that we should manage to make sure that the accretive output isn't past what the FCC regulations are? WESLEY: And again, I really can't answer that question. The tests that are done of the RF radiation from the antennas, I don't know if that gets into cumulative or if it is something that just measures the individual outputs. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The testing devices that I've looked at in kind of preparation for this, look at the output in total. But I don't know that everyone has a different frequency. So I'm not positive but I think it's something we ought to look into to make sure. And my last question is, there's an electrical meter on this site. Do you know what the ampacity of that electrical meter is? Is it -- because that would have some limiting effect on the number of providers as well, because the amount of equipment. WESLEY: Chairman, no, I don't. I think that would be -- again, as I think through the things I've seen in ordinances and what's in our ordinance, the emphasis has always been on the tower itself and what it can hold and the engineering structure there. The equipment base at the bottom has been less of a concern and gets updated and changed around as needed to handle the towers that are on the pole. And so I think they make that kind of change as needed based on the providers on the tower. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I still think that we have some responsibility to look at the size of the disconnect. If it's going to be a 100 amp disconnect, 200 amp, 400 amp -- some size. Because the primary conductors are going to have to be installed, initially, by the utility and the conduit sizes would have to be sized appropriately for the conductors. So we wouldn't want to be tearing up streets again particularly if we're going to go eventually look at streets. So I know that's something. I know we've talked about it in the building codes, about how large they are, what their requirements are, phasing and that sort of thing. So I think we should at least address that and give some consideration. WESLEY: So just to make sure I understand, Vice Chair, that if we look at some of the places in the code where we talk about the colocation, in addition to the engineering of the tower, if we put in a requirement that they provide service upfront capable for the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 54 multiple carriers so that doesn't require that rework? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes. WESLEY: Is that what you're suggesting? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes. If that mean, originally we put in a 100 amp disconnect and that is sufficient to support four colocated providers, we wouldn't want to put eight on there and then have to go back and reinvent the wheel for that to particular feature. WESLEY: Or on the other hand, if we didn't pay attention to that upfront, and so we let them put in 50 amp to start with and it can't support any additional providers, and they say, oops, sorry; we can't colocate because we didn't put in enough service to start with. We don't want to limit ourselves in that way either. So make sure they put in sufficient -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: That's correct. WESLEY: -- in the beginning, to cover two or three or whatever. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Correct. Thank you. WESLEY: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. WESLEY: You ready to go on? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Just what I saw in the ordinance is what they're going to do with electrical supply except to say it had to be underground. But what it did say, a new pole would have to be able to handle at least three colocated facilities. WESLEY: Okay. So moving on then with some of the general requirements, again, had some discussions about this along the way. We've added some language, more than what's in the current code with regard to at the time of submission, information about the noise, and providing the acoustical information. And with an initial application we can require noise baffling. And then also, the engineering certifications. And then move to this section of the code. Setbacks. Section 17.03B has information about setbacks of towers to different land uses and also separations between towers. At the last -- so in the current code the most restrictive is 200 feet from habitated residential use, single family to a tower, or I think, TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 54 it's 300 percent of the height of the tower. And then from there they kind of shrink down to not being a specific separation requirement from industrial. There was a comment at the last meeting in May that we ought to increase those numbers, and what I got from reviewing it was 500 feet should be the standard for all residential. And then also to increase the separation between towers. I haven't changed anything in the ordinance yet at this point. I felt it needed some further discussion because it was just one comment. But did take a look at what those numbers might mean. And kind of hard to read all that map but basically the areas in blue are areas that are at least 500 feet away from any residential use of any kind. With one there, and that was -- I don't think that's going to work. Let me try the mouse. This piece right there shouldn't be on here because that's within 500 feet of a residential use. And then from there, if we look at where there are existing towers and apply the separation requirements, it gives us just a few locations where a new tower could go without required council review. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The -- KOVACEVIC: The old -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Go ahead. KOVACEVIC: The old ordinance was 300 feet? WESLEY: 200 feet or 300 percent of the height of the tower. And that was just for single-family residential. If it's multifamily or if it's zoned residential but not built yet, just platted, those numbers start to reduce a little bit. That type of thing. KOVACEVIC: What's the -- why would we -- if it's vacant, unplatted but zoned residential, why would we reduce the setback if somebody's going to live there some day? WESLEY: Again, I didn't draft the ordinance, but I assume the idea was if the tower's going there first and then you're platting it, you'll plat it with that in mind and adjust your plat or people then that are buying the lots will know that the tower's there and will make that decision, rather than the other way around if the home has been there TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 54 first. KOVACEVIC: That's all. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. Commissioner Corey? COREY: John, so this map is with the 500 feet? WESLEY: Right. COREY: Did you see a map that was with the 300? Did it change that much? WESLEY: Vice Chair, Commissioner, I knew someone would ask me that question. But no, we didn't. Because the current setup is -- it has different numbers based on whether it's zoned and platted or it's vacant and there's just too many iterations of that to try and put that one together to show all the variations. So we just did this to show the impact of what 500 feet would be. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And John, I'd suggest including the word, "minimum of 500". I wouldn't want it to be any less and I don't think there should be much in the way of discretion to make it less. So "minimum" should be preceding 500. And the other question is -- that goes back to the noise. I'm not really sure how much noise these make but wouldn't it be prudent to say that they should all have acoustical enclosures? WESLEY: Well, all have the screen walls around them. That's the block walls around them as a minimum. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I'm thinking more of the -- if you walk by a genset or any type of electronic devices, there's a buzzing that goes on. And I'd like to see that contained as well. So an acoustical enclosure, I would recommend adding that in as a requirement. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: I'd also like to add -- the old ordinance had a 50 decibel limit at the property line and I just -- I'm in favor of that. I think that the noise section here is just -- it's too squishy. It can mean whatever anybody wants it to mean. WESLEY: It looks like I got two of the same here by mistake. And again, Commissioners we can make that kind of change if you'd like. The last time that the town reviewed and updated our noise ordinance with input from our town prosecutor, he strongly advised against using decibels because they're just so difficult to enforce ultimately. And so TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 54 we've taken them out everywhere else in the code but if you'd like to put it back we can certainly add that in here. So I want to go to this table then, for just a moment if we could, and see what consensus -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Well, before we move off of decibels I would like to affirm there's a consistency with this type of decibel output noise. There's an inconsistency with everything else that we've tried to measure as decibels, and I still have -- I believe the argument is still valid, that people can be loud, there can be parties going on and so on, so I kind of understand where it's difficult to measure based on decibels. But in this particular case, because of the consistency of the equipment's operation, the decibel output is going to be consistent and not inconsistent. So I think we should have it in there. WESLEY: Okay. Is that consensus? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. COREY: I think so. But if I could just ask a question, just for my clarification? Where are we hearing this noise? What kind of tower or box would I have walked past sometime in walking around Fountain Hills? Like, where am I hearing this? Where does the noise come from? VICE CHAIR WATTS: It comes from the electronic devices that -- I mean, there's transformers, there's rectification circuits, there's all sorts of things that can generate noise and if you don't at least limit the amount of noise, to Commissioner Kovacevic's point, which is 50 decibels, then you could crank up that power and make it more annoying. Because there are certain times when a transformer, for instance, buzzes and it's extremely annoying, even in a mechanical room -- as Commissioner Dapaah can tell you. You walk by and you may not hear it at certain times, but you can at other times when there's a load on that particular transformer, for instance. COREY: So are we like more proactive about this? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes, absolutely. COREY: Versus there was -- it wasn't complaint-driven or something that somebody TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 54 said, we've heard a loud one around town. VICE CHAIR WATTS: It's experience-driven. I've -- COREY: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- I can attest to it. I've got Patrick's head going like this, says yes. Everybody knows there is noise generated by electrical devices, including transformers. So that 50 decibels at the property line makes a lot of sense. And hence the acoustical enclosure as well. WESLEY: Chair, thinking about what you just said in terms of at the property line, and I guess we would want to be clear is that at the property line or is that outside the enclosure screen wall? How far away do we really want to be? Because sometimes -- and I guess it really -- maybe it should be at the property line because you can't hear if it's loud on the property, then I mean it's not an issue. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The more restrictive one would be outside the enclosure. So if we have an acoustical enclosure that's going to dampen it somewhat. But even acoustical enclosures are designed for a certain decibel containment. So I would say if we were outside the immediate enclosure, that's where I would like to see it. That would be as quiet as you can get it. WESLEY: Okay. Is that -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay? WESLEY: Going down into the table on the setbacks. So again, Vice Chair, what I heard, at least for these top few, maybe it's for all the residential ones, you'd like to see all those be at least 500 feet? VICE CHAIR WATTS: How does this table compare to the one that I just saw that had 1,500 feet? WESLEY: No, this is separation between towers. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. So go back -- thank you. Residences, right. Yes, this is the one I'd like to see a minimum of 500 feet. WESLEY: This works a little bit backwards on itself. But, basically, it says up here in 2, that -- I think it's up here in 1. That in the table of the setbacks you have to follow, TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 54 council may reduce those. Which basically says that that kicks you into the other review in order to have something that's less than 500 feet away. COREY: So it's back -- I'm sorry. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Go ahead, Commissioner Corey. COREY: I'm sorry. Thank you. So what you're saying here is, because it's less, it's 100 feet, that gives more flexibility to have that meeting with the residents? WESLEY: So I'm saying it's -- the way it's worded currently, because it can kick it to council, by putting the 500 feet in here, you're not saying you'll never get one within 500 feet of a residence. It just means that in order to do it within 500 feet of any residentially zoned property or used property, it would have to go to council for review. COREY: Whereas right now it's within 100 feet? WESLEY: Right now it's 300 feet. Anything closer than 300 feet has to go to council. COREY: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: That's exactly what I'm looking for. To maximize the distance and I don't think there's any way to prohibit anybody who doesn't like the 500 feet to go and petition council for a variance. I think a variance is a natural thing to do. But I think that the councilmembers need to understand the implication of making it any closer than 500 feet or allowing it any closer. So variances should be nonexistent as far as I'm concerned. WESLEY: Using that term "variance" to me that means it's going to the board of adjustment. So I'm not sure you mean variance. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Well, you said town council and I interpret that as variance, so my bad. I'd go to council and hope that they don't approve it. WESLEY: So public review process for anything under 500 feet. And so basically -- well, let me ask this other question then. In terms of the nonresidentially zoned piece is it 500 feet there also or is that none, like it has been? If we're trying to encourage them to go in nonresidentially zoned property, it can't be 500 feet from residential and 500 feet away from everything else, then everything is going to require a special use permit then why doesn't it just say that upfront? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: That was my -- WESLEY: And that's fine if that's what the council -- KOVACEVIC: -- that was my -- WESLEY: -- if that's what you want to do. KOVACEVIC: -- takeaway from this. In all eight of the model ordinances there was a public process. They weren't all necessarily through planning commission and town council from the various municipalities. But there were only even one or two that just said okay, you've got to notify everybody within 750 feet of the tower or everybody within 1,000 feet of the tower -- all the residents. But in six of the eight, it was conditional use permits, special use permits, it was -- I would say in probably four of the eight, it was planning commission/town council to get approval. And so I would -- I am coming down on the side of everything's a special use permit. CHAIR GRAY: Chair, I concur with Commissioner Kovacevic. VICE CHAIR WATTS: What's that do to us, John, as far as everything we've got outlined already? I mean, if these are the guidelines, but it still requires a special use permit? WESLEY: So the way it's drafted today -- and I'll stay here. That is shown really starting here in terms of the types of applications. So today we have administratives, which are mostly modifications to existing towers, but it does allow for new towers if they meet the separation requirements. But if we're getting rid of any separation requirements for new towers, so that piece would go away. Or it's at least going to change to 500 feet it seems like. And then -- so the public review would be for all new towers and any modifications to existing towers that exceed the limits that are described in the section on the administrative review. VICE CHAIR WATTS: So we've eliminated all of the administrative review process, if we eliminate the table for 500 feet? WESLEY: For new towers. VICE CHAIR WATTS: For new towers, correct. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 54 WESLEY: Right. KOVACEVIC: But are we? I mean, the -- we still have to give the tower builder a set of design criteria. And that is part of the design criteria. You have to be 500 feet from the property line if that's where we're coming down on this. I don't think that the table goes away. I think the table has to be in there and just -- that's part of what the builder has to hit, or the permit he has to hit. WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner, just to make sure I'm clear on that. So that sounds like you're saying that if you are less than 500 feet away from any residential use of any kind, you just can't go in. And then if you're beyond that, then you can apply for a special use permit. Is that what you are suggesting? KOVACEVIC: No. I'm not saying you can't go in, but if you come in at less than 500 feet, your application is less likely to be approved. You're won't -- you're swimming upstream in a big way. I mean, I guess, who knows if we're -- I mean, if we need the tower we should have the flexibility to do the tower, but it should be part of the criteria that we're, I think, 500 feet. Again, if that's what we decided. I mean, I think Paradise Valley which is built up as 300 and so at some point -- at 300 I would say absolutely. If they're less than 300 they shouldn't come in. But I -- hard and fast, I don't know how hard and fast it has to be. If they come in for, lack of a better word, a variance. WESLEY: I'm not sure which direction you want to go, but I'll point out this one page that was coming up on the slides and that's in terms of the hierarchy of sites, is another way to approach this, either in conjunction with or instead of. Because it sounds like, at least some of what you're trying to do is direct them to be as far away from residential as possible. And so if that's what we want, then we should maybe make it as easy as possible to go where you really want them. If, a minute ago we were saying everything should have a special use permit, then it really doesn't matter if you're applying in a residential or commercial, you'd have to go through a special use permit. So again, maybe it's this hierarchy of sites criteria, where you've got to -- if you're trying to go in a residential area you've really got to justify why you're going there versus the ones we really give a priority to in the industrial areas or the commercial areas. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: John, why couldn't we do both? Why couldn't we say in order to apply for a special use permit you have to meet this minimum conditions; that 500-foot threshold? I mean, I think it effectively does the same thing that Commissioner Kovacevic said is what we're trying to do, it's not an either/or, it's a "it-has-to-be". We've given them design specifications that if you want to apply, which you are required to do, consider the fact that at a minimum you have to be 500 feet. WESLEY: We could do that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. WESLEY: But again, when we do that the blue areas on the map are the only places that are left and within those blue areas some of them aren't available at all, because of the existing towers that are already there. So it leaves you a spot in there, leaves you a spot right there. It leaves you this area, which it probably wouldn't happen in, you've got a lake in the plat 08 area that's already developed. It leaves you these two places. And those are the only areas in town then that meet that initial criteria of 500 feet away and are separated from existing towers. And then within those areas, you'd have to apply for a special use permit, that's what I'm hearing. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. No, that makes sense to me. We have a consensus on that? We're okay with it? COREY: Sure. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Patrick? We're good? SVEUM: Can I ask a question? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Sure. It sounds like Phil. Go ahead, Phil. SVEUM: Yeah. I guess, I -- and I'm not an expert by any stretch with this, I just got into it. But I -- what's the rationale between 300 and 500? I mean, is there scientific rationale that there's -- it minimizes this health risk? It has a impact on valuations of property? I mean, where is the I guess, the specific advantage between 300 and 500 feet? VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think -- because I'm not getting John to cooperate by answering for me. I think the issue is both property values, health and welfare. Because we still TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 54 don't know for sure the governance of the accretiveness of an output on a particular tower. So if we design for four providers and we end up with six or eight, are they the same frequency, complementary frequencies? So I think it has an effect -- potentially has an effect on both property values and health and safety. The closer you are to this -- if you can envision a cloud coming off of the output port part of the antenna, there's a stream -- there's a cone or a stream, a cloud in some fashion, and it has the potential to have a problem that cause health problems. On the other side there is a physical component of a -- I think it's a three by three by four base with a tower with a monopole on top of it, that could potentially be in somebody's front yard. And that has a detrimental effect on the property values. So both of those things can be considered as potentially detrimental and that's what we were trying to avoid or to minimize the opportunity for any tower to go in anywhere. Does that help, Phil? SVEUM: Yeah, it does. It sounds like it's just to minimize whatever impacts there might be. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Correct. SVEUM: Impacts really are not -- they're not specific right now, obviously, they generally are. But this is a way to try to minimize that impact? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Correct. SVEUM: Okay. Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. DAPAAH: Chair, is this -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Go ahead, Patrick. DAPAAH: So 500 feet is this -- does that sound like something that will pass? I mean, what are other municipalities doing? What is Paradise Valley -- you see that thing you mentioned -- 300? And -- KOVACEVIC: Paradise was the shortest distance at 300. Then there were a number at 500. And then some of them are silent. Some of them, like John was pointing out, there's preferential site criteria which doesn't really give you a distance. So I mean, everybody's all over the board. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: But the numbers that I've looked at, the number of ordinances, it's north of eight. They have been 500 or better. 500 is the minimum and it looks like we mitigated some of the potential problems by the areas in blue, as John's outlined, by having it 500 feet. DAPAAH: Okay. Along with trying to control sound and all that, and all these requirements, 500 seems pretty reasonable then. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. I'd like 1,500 but we're not going to get it. WESLEY: Okay. Are we -- so again, what I heard what you want to see in the ordinance is, a criteria that any new towers have to be at least 500 feet away from any residentially zoned or used property, as a minimum to then be able to continue on to get a special use permit to the town council. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Correct. WESLEY: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Chairman Gray, comments? CHAIR GRAY: No. I mean, I'm with you. 1,500; 2,000; 3,000. I don't really care for any of this. So if we think 500 is on par with piers and it's not a outlier, that's what we have to avoid in these scenarios. We can't be --- we can't have such a tremendous outlier that it's dismissed, then I'm good with 500. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. WESLEY: Vice Chair, and Chair Gray, you don't have those other ordinances in front of you right now. From what I recall from them, however, is that you could still apply for a conditional use permit in those other areas within the towns, it just had that limit on where you could go without having to apply. I don't think in those other towns there's a total prohibition of any place else in town that didn't meet that criteria. CHAIR GRAY: You know, I don't really want to belabor all this that much anymore. But I kind of view this as kind of the same -- my way of thinking, right? So I view this as why is this any different than how liquor licenses are apportioned in places? We can say, yep you can put a tower here and that tower can have two antennas on it, I don't really care whose antennas they are or the diversity of those antennas. But there's limitations TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 54 there and if the next provider is willing to lease that antenna at a higher premium, let it be transactional. I don't know that we should -- I don't know that we should open up capacity necessarily on private property. WESLEY: Moving on? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Please. WESLEY: Okay. So moving on in Section 17.03, next Section C talks about buildings and other equipment. And basically, this addresses some things about the equipment cabinets and how they relate in a couple of different settings. Colocation, so just moved from another portion of the code. No changes but again, it kind of outlines some of the requirements. Mostly that new towers, again, designed to accommodate future colocation, requirement that people cooperate with that. Third- party review if there is a conflict. I got a typo. Then location required if it result in significant interference, and people fail to comply it will result in denial or revocation. So again, this will be a place where I could come and look for some additional statements about the tower being designed initially, not only in terms of its structural but its literal capacities to handle multiple colocations. Not sure if it will be in here, it will be someplace else. But this is one of the places where I would look to include that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And John, how do we validate whether there's significant interference? What measurement? Because that -- it's a great statement, but there has to be a process. WESLEY: Where am I in the code here? Maybe I'm too far past it already. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Is this going to the third-party testing? DAPAAH: Yeah. WESLEY: It's up here. So it's number 4 in the list here. It's the actual wording. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I hate to belabor this but that doesn't really answer the question: what constitutes significant interference? I mean, there has to be a measurement. Something that we can -- some standard that we can apply to that. WESLEY: So we can probably push that back to some of the third-party review to verify that there is -- there got to be interference. But I couldn't tell you, standing here today, TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 54 what those criteria would be. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Maybe you just said it, though. Maybe it is the engineer's report that the time it's submitted that they've done the testing in the area and there wouldn't be any. So a validation by the electrical engineer or PE, somebody, that can do that. I think we should include something to get some verification. It's too ambiguous otherwise. WESLEY: Okay. Then we get into the actual types of applications. And so there are two types -- the administrative and public review. And administrative, at this point, as they're drafted really are the modification occurring to existing towers. And describes them; those types of changes that would be allowed. How much you can increase the size and so forth of towers. And then public review, again, this was set at 300 feet, but now we're saying we'll change that to the 500 feet requiring the special use permit. And then from there we move into the actual processing of applications. So the initial part is very much like we've done in the Section 2.02 changes of the Zoning Ordinance with other applications and in terms of what the basics and middle statement of process is. Then there were all the things reviewed in 17.03, in terms of general requirements. And so if they apply to a particular type of application, they need to provide that. You've got to provide the inventory of existing sites. And then also provide some criteria for the specific criteria for the utility service antenna because they are a little bit different. And then we go through the actual rest of the process here. Listing requirements for existing towers and proposed towers. We've added in the photo simulations of the new tower, and you pay the fee. Have a section that's been added in terms of shot clocks. It's one of the things that there was concern about. And there are some specific standards from FCC rules. And so I've added extensive language on how the shot clocks would work and what starts and stops those shot clocks, so that we don't get something approved just because we didn't act in a timely fashion on it. And going to go through the actual processing with the different bodies. And so the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 54 public review is the same as for a special use permit. And we've added in the requirement as council request for the drive-test and council may approve conditions on the approval. Section on removal of abandoned towers, it's the same as the current ordinance. And then the federal and state requirements. The initial paragraph there is one that's been in the code for a while, but we've added the paragraphs on the initial certification of RF compliance in 45 days and the opportunity then for the town to request a random ongoing tests. And the penalties involved if somebody is in noncompliance. And then staying in compliance with building codes. And staying in compliance with the noise ordinance. And the last section of 17.07, there's really no change except for a few section number references. So as mentioned earlier by Commissioner Dapaah, we did receive today a letter from CTIA, and I'd have to look over there again to remember what CTIA stands for. It's the wireless communication advocacy lobbying group of some kind. They question some sections of the draft ordinance, had some concerns with them. And so the ones listed here, and Commissioner Dapaah, the ones you brought up before, all the sections pulled pretty much directly from what our previous consultant had drafted. And so at least in general, we feel confident with those that they would be in compliance with the rules. The one that they highlighted with regard to the new utility service antennas we have been working with SRP on what those standards would be. They are comfortable with them, and so again, we feel confident that we're not going to have any utilities pushing back on that. They pointed out the section saying, "no signs". I knows this is only administrative that that means some kind of commercial sign, it doesn't mean you can't put up any required signs. But we can modify that language a little bit, just make sure that's clear that any required signs can be there. That's no issue to make that change. A couple of other sections that they questioned are in the current ordinance, just being repeated. They have been there, again, and used for a long time. Again, we're comfortable with those. And then, the language they questioned in 17.05C was again some of the view criteria with regard to the process of mostly just agreeing with, I think TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 54 the language is fine and is clear enough for this type of reading. Let's see if I -- I've gone past it here. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Commissioner Corey, you have a question? Commissioner Corey? COREY: Just two things. One, previously you mentioned the drive-test to verify gaps in coverage. And I'm just curious, like, what happens if there is a gap? What's the -- how do we correct that? WESLEY: Sure. So Vice Chair and Commissioner Corey, usually when a tower company's in here promoting and applying for new facilities, it's because they believe there's a gap in service. They get so many customers complaining, I just don't get service here, and so I need to put in a new tower. That's the only way to provide our customers with reasonable and consistent access to the network. And they usually provide some type of heat map that they have generated just from their computers that show where the gaps are. And so this is a step beyond that, in requiring them to drive the streets with the meters that actually register the amount of signal being received and produce that in a document for us to look at and verify where there really are gaps in their service where people can't get the service they need. COREY: And if we -- okay. So if they put a tower in and then we find out, oh, there's still gaps in certain areas, how do they correct that? Do they change the tower, or do they move the tower? WESLEY: They're not going to move a tower. COREY: Well, I mean, plan on locating it somewhere else. WESLEY: They might add more towers if that's the case. COREY: Okay. WESLEY: But hopefully when that comes in, we look at the gap and where it is and what they're designing and what they are really filling in all the gap. COREY: I'm just mentioning that because we're being restrictive for the right reasons, but if we find that there's a gap later on or when they're installing it, then it sounds like we need to be kind of flexible in working with them so that they can put it in the right spot or have the right coverage broadcast. Right? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 54 WESLEY: Um-hum. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think the issue is validation that there's a gap. Because coverage can be because of capacity; it can be because of frequency; it can be because of output; it can be even reduced frequency and output. So I think generally speaking most of the providers would -- I'm going to use a nontechnical term -- crank up the power in order to cover the gap. COREY: It's very technical. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Right. So we don't want that. We want validation. And I think we ought to have a way to capture that validation, have them file the data that says here's the gap, here's the bell curve, here's where the time of day over a period of time, to validate that there actually is a gap rather than just wholesale say, add a tower or you can crank it up a little bit because you're within the confines of what the FCC says is okay. So I'd like to have something more definitive in there about how do we determine and validate that there are gaps. And maybe that's a third-party. You know, a nonbiased third-party that's going to collect that data and/or review the provider's data. So they make their records available so we can do that. We want to help them, but we don't want to give them carte blanche to just do whatever they need to do to increase coverage. COREY: Yeah. And just to follow up on that. Like, we were talking at the beginning of this meeting briefly was, during the 4th of July I was down at the fountain watching the fireworks and there was no coverage. I couldn't send text messages; it wasn't going through. And I think it's probably because there's a lot of people down there one time, using the bandwidth but maybe that's an opportunity where they can crank it -- what was it? Crank it up or something? To be able to provide -- CHAIR GRAY: That's an opportunity for COWs or temp facilities that clearly was missed by the provider. COREY: Yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Regardless, I think it needs to be validated and we need to come up TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 54 with a way to validate by collecting the data, analyzing that data, looking at when the capacity or lack of capacity occurs in order to substantiate adding a tower. Because most likely it's going to be adding a tower, not cranking it up. At that point, they probably cranked it up. COREY: And just -- SVEUM: And just, Chair -- sorry. Go ahead. COREY: Sorry, just my last note. That, yeah, so it was interesting to read the CTIA feedback. And my only major concern here, John, is they brought up multiple examples where this ordinance is inconsistent with federal laws. So that will be my major concern here. I know you said you're going to review it with the attorney just to make sure that we're doing everything right, we don't want to get in trouble for something here. So that's my recommendation is, just to take it back to the attorney and make sure that we're following the laws here. VICE CHAIR WATTS: To add to that and sorry to cut you off, Chairman Gray. When we started on community housing we were told you can't, you can't, you can't. You can't; it's restricted. You can't do this; you can't do that. And if we take a word of a lobbyist or our attorney and say that you can't do something that we successfully have done with community housing, then we are being remiss. And I think it's incumbent on us to make an aggressive, protective ordinance; not prohibit, but manage the implementation and serviceability of anything we allow in the town based on this ordinance. COREY: But just to review it with them, make sure. VICE CHAIR WATTS: With the concept of reviewing is not acquiescing to what somebody doesn't want to get sued for. Back to you, Chairman Gray. CHAIR GRAY: I'm sorry, Commissioner Corey, there's a delay and I keep jumping on top and I don't mean to do that. So I promise I won't do it again. I want to go back to the conversation about heat mapping and doing that sort of study -- that gap analysis study. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I almost want to say what we ought to write into our ordinance is not something that's on the solicitation side but something that's on the closeout side. So you put up a tower, we have third-party TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 54 commissioning, or the town is a part of that commissioning process. We validate that the tower's outputs are where they're supposed to be per code and per FCC regs, and the heat map is a part of the closeout and the commissioning process of that tower, so that we have that baseline. Because that to me is more valuable at that point where we can say -- let me say this differently. If we don't have it there, then when a gap is identified, the power's getting cranked. And I think Commissioner Watts, you've essentially said that. Whereas, if we see a gap closure, that's kind of a trigger for the municipality to say, hey, something's changed here. Somebody's changed a parameter and cranked up the output here and we need to dig into this a little bit. So I'd like to see that language on the commissioning side of a tower's installation versus on the application side. Because I don't understand how you heat map -- and I guess you could do it. But it's a lot harder to heat map something before you're actually generating the signal. And I think if we are going to ask for it on the application side then really what we're saying is similar to the way wind turbines are surveyed on ridgelines. We're saying go out and put up a temp tower, beam the signal, heat map it, and report back. And I just don't think that that's something that's ever going to come to fruition. WESLEY: Chair, if I may? So the drive-test is going out and testing the infrastructure that's in place now, and by doing that testing showing -- documenting that, in fact, there is a gap in service. So that then justifies the need for the additional tower. VICE CHAIR WATTS: John, I think that's where I disagree. Because based upon the timing, there could be an insufficient capacity or there could be a reduced output. There's some variables -- a lot of variables that could be applicable to why coverage isn't available at that point in time. Could be interference by the fireworks. COREY: Yes. A surge of people. VICE CHAIR WATTS: You just don't know. So we need some validation again as to why some justification and commission process is pretty much industry standard. Whether it's in the telecom industry, whether it's in mechanical industry; commissioning is an important part of making sure everything is installed the way it was designed and the way it was presented by the engineer. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 54 WESLEY: Sure. Yeah, I can see adding that other piece in too, but I was trying to cover the difference in what they were doing. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. DAPAAH: But that's if the town actually invest in a third-party commissioning process. Right? Because -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: That's going to be on the provider. DAPAAH: That's going to be on the provider. Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The provider and we can look at it and see if the data is valid, if there's any loopholes in the data. DAPAAH: Okay. I would think that the town would also have someone that can look out for the town on this matter, just to ensure -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: I would say, I'd agree ideally that if we had somebody that was certified, because you need the certification to read the data and to use your own -- it's not in an -- it's a spectrometer, I believe. That you have to look at and see what the frequencies are and what the volumes are, and then compare that to the provider's data. That's where the bell chart comes in, when you show time of day and how much usage and capacity and what you've got, what you projected; that it's all consistent. So I think I'd love to see that included, that we would have somebody on staff. I don't know if we're going to get that through because of the training and the certifications. DAPAAH: Yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: But it certainly can't hurt to ask. In-house certification. Go ahead. KOVACEVIC: Have you gotten through? WESLEY: Yes. KOVACEVIC: I made a list of things that I think were -- at least that were in other ordinances that we haven't addressed in ours. So I would like to go through that. We talked about the public process and getting an SUP. We talked about monopole towers using stealth technology. One of the ordinance stipulated no RF emissions below eight- and-a-half feet above grade. Is that something that would make sense for us? Okay. We talked about the old noise limits. We talked about setbacks. We talked about TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 54 holding the setbacks, even if the zoning's vacant and unplatted at 500 feet, right? WESLEY: Yes. KOVACEVIC: Okay. The new towers must provide for colocation and one of the -- they usually specified at least one -- or one of them said a new tower has to be able to colocate three additional users. Did we want to specify that? You're -- I know we talked about reviewing the power and the downside of that from health, safety, and welfare, but -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Are you asking to put that into the ordinance -- KOVACEVIC: I'm throwing it out there, yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- every design has to be able to support at a minimum three, four providers? KOVACEVIC: I think so, yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. KOVACEVIC: I mean, it's a -- I'm suggesting. I'm throwing it out there for discussion. We can go through them all or we could go through them one at a time and get feedback. VICE CHAIR WATTS: What's the value in stipulating the number of providers per tower? KOVACEVIC: I think you get -- like, in the case of adding three, you get a lot of use out of that tower. I mean, you're specifying -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: You want to put a maximum on it too, then? Because then we go back to the electrical requirements for the different providers. KOVACEVIC: I don't know. What I did was, I went through the ordinances that were provided to us and I pulled out what the other towns did. I don't know any more about how a tower works today than I did a year ago. But I know what's in these ordinances. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. WESLEY: Chair, and Commissioner, another thing we had to be concerned about there, a little bit at some point is, it often gets harder to be stealth or camouflaged, as you add more and more antennas on and more providers on it. So I think depending on the design that you start with and where it's at and what you're trying to do, that can be a TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 54 challenge maybe even adding the second one. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. That sounds right. I don't know how you'd do it. But colocation, it seems to be pretty standard -- the requirement of providing colocation. And if these things are going to look like palm trees, I would guess you could colocate. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Palm trees in the desert? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. WESLEY: So if we're going to do that, I think this would be the place right here. We could add a number. Shall be designed to accommodate at least two or three more antenna, whatever number we want to put in there, rather than just leave it open. If that's the desire of the commission. VICE CHAIR WATTS: To me that's a tough one because I don't know -- to one of my original questions, are the outputs accretive or parallel? And I think that's -- we need some technical input to be able to answer that question. I'm not sure. Because I think as long as you have -- if you design it initially to say I can have four providers on the same tower based on colocation, but I can't exceed six providers. There needs to also be a basis why you can't exceed the six. So I do think we need some more input on that. A little bit more research. WESLEY: Okay. So I don't know if this would be a time to remind the commission -- I'm going to use it as a time to remind the commission. You talked about it at your May meeting, you held your public hearing. 90 days to make your recommendation to council. So it has to happen before your next meeting. So if we can make a recommendation we need to schedule a special meeting between now and your August meeting to finish up. KOVACEVIC: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I don't want the fear of a special meeting -- KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I'm -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- to deter us either. KOVACEVIC: I'm here. VICE CHAIR WATTS: So in your research, how many towers or how many providers on a TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 54 tower have you seen, kind of, universally? KOVACEVIC: Most of -- they all ask for colocation. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Right. KOVACEVIC: Some of them specify one. The most I saw was three. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. KOVACEVIC: Can I -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. Go ahead. KOVACEVIC: -- go on? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah, please. KOVACEVIC: There's security -- one of the towns asked for security for the maintenance of the paint and the maintenance of the landscaping around the towers. So they provide a bond that covers two years of maintenance of the landscaping. I don't know if that's something we want to talk about. One of the towns -- or most of the towns provide secure -- ask for security for the removal of the tower if it's abandoned. And that, typically, is a reservation of the lien rights. They don't require that you put up a letter of credit or a bond or anything. It's just if we have to remove the tower, we have lien rights on the property. One of the town's requires annual RF testing at permittee expense. I know that the trade group said that's -- that they felt that that was a -- that that was the FCCs realm and not ours but one of the towns didn't seem to care about that. The building -- we say they've got to comply with our building code. Do we have a building code for towers? WESLEY: I don't know if there's a specific tower building code, but there are electrical codes and structural requirements for -- KOVACEVIC: Because they name ANSI -- A-N-S-I, and I mean, most of the towns name the -- who provides those kind of standards. The fiber optics and the power to these towers and from these towers is underground. I think that should be specified. WESLEY: That's already in our codes. KOVACEVIC: Okay. It was the California ordinances; they required a backup power TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 54 supply. Is that something we would want? WESLEY: Possibly. It's my understanding the FCC is requiring that in most cases anyway. KOVACEVIC: Okay. I have -- WESLEY: To have. KOVACEVIC: -- I don't know. I didn't look at the FCC -- what the FCC requires. And I noticed it was in the California ordinances and it was not in the Arizona ordinances about a backup power supply. We need to make a statement that the paint color and finish must be maintained in a good condition at all times. And graffiti needs to be removed within 48 hours. I think we need to have that kind of language in there. Testing at permittee expense for interference, structural, or electrical integrity. If it's ever in question, that we have a right to test. And I think some of them limited it at to once a year, but we should get the right to test for if there is interference or if there's a question of structural integrity or electrical integrity. A couple of the ordinances have parking requirements to provide at least one off-street parking place for somebody at the tower. This is an important one to me, I think the permittee should indemnify the town against lawsuits. If the -- I mean, if we pass an ordinance and then somebody comes in to put up a tower and the citizen group comes in and sues the town for allowing the tower, the permittee should indemnify us. I think we need to make a statement that the tower cannot interfere with the government emergency response network if we have one; I don't know if we have one. Or any town or county communications. That was in a number of the ordinances. Insurance requirements, they should be in the ordinance. I know that we limit lighting, but we should also make a statement that it needs to comply with the Dark sky Ordinance. And one other thing, the -- there was a statement made in one of the ordinances that any new developments over a number of acres -- I think the number was 65 acres, but this would cover the state ground, that any development over X acres must provide a tower location. Which means they would have to set aside a location that's 500 feet from any residentially zoned property. So that's my list. VICE CHAIR WATTS: So the ones that I'd like to see, and that I agree with you, are the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 54 testing, structural, backup power, parking requirements, indemnification, insurance, lighting, and the acreage or the area for a tower on any new development. And ones that I can waive on, because I think we already covered it, are paint color and finish. I think town codes already take care of that. The graffiti issue is already taken care of. Signage is already taken care of. You have to put emergency signs there, what to do and it has to padlocked, it has to have emergency access. And we don't have a frequency issue, I don't believe, because our fire, live, and law enforcement uses a separate frequency other than cellular frequency. So but the ones that I would look for support, hopefully, are the ones that I just said: the testing, structural, underground utilities, backup power, parking, indemnification, insurance, lighting, and tower location on any development. WESLEY: So just on one of those, anyway, the lighting. Tower shall not be artificially lighted is already in there. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. But yet it still has to have FAA approved lighting. WESLEY: Unless the FAA requires. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. WESLEY: And then our town codes already require underground of the wires coming and going. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. SVEUM: I have a question. Phil. CHAIR GRAY: Go ahead, Phil. SVEUM: So if a provider was to locate and I assume on someone's private property they would own that antenna or that pole. And if there were multiple providers on that pole, who would be responsible for the other providers and what their business is that's being conducted with their equipment on that pole? That make sense? VICE CHAIR WATTS: It does. I'm going to try, and John, if you'll help me along the way. Generally speaking, there is a builder who designs, engineers, and builds the tower and then leases the provider space for equipment and their antenna. WESLEY: And all that's done, usually -- TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 54 SVEUM: Okay. WESLEY: -- with a ground lease from whoever the property owner is. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Right. SVEUM: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yep. So the -- SVEUM: And -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- you get different -- you get different insurance requirements here. You get one for the construction and then one for the provider. So they both have to have that same insurance. SVEUM: Okay. Would these providers be typically competitors? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Verizon -- they can be. Verizon, T-Mobile, there's a plethora of them and they all have potential output. But they also -- some of them share and then sell their product out as well. So there's a variety of different arrangements and we've got to be capable of handling all of them. SVEUM: So the company or entity that secures the site, builds the pole, or installs the pole, and has the lease with perhaps Verizon, would that be like a master lease for Verizon, and they would sublet to other providers or would each one of those providers lease directly from the owner of the pole? VICE CHAIR WATTS: My understanding is that the builder retains the leases. They're the master lessor and that they lease the capabilities that they've built for to various entities, like Verizon, T-Mobile, and so on. WESLEY: So -- and Phil, I think you asked -- and I don't know the answer for sure, but if Verizon has leased a portion of the tower and has some antennas up there, could they then sublease to another provider to share their antennas? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Right. WESLEY: I don't know. That probably does happen, but I don't know for a fact. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I'm pretty sure they do because you've got a third-party that is leasing and say, there's Consumer Cellular for instance, they use like a T-Mobile and sublease from T-Mobile, and they use their capabilities. So I think that's exactly what TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 54 happens. SVEUM: So we would need, as the town, to be protected by the various providers that are on each one of those poles. Because if there was a lawsuit, the town would be included in anything that would -- in the form of a lawsuit for many of the residents that had that pole on their property. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think that that's correct. I think that you've got a building construction structural indemnification that you're looking for in case the thing falls over and then you're looking for the tower people that lease it and the providers, to make sure that they don't do something that could cause harm to the general public. SVEUM: So would it not be appropriate then for the town to approve all providers that are on that pole? VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think that's what I'm saying. Yeah. WESLEY: So -- SVEUM: Oh, okay. WESLEY: Vice Chair -- SVEUM: I just wanted to make sure. WESLEY: So again, I don't know enough of the details. If Verizon is then -- or T-Mobile subleasing now to Consumer Cellular, I'm not sure we would know that piece. VICE CHAIR WATTS: No. But your master lease would say any subsidiaries, any third- parties that you would use. That they'd indemnify us on behalf of them. WESLEY: Right. SVEUM: I guess, my thought process here is always looking at the worst-case scenario where there's a problem and one of the providers may be streaming or doing -- providing inappropriate activity, for instance, that could cause a town a problem eventually or even -- or cause all the providers and the town a legal issue. So I don't know if it's worth considering or not. It just comes to mind. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think that's where the indemnification comes from. SVEUM: Yeah. As well as the property insurance. CHAIR GRAY: Vice Chair, Commissioner, I share some of the same sentiment. I think TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 54 this all started with Commissioner Kovacevic. On the build -- so first of all, you go back to -- you made reference to the community residences proffers that we went through and so on and so forth. And one of the provisions that we had wished to see stipulated within that, in our draft language that we put forward to council, we had insurance criteria in there and hold harmless indemnification language that we wanted from those, in that case, community residence providers to issue a hold harmless and an additional insured of the Town of Fountain Hills. And the town attorney said no dice, you can't do that. And then the majority of the council went with the town attorney and stripped that language out. So I think in this case, I mean, you're kind of apples and apples here. I think you're going to end up in the same spot, different subject matter but same rules of the road so to speak. But I think in this case what I want to add into your conversation there is, if you did a quick Google search on the computer, you go back to June 18 of this year of 2024, you can find a Cox Communications pole with a bunch of gear hanging from it that got backed into -- it got hit, let's say, by a box truck and that pole landed in the backyard, with that gear -- landing in a swimming pool that had five kids in it. So I want that to be a part of the narrative and the record on this particular insurance provision. Because that's a real-world example, 20 minutes down the road, within the last quarter of this calendar year where bad things -- luckily none of the kids got injured because the lines, for whatever reason, weren't energized. But that's a real-world example of what could have gone terribly wrong because that pole -- that pole happened to be in the right-of- way by the way. But because that pole had that adjacency and did in fact cause harm. I think that Tempe could have been in a little bit of pain because of that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. Anything else on -- Commissioners? DAPAAH: So these are all very valid questions. Thank you for doing all that background work. That's pretty solid. So my question is on the power backup. I never thought -- are we talking per pole? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes. DAPAAH: And what is the source of energy? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: Gas, battery. I do think that John commented that -- I'm not positive of this, but I think the FCC requires that there is a consistent supply for power. So it could be propane, LP. It could be gas if it's available in the area. A little genset. DAPAAH: What's the industry standard? WESLEY: Chairman, unfortunately, Commissioner Dapaah, I don't know the details of it, but this started, I don't know, half a dozen years ago or so that the FCC did some rulings and I think identified certain towers, so that there's enough coverage left in an area. And they have to have a backup power so there's always a system operational. And so it's not required for every tower, but I know there's some percentage of them or some spacing of them that does require that from the FCC. DAPAAH: Okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. I don't remember offhand the exact, but I remember reading about gensets being required, order of magnitude depending upon the service entrance coming to the unit would depend. DAPAAH: Right. VICE CHAIR WATTS: But it could be whatever uninterruptable power source you need. DAPAAH: Interesting. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Anything else, Commissioners? John, anything else? WESLEY: I know we've got at least one person hoping maybe to speak a little bit. So I want to take -- TROLLER: I'm here. WESLEY: So just, again, just to set some expectations a little bit, because you brought up some of the comparisons with the community residence ordinance. You've thrown out a lot of things. Some of them are easier, some of them may be a little bit harder. Brought back up this intent statement here that we need to balance things with. We have to comply with the TCA and provide reasonable opportunity for service, while providing also protection to the public. So it may be some of these things, particularly as I go back to that map of the 500 feet and what that does and how limiting that is, that we may come back and say that really is too much. And some things like that. But TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 54 anyway, I just really want to set that expectation. We'll be looking at that. And whether you keep it at 500 feet, it gets to council and some things -- as we look at the decibel limit, council has previously decided we're not doing decibel limits anymore. So just want to put that out there that this will have that type of continued review, things may change. But understood. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Paula? WOODWARD: We have one speaker card for call to the public: Lori Troller. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. And if I'm not mistaken, Ms. Troller has asked for six minutes, plus or minus a couple of seconds. TROLLER: It's a lot longer now. I'm going to ask for ten minutes if possible. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Talk fast, please. TROLLER: Talk fast. Good evening, Chair Peter, Vice Chair Mr. Watts, and commission. Before I start on what I was going to present, I do want to say that when Mr. Wesley's presentations are over an hour-and-a-half and the public gets three minutes or six to respond, it's not even adequate. And so I would like to ask for some sort of opportunity for me to provide my insights. I can answer so many of these questions and there were so many things that need to come into discussion that it would greatly help this process. One thing, you guys were talking about distance. The automatic distance, the 300 or 500 feet. There's one thing that was completely overlooked, was that there is the ADA, and the ADA recognizes a disease that when people are near these towers they literally can't live near them. They can't be in the presence of it. You've seen April McCormick (ph.). She doesn't live here anymore. She had to move because of the exposure in the town. Her face will start to fall, like she had a heart attack. She will lose her voice, and this is within 30 minutes of exposure. And it takes her days to recover. This is a very real thing. So when we automatically put a tower up just because it's within 200 feet or 500 feet or whatever your number is, you are ignoring the ADA requirements to notify people. Everyone must know this. So these distances can't just be an automatic thing. There are other laws in place that we will be violating. The PV -- you mentioned PV quite a bit and they're 300 feet. There's a little bit of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 54 history to that. PV went into negotiations with several telecom companies, and they agreed that Paradise Valley would define a corridor for all the main towers. And they said hey, telecom guys if you promise to keep the majority of your towers in this corridor, we'll let you have the 300 feet. That's why that number is so low. When it came down to actually putting those networks in, telecom company said [gesture on video] and they put them wherever they want and now they have a problem. So that's why that 300 feet is there because they thought they were going into some sort of agreement with the telecom companies that they didn't live up to. Regarding sound. You guys were talking about sound a lot. So there's the actual tower itself and then there's this whole conglomerate of little facilities that go around the base of a tower. You can require all that be built underground. Most of that's your noise generation, put it underground. Just make that the requirement. So you can play with that thought. The submittal process that John was talking to, that got glanced over very quickly. There is a lot of information that goes into that. One thing this town needs is a database. When I ask John about previous decisions, approvals, or denials of any towers we've had, that process is over a 100 questions. And he cannot tell me how he came to an approval or a denial. We need to be able to track that. We need to be able to pull up a map and say, we definitely have this tower here. This is the equipment on here. This is what, when it went in, what it was set to be emitting. So when you do tests later on, throughout the year, you can say, hey, this is the -- hey, this number is way low, this number is way high. We need a database. We need to able to track this stuff. A lot of that information is collected at the point of an application. All that's available. Because when we have staff move on to greener pastures, we lose all that knowledge. That, we can't even ask anybody. So we do need a database. That's a whole other topic. Drive-by tests. Do not use drive-by tests. Drive-by tests -- what notoriously is falsified in court case after court case, are drive-by test information. Telecoms constantly lie about that. They just take some sample somewhere, put your street name on it. Oh, that's TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 54 been proven over and over again. What you really want are dropped call logs. That's your information, my information, how many calls did we make and how many calls were dropped. And you need the data behind that. That's the type of information you need. Now, if we don't define that in our ordinance, if we don't define how they are to provide that, in a court case they said, well, you didn't say and you didn't define it, so we don't have to give it to you. We're putting a tapper in. So be very specific on what you're looking for when you're looking for what you call, gaps. Now, there's another thing. What is a gap? Is a gap 30 feet? I can't make a phone call between here and there; is that defined a gap? It doesn't. So there's all these other definitions of what's a gap? And is that gap there all the time? Is it raining? Do we have gaps all over the-- did they take that -- did telecom go out on a rainy day and take gap information? Drive-by test information on a rainy day or during the fair? Oh, look at this. You know if they did a test when we were all at the fireworks, they're going to say we need 19 towers around here. That's not fair. It's not accurate. So all of these things, you've got to nail them down. You can't just say, we need testing. You have to define it. And if we don't define it, in a court case they're going to say, you didn't define it. And so they win cases. So you got to be really specific. And this has been why I have been forever saying you guys need to bring people in. Who here knows how to say what those numbers should be and what's real? This is where the experts come in. This is where their advice will help us. Let's see. I think Peter was speaking about -- unless it's written in an ordinance the industry has complete -- oh. So Vice Chair Watts was speaking about they turn it up or they turn it down. Well, don't you think we want to know where it's set? And we should always know where it's set? These things are emitting pollution. That's a part of the problem. So if this were something that we could actually see, an amount of smoke coming out of a building. Well, okay, we're going to allow a certain amount of smoke. But if they started just like, unbeknownst to us, just putting out way more smoke on some days and some days none, we would want -- we can see that. We have grasp and we can know that that is. We know whether we need to be concerned or not. So when TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 54 we do not have those volumes measured by these towers, this is invisible pollution. You can kind of tell with your phone, your gaps, your -- so I'm just saying, because you can't see this, doesn't mean you don't measure it and you don't want to know. You do want to know. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Can you -- Lori, can you wrap up, please? TROLLER: I didn't even get to my -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: It's eight minutes. TROLLER: Okay. Real quickly. There's a big problem right now, is that Mr. Wesley is editing the code. So in Fountain Hills and everywhere else, when we have law it's written in the form of an ordinance or a resolution. And the difference between those two doesn't matter in this application so we're not going to get into that. But you guys aren't dealing with a resolution or an ordinance. He's dealing with the municipal code or the zoning code. Right? And he told you earlier that you cannot -- you can't touch the piece in the municipal code. And right now we have a law on the books, it's a resolution -- happens to be a resolution and it's Resolution 2018-18. This is what you guys need to be updating. Now what happens is this resolution gets codified. It gets codified into code. And it gets either codified into municipal code or zoning code. So now what Mr. Wesley is working on is Chapter 17 which is the cellular code. You guys aren't touching the broadband. I have never talked about cellular. The council was only ever talking about broadband. Broadband was codified into Section 16-2. This is the only piece you guys are working on. You are not touching this. Now, this is code. The only time you touch code is when there's errors to it. These aren't errors. This is a modification to the law. You guys need to be updating the law not making codification changes. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. TROLLER: Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And you got your ten minutes. TROLLER: Thank you. It felt like two. VICE CHAIR WATTS: With that we'll -- no other speaker cards, Paula? Just the one? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 54 WOODWARD: No, Vice Chair. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. With that we'll close the public part. And Commissioners, comments? DAPAAH: I would like to thank Lori. I think Lori, you've really contributed to our understanding and clearing up some of the stuff for us. I really appreciate it. I would like to know -- I'm interested about this thing she's talking about with putting everything underground. Is there any city with that? Because that's another added thing that we would have to -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Are you talking about the equipment itself? DAPAAH: The equipment itself. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. It's a vault. Think about a vault that you've got a mechanical room vault with pump stations. DAPAAH: Right. But would that be -- would that have to be in a conditioned space? Are we now talking about an air conditioner? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Well, if it's outside on a pole, it's not going to be in a conditioned space. DAPAAH: But it's got free airflow. VICE CHAIR WATTS: It does. But you could put ventilation fans in. You could do that. So I mean there's ways to build a vault and I think that's a great idea, because that would abate a lot of the noise issues or concerns -- DAPAAH: Right. Right. I think that is a very -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- being in a vault. So maybe a vault's the way to go. DAPAAH: Yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think somebody's going to look at that and say, look, by the time I do acoustical enclosure, distancing, measurement, and the lot, that a vault may be the way to go. It's underground, out of sight, out of harm's way. I agree. And I also think that to Ms. Troller's comments about data, I think we've been driving home all evening the collection, the analysis of data, understanding where the gaps are. While we didn't come right out and talk about the data logs themselves, we said we TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 54 want all of the providers' data. We want them to be able to validate that. What that is we haven't defined yet, but we have moved to take that next step and define it. So I agree with that as well. Commissioner Schlossberg, please? SCHLOSSBERG: Yeah. And I wanted to follow up on Commissioner Dapaah's comment and I wanted to thank Lori, not for clearing things up, for making me more confused as it were. But through this whole process again, I've not said much because I'm still so confused. Vice Chair Watts has become a semi-expert. Commissioner Kovacevic has learned a lot as well. But I mean, I go back to what Lori said and the fact that we don't have professional help. I've said this before. It's just -- it's absurd that we're tasked with making a recommendation when -- I honestly, I mean, a sliver of a percentage of a clue, what I'm talking about up here. It's absurd. So I will leave my comments at that. But thank you, Lori. And wow, you could have gone on for a long time. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Any other comments, Commissioners? Commissioner Gray and Phil, sorry about this. I'm terrible at pronouncing last names. CHAIR GRAY: I'd like to be there, Commissioner, because I've got a lot of thoughts about this having -- I started where Commissioner Schlossberg was. I'm a notch or two away from that position. I'm out of the starting blocks but I still have a lot to learn. So I jotted down a bunch of notes. I went back through our old meeting minutes. I went back through council videos. I went back through text messages and emails and tried to get to a spot tonight where I feel good about something going forward, and I'm not. And so I'm kind of going to kind of skim my notes, but I want to read them because I want to remember them, if for no other reason the verbatim transcript is going to help me do that. And also, I want to be clear, I want what I say to be reflective of me as a resident who has a small family in this town and then a commissioner. That's where I come from on this topic at this point. And I have to say what we've seen transpire on this is, it's nothing short of unbecoming of government when our entire interest -- what we should be doing here, should be in the interest of the citizenry of the town and the private property owners of the town. I've had a lot of conversations. I've had a lot of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 54 conversations with Lori. I've had a lot of conversations with Rick. I've had a lot of conversations with folks that we deal with tangentially in and around the hospital, they're in the telecommunications industry, and I haven't talked to anybody who hasn't cited some significant concerns with where this industry is going and what the actual product even is today when we start to get into the -- when we start to get into the higher decibel outputs. And that's a total aside from having the conversation -- I made reference to the pole, the Cox pole in Tempe that fell. You know, that's another real-word example of -- we got a -- we got to play in this at a more macro level than what we're doing here. And we've got to do that with all the right tools -- arrows in our quiver, if you will. So I'm doubling down on the need to review this whole thing holistically and across both sections of code. I am not by any means; I want to be crystal clear. I am not saying combo the sections of code together. I'm not saying make Section 16 go away. I'm just saying how in the world can we talk about having tower parameters and placements and separation distances on private property, when we could just rack them out in the ten-foot right-of-way throughout town? How do you not talk about those two things as an intermingled topic and then bifurcate them back out to their respective spots in the code after all of that conversation has happened? So the reason that hasn't happened is obviously we've been limited by the town council and the town attorney in what our span of scope here is. And I went back, and I watched all of that and if the basis, which is what I think I heard of this limitation is to save us somehow from preemption, I got to say that's a false notion. Because as Commissioner Watts pointed out in his example earlier, we've been preempted before as a commission. Most of this commission was the same commission that was in place absent, I believe, Commissioner Dempster at the time, that worked through the community residence piece. And so you can't tell me today that you're going to save us from preemption because we were preempted when that topic came to light as well. And so if it's not preemption, then the basis must be for some sort of special interest, maybe an inadvertent transfer of wealth from private property owners to the town via TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 45 of 54 these small cell agreements that seem to be proliferating throughout the country. Everybody's chasing the ten-minute city and maybe that's what we're doing here, but nobody's talking about it. We're just saying we can't talk about it. If that is what we're doing, that's not something you do in the dark. That's something that gets daylight and we have the conversation out in the open. We talk about the property values, we talk about the health consequences, and we weight this whole thing in a extremely complex and -- well, complex deliberation. But you can't talk about placement here on private property versus placement in the right-of-way. You've got to talk about the whole thing holistically. So I got a note here about John. John, I really, really, really don't envy the position you're in and I want to be really clear that what I'm saying, my thoughts here, they have no reflection on you or staff in general. I've got a tremendous amount of respect for your position, and I absolutely recognize that you're obligated to take this direction and work with the tools that the council affords you to the best of your ability. And I absolutely think that's what you've done. I just, again, think our span of control here is misguided, so. I guess, in my opinion, again, and I having observed I've come to this revelation that when the council removed most of the meat of consideration from the topic, it was incorrect. And I believe that compromises this commission's ability to make that meaningful recommendation tonight or at any time, or at least a recommendation that would holistically benefit the community and residents. I'll go a little bit further and say I think this approach actually does a disservice. I think it does a disservice to the town. I think it does a disservice to the residents. As we make a recommendation, if we make a recommendation tonight for Chapter 17 in isolation, it insinuates that we've addressed the topic. And I know John said at the onset, we might pick up the other part of this at a later point in time, but I don't think you can do them in isolation. I belabored that, I guess, to this point. I don't think addressing Chapter 17 in isolation does anything. I think it insinuates we've addressed the topic -- we've actually done nothing more than placate it. So that to me is kind of on par with, we've become complicit in the narrative TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 46 of 54 of, let's move on; there's nothing here. And I think this commission has shown over time that we've got a little more integrity to display to those that we deliberate on behalf of. I wrote down six points in time that are really interesting to me. That again, I just want -- I want this all in one spot. So the first point in time is, how did this whole thing start? And that was after an extended series of calls to the public. Open calls to the public, the council requested staff onboard to consult and to facilitate a review and recommendation of ordinances related to towers in the general context of small cell distribution and broadband. Two consultants were hired by the town. Contracts were executed by the town attorney, somehow as signatory. And then, my second point in time is, the scope of work for the Campanelli agreement was obtained through a FOIA by a resident and that scope of work very clearly states review and updates of Chapter 16 and 17 of town code and ordinances. And I have to note here that that agreement was received in full, and it was unredacted. The second consultant, whose business is centered around negotiation of contracts between public entities and tower operators, was then hired. The third point in time is the town then runs out the clock on the Campanelli retainer, releases the consultant through a lengthy and puzzling process run through the town attorney. Next point in time is the scope of work that this commission is tasked with is quietly modified by the council behind closed doors in executive session. And we're told only have eyes for Chapter 17, and the Campanelli documents are placed into privileged and confidential status now by the town attorney. And then finally, and the most impactful of my six points in time here is when the guns starts to really smoke. And that's when another FOIA request is made by a second resident for the very same Campanelli agreement after the May zoning commission meeting, when that agreement was passed on to me and would you believe that that agreement was now fully redacted? There was not one word in the scope of service for Andrew Campanelli that wasn't fully redacted. And so I end up saying, what in the world is going on here? And I'm not a conspiracy theorist but after you direct us, we TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 47 of 54 hire consultants, we go through review, we let agreements expire, we fire or maybe, I should say not retain a consultant, we pivot and then we redact, all behind closed doors. Went from literally talking about ordinance development, even I am going to begin to wonder what is going on here. The commission, John, members of the public -- Lori, you in particular, have arguably hundreds of hours invested in this topic. The commission, finally stumbled on the realization, back in May, that the gap and most of our confusion, or I should say, most of my confusion and what we sought to accomplish was actually in Chapter 16 and not 17, which we had been told to put the blinders on for. But in retrospect, I guess, that really shouldn't surprise me. This commission, we're not always on the same page all the time, but what you can always say about this commission is that good things come from debate; good things come from research; good things come from the debate on that research; and good things come from the public participation. To roll over or turn around everybody says it's preempted or don't look here would be a dereliction of this commission and that's why we hung it all out there back in May and made the very specific request. And the request was two-part. The request was, A, we'd like to look at 16 and 17. We never said we'd like to combo them. We said we'd like to look at them, and maybe, tangentially we said the word, "combo". But if you go back and look at those minutes, it very specifically says look at Chapter 16 and 17. And the other request that we made is, we made the request to understand why. And we made that request and we said we'd take that request under admonishment in executive session or publicly, but we made that request. We never got it. The following morning, though, we got an email from the town attorney saying it's not going to happen, present your findings without delay. The clock's ticking essentially. That was long before John ever even posed the question to the council and that gets flagged as, a, noted, because we got the correspondence. And b, out by all accounts. Because we never asked the attorney's permission, we asked for council. But we were told within 24 hours to move along by the attorney. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 48 of 54 Once it got to the council we got the public lectures from the council on the rule of law, insubordination, protection of staff, trust what you can't see, trust what's behind the curtain, and of course, a few amusing analogies with respect to our collective skill sets. But we still never got that logical explanation that pass the bar. And ironically, only Councilpersons Friedel, Toth, and Skillicorn ever reached out to the commission to understand the basis of our request. If we were paid employees, I'd say I get it, but we're not. We're a cross-section of volunteer-residents with a singular objective of protecting the residents and the residents' investments in this town. We absolutely recognize we don't make policy or law, but we sure as heck have the ability to recommend and have an obligation to do that to the best of our ability. So when you leave the commission in the dark, you start to hypothesize why. So here they are. Door number 1, that Andrew Campanelli is wildly incompetent, maybe even dangerous and the town attorney gave him grace and a swift and quiet termination. I would buy this door except that we know that several other public entities here in Arizona and across the nation are utilizing the consultant to draft ordinances to protect their residents and investments. We have no idea what was ever in it. John did a nice job tonight of telling us where there were gaps in that ordinance and maybe those are gaps we would plug, maybe they weren't. But that's door number 1. Door number 2, the second consultant's onboarded. This consultant specializes in lease agreements between providers and municipalities. He inadvertently or directly makes a sales pitch, and the town sees dollar signs. The conundrum with door number 2, is those dollar signs, if not managed, are at the expense of the average citizen from a number of angles, predominantly property values and health. And that is not appropriate without us at least having a conversation. Door number 3, the commission is the same commission that presented the community resident ordinance to the council for a vote, as Commissioner Watts had outlined earlier. When we went through that process we were repeatedly told that the Prescott matter was the only model. We were told you can't, it's protected, it's untouchable, TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 49 of 54 ADA, Fair Housing Act; and my favorite, it's preempted. But in the end the creation of that ordinance should be a very good reference of what can come of challenging perceived boundaries. This commission had the fortitude at that time, to say thanks for the advice, to walk away. However, we said at that time we're not going to run and hide. We'd rather present the language that's on the books today by all accounts, and that language has curtailed the number of homes converted to higher occupancy dormitories and has become a model ordinance for municipalities nationally that does it for all the right reasons. It promotes the types of homes when they're set up for the right reasons and it discourages the types of homes when they're set up as profit centers for corporations to the detriment of neighborhoods. The result of this a couple of years later is the number of homes is down significantly in Fountain Hills from the trajectory we were on. I view that as a success on behalf of the residents. And there might be a little bit of a -- I won't say: retribution is not the right word, but I'll use it anyway. It might be a little bit of retribution today because we didn't listen when we were told there's nothing you can do in this space, look elsewhere. So I'll wrap up here. I suppose special interest and personal interest could be in the mix, but I'm more inclined to believe it's a combination of doors 2 and 3, where town leadership has probably been pitched a potential financial gain through leases of right- of-way in folks' front yard in exchange for property values and health, through the town attorney who promotes a zero-risk mentality. Which in my way of thinking, benefits the attorney and his firm for making the next sales pitch to the next municipality for services. However, the downside here to us and to the town is that the zero-risk approach is paid for indirectly by the residents when we say we can't, or we'll get sued over time. I have a really hard time with this strategy. So ultimately, what do we do now? Do we take Chapter 17 in isolation? Do we punch it through tonight as we've been requested to do, to be in conformance with code and with all of the questions and the redlines that were fleshed here tonight? Or do we look at a path that is not often traveled? Frankly, I don't think we've ever traveled it, and say we're missing critical span of control to make any meaningful recommendation to the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 50 of 54 council, and we should simply defer? So if I was to make a motion, and I want to talk about this. But if I was to make a motion this evening it would be a, to say the work on Chapter 17 has been great. But we would be making a mistake to put anything forward on Chapter 17 without at least taking a hard look at Chapter 16. Preemption or not, I think that we can find a way to look at Chapter 16 and at least, the very least that comes of that, is we say we looked, we tried, we couldn't find a way. I guarantee you we'll find a way to do something impactful and meaningful to the residents and the property owners of this town if those restrictors are taken off of us and we can look at both of them. So my motion would be to park what's been done on Chapter 17, and effectively forward a recommendation to the council of quote-unquote "no recommendation until such time the council affords the commission the latitude to review and recommend modification to all facets of towers, their placement across Chapter 16 and Chapter 17". I think we owe it to everybody in this town and every resident who could be affected at some point in the future by right-of-way placement of a tower to say we actually looked at. So in closing, while we might say preempted, I think we should once again say, that's great, but let's go ahead and take look at the topic anyway and see if we can't effect some meaningful change. And so Chair, I'll turn that back to you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Any other comments from commissioners? CHAIR GRAY: You still awake? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yep. Still awake. So in a -- SVEUM: This is Phil again. Phil Sveum. Again, uneducated for the most part with this. I couldn't agree more than -- I couldn't agree more with Peter on -- with his conclusions. I heard some great information tonight from commissioners that have been on top of this for months. Lori, your presentation every time I've seen it, heard it, you're a great asset to the town on this topic. And John, you do have an impossible job. I think I'd like to see us follow Peter's advice and park it for the time being and try to figure out what the town really wants out of this and how we can go about helping it accomplish that. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 51 of 54 Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Yeah. I also concur with what Chairman Gray is talking about and if he presented a resolution, I will second that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: In addition to what Commissioner Gray said, I think we got a huge amount of additional data this evening. A huge amount of open-ended questions that we don't have answers to and a whole heck of a lot more research. And I don't think that we can do the research sufficiently without all of the information. Just like any other trade, and I don't' care whether it is a framing contractor, he needs his hammers and saws, we need information. That is what will give us the ability to provide a very succinct, accurate, protective ordinance. Without the information, I think we're dead in the water. And so I appreciate all the kind words from Commissioner Gray. And Commissioner Gray, did you actually make a motion, or you intend to, or what do you want to do? CHAIR GRAY: Well, I mean I'm happy to. My motion is really simple. It's unconventional but it's simple. I -- there's great work on the table. I'll say this part again, I -- John has done a tremendous job to getting us to this far with -- essentially, what I view as two hands and one foot tied behind his back and we're fumbling along as best we can, largely led by you, Commissioner Watts, and a lot of the intel and research of Ms. Troller. I got to say, I can't follow 70 percent of it. I tried. But we can't do this like this. I don't care what anybody says. We can't -- I'm not going to be a part of being told that I have to put blinders on like I'm going into stall number 5 in the Derby, and I'm not supposed to look left or right. That's not how you develop the best possible product for the citizenry. Now, if there's another objective, by all means let's talk about it. But let's sanitize that out in public, in daylight. Let's not hold that in the backroom. Because we're talking about ordinance development here. And so we either look at this topic holistically across both the public and the private space or we just wait until such time that we, the town, as a body is willing to take that angle on it because whatever we do tonight, whatever we do in isolation with Chapter 17 will have an impact or will be TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 52 of 54 impacted by whatever happens within Chapter 16. And God knows if we don't touch Chapter 16, then it's preemption, preemption, preemption, don't touch it, they can do whatever they want. And I'll say it one more time that's exactly what we were told the community residences and what we have, and what we came out of that, I don't' think anybody fathomed we could have come out of that process with that. But we did. Between John, between public input, between our -- Ms. Bell, all of the research that happened and the collaboration on that resulted in something really special. So so why the hell wouldn't we try to do the same here? And so my recommendation because we're up against the timeline and the mandate, my recommendation is to forward a recommendation of no recommendation tonight. And again, solicit the approval to broach into, to unveil Chapter 16, look at the whole thing holistically, and then recompartmentalize it like adults into their respective chapters of code so we don't screw up the system. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Do I have a second on the motion? DAPAAH: Yes. I will second that motion. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Commissioner Dapaah seconds. And one other comment I want to make sure the commissioners understand. Because we have a timeline we have to deal with as well, to John's point during presentation, we could have possibly have a special meeting in -- I'm not sure when that would be, John. August? Early August, later August? WOODWARD: Before the 12th. WESLEY: Vice Chair, it would have to be before August 12th. WOODWARD: August 121. VICE CHAIR WATTS: So we may put ourselves in that position, just so that everybody is aware. So with that said, Paula can I have a -- oh, hang on. One second. Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: So I just -- I don't' have my arms around what we're doing. I can -- so we're saying no recommendation because we don't feel we can rule on antennas without ruling on the small cell right-of-way broadband part covered in Section 16? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 53 of 54 VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think that's part of it. But I also think that it is because of the complexity of right-of-ways (sic) versus private property-public property. Without all that information and without the technical and legal expertise to be able to answer all of the questions that we've got in front of us tonight, that we're going to defer. Paula, rollcall please? WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey? DAPAAH: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Aye. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Watts? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Aye. WOODWARD: Chair Gray? CHAIR GRAY: Aye. WOODWARD: Seven-zero. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you, Paula. And with that, we'll move to item number 6. Commission discussion request for research. Anybody have any topics that they'd like John and staff to address other than? I thought you had to go? COREY: I couldn't leave. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. I'm still hammering on bicycles and pedestrians. So don't lose sight of that one. WESLEY: okay. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Without any comments, we'll go to 7, summary for commission TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JULY 8, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 54 of 54 requests from John. WESLEY: I heard bicycles and pedestrians. That's my summary. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The bicycles and pedestrians is safety. It goes back to walking out. And this weekend, people walked out in the middle of the crosswalk at the Avenue of the Fountains and Saguaro; didn't look. Almost got run over by somebody making a turn because they thought they owned it. Same thing's happened at the roundabout several times where people have walked out and bicyclists blowing through stop signs, blowing through red lights. I know MCSO, their law enforcement is primary on vehicles, safety. But at some point I'd like to talk about bicycles and pedestrians. WESLEY: I guess, number 8 on the agenda? VICE CHAIR WATTS: I don't want to know the agenda. I just want to note it. WESLEY: Fine. So in terms of my report, Aguust meeting. At this point, it looks like you will likely have two special use permit applications for consideration and one ordinance text amendment. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. That's it? An easy August. WESLEY: Should be. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Should be. WESLEY: Maybe. DAPAAH: So we are meeting in August? WESLEY: Yes. You got to meet in August. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yep. And I think with that, do we have a motion to adjourn? KOVACEVIC: Motion. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Wow, that was quick. That's unanimous. COREY: Thank you. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you, everybody. Have a good night. ITEM 7. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS STAFF REPORT    Meeting Date: 04/21/2025 Meeting Type: Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Type: Submitting Department: Development Services Prepared by: Farhad Tavassoli, Senior Planner Staff Contact Information: Farhad Tavassoli, Senior Planner Request to Planning and Zoning Commission (Agenda Language):  CONSIDERATION AND DIRECTION: Provide staff with direction on updating the Town's Sign Regulations contained in Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff Summary (Background) The Town's sign ordinance has undergone periodic updates over the years to address evolving needs and preferences for local signage. A significant revision was completed in November 2021 to align the regulations with the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring sign codes to remain content-neutral. The most recent update was approved by the Town Council in October 2023.  During the January 21, 2025, Town Council meeting, staff was once again tasked with reviewing and revising the Town's sign regulations. However, the Council did not provide specific guidance on the issues to address or the goals to achieve. Additional direction was offered at the February 18, 2025, Council meeting, which outlined potential amendments for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Councilmember Toth remarked that, despite several changes to the sign ordinance in recent years, it still failed to meet expectations. This item seeks to present the Council's feedback and gather further input from the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding recommendations for possible revisions for Council consideration and approval. The following outlines the sign types discussed at the February 18 Council meeting, along with the current ordinance pertaining to each type and the Council's discussion regarding them. A-frame signs Current: The ordinance permits one A-frame sign per business, with an allowance for two A-frame signs if the business has two public entrance doors. Sign area is limited to a maximum of 6-square feet for one sign and a total of 9-square feet for two signs. Additionally, A-frame signs place in the right-of-way may only be displayed during the hours between sunrise and sunset (except in the Downtown pedestrian area).  Council discussion: Councilwoman Earle proposed revising the ordinance to allow businesses up to four A-frame signs, with no restrictions on display times. Councilmember Toth further proposed increasing the allowable sign area to a maximum of 8-square feet, arguing that this would be more suitable than the existing 6-square-foot limit. Banner signs Current: A banner sign permit is valid for 30 days, with the option for applicants to reapply up to four additional times, allowing the sign to be displayed for a total of 150 days. Banner signs are also allowed for a new business for up to one calendar year.  To request any days beyond this limit, a temporary use permit is required. Council discussion: Councilwoman Earle and Councilmember Skillicorn suggested that the 30-day time limit is too brief before requiring an application for an extension. Councilmember Skillicorn suggested extending the maximum duration to 90 days, with the option to extend the total allowable period to a maximum of 364 days. Yard signs Current: A maximum of two yard signs are allowed for each residential property. Council discussion: Councilwoman Earle suggests allowing a total of four yard signs during election periods, while limiting the number to a maximum of two at all other times throughout the year. Railing signs Current: There is no provision in the current ordinance to allow for signs on railings. Council discussion:  Councilwoman Earle pointed out a need she has seen for a business that has a railing in front of their building and they would like to be able to put a sign on the railing to increase their visibility.  This could be a permanent sign or a temporary sign that is put out each day and hung on the railing. SUP for signs Current: The existing sign ordinance does not include a process for allowing exceptions to the ordinance, either administratively or through a public review process. Council discussion:  Councilmember Kalivianakis suggested considering an amendment that would allow for exceptions to the code, e.g. allowing additional A-frames for a business, rather than amending the code.  The idea mentioned was through a Special Use Permit process. Although no council direction was provided regarding wall signs, staff may recommend further amendments for buildings with at least three sides visible from the street and one side facing the parking lot—such as the Spooner Physical Therapy building on La Montana Drive, next to the Honor Health Clinic. Under the current ordinance, such a building is permitted two wall signs: one facing the parking lot and another facing La Montana on the north side, but not on the remaining two sides. The wall signs may each have a sign area up to 1.5 times the length of the business frontage on the corresponding side. Additionally, the ordinance allows for one monument sign along La Montana and/or one projection sign. In this scenario, staff believes it could be advantageous to offer additional wall signage options in place of a monument sign or projection sign.   Related Ordinance, Policy or Guiding Principle Zoning Ordinance Chapter 6 Sign Regulations Risk Analysis N/A Recommendation(s) by Board(s) or Commission(s) N/A Staff Recommendation(s) Staff is seeking further input from the public and direction from the Planning and Zoning Commission on possible modifications to prepare for Planning and Zoning Commission review and recommendation.  No staff recommendations are being made at this time. SUGGESTED MOTION No motion is anticipated, staff is seeking direction from the Planning and Zoning Commission to proceed with this review and update to the Zoning Ordinance. Attachments Current Sign Ordinance  Chapter 6 Sign Regulations Section 6.01 Introduction The regulations set forth in this chapter are intended to encourage attractive signage for businesses and services, optimize the availability of information, and promote the general welfare by creating a more aesthetically appealing community. A. Findings and Purpose. 1. Findings. Signs can obstruct views, distract motorists, obstruct pedestrians or vehicular traffic flow, create safety hazards, create aesthetic blight and visual clutter, and pose other problems that legitimately call for regulation. 2. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the size, illumination, movement or appearance of movement, materials, location, height, and condition of all signs, as defined herein, and to allow and promote sign communication in a manner that: a. Preserves and protects public health, safety, and welfare within the Town of Fountain Hills; b. Assures the use of a variety of sign forms designed to be sensitive to the context of the location, as a reasonable method of visual communication between groups and individuals; c. Enhances the flow of traffic and the convenience, ease, and enjoyment of travel within the Town of Fountain Hills; d. Restricts circumstances that otherwise may result in injury or damage because of distractions, or obstructions of vision attributable to sign placement or size, or to the illumination of signs that may become a source of undue glare, distraction, or light pollution; e. Avoids visual clutter that may contribute to traffic accidents or be harmful to vehicular traffic or pedestrian safety; f. Promotes the aesthetic and environmental values of the community by providing for signs that do not impair dark skies, property values, business opportunities, community appearance, or the attractiveness of the Town as a place to visit, live, work, and shop; g. Allows signs that are appropriate in scale to the zoning district in which they are located; Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 1 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. h. Provides for signs as an effective channel of communication, while ensuring that sign forms are aesthetically designed and proportioned in relation to adjacent structures on the same lot or development site, and that are compatible with their surroundings; i. Promotes the effectiveness of signs by preventing their overconcentration, improper placement, deterioration, and excessive size and number; and j. Supports and enhances commerce within the Town. B. Applicability. 1. Subject of This Chapter. All signs as defined in this chapter are subject to the provisions of this chapter as they pertain to: a. The allowance of signs (principally the number, form, material, size, and structure of signs); b. The review and consideration of sign plans and permits; c. The entitlement and issuance of permits; d. The location and placement of signs on all buildings, structures, and land; e. The integration of the design of signs with associated building architecture; and f. The maintenance of signs. 2. The provisions of this chapter do not apply to the following: a. Address numbers as required by the Fire Code; b. Government signs; c. Traffic control signs, markings, devices; d. Signs authorized or required by the Arizona Revised Statutes; e. Public transportation signs; and f. Signs specified as mandatory by any provision of the Fountain Hills Town Code. 3. Most Restrictive Provision Applies. Except when otherwise authorized by a special use permit, temporary use permit, or variance, the most restrictive provision shall prevail in cases in which two or more provisions of this chapter appear to conflict. 4. Controlling Document. This chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate, annul, or in any way impair or interfere with other Town provisions, allowances, or ordinances, except those specifically repealed by the ordinance codified in this chapter. Where this chapter imposes a greater restriction on a sign than is imposed Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 2 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. or required by other Fountain Hills Town Codes, provisions, allowances, or ordinances, the provisions of this chapter control. 5. Definitions Used. Definitions for specific terms used in this chapter are principally found in Section 6.02. Additional definitions are also provided in Chapter 1 of the Zoning Ordinance and in the Fountain Hills Town Code. Definitions not included in this chapter, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Town Code should be given their plain and ordinary meaning where possible. 6. Effect on Previously Approved Sign Permits and Comprehensive Sign Plans. All sign permits and comprehensive sign plans approved and in effect prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall remain in effect. Signs authorized by such comprehensive sign plans shall be developed in accordance with the standards specified by that sign plan and any applicable conditions or stipulations associated with the approval of that sign plan. The development standards and requirements of this chapter apply if not specifically modified by the applicable adopted sign plan. The zoning administrator may approve minor modifications to approved plans regarding design, height, number, or sign area that do not exceed the maximum(s) allowed by this chapter. C. Repeal and Severability. 1. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter 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 chapter. The Town of Fountain Hills hereby declares that it would have passed the ordinance codified in this chapter, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof, regardless of whether any or one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. 2. Effect on Previous Proceedings. Nothing contained in this chapter affects rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that began before its effective date, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (C)(1) of this section. D. Consent of Property Owner Required. Unless otherwise allowed, no person shall construct, place, display, or maintain any sign without the written consent of the property owner, the property owner’s agent, or an authorized representative. E. Noncommercial Message Substitutions Allowed. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter to the contrary, any noncommercial message may be substituted for the message placed on any sign allowed by this chapter. F. Responsible Party. 1. Posting Sign. The person, group, or organization directing the posting, installation, or erection of a sign is responsible for assuring the compliance of the sign with the requirements of this chapter. This includes the placement, removal, maintenance, replacement, or alteration of the sign, as may be applicable. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 3 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 2. Owner or Occupant. If the person directing the posting, installation, or erection of the sign does not remove, maintain, replace, or alter the sign in accordance with the requirements of this chapter, then the property owner or occupant of the building where the sign is posted is responsible for either replacing the sign with a sign that complies with this chapter or removing the sign. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Section 6.02 Definitions A-Frame or T-Frame. See Section 6.08(A)(1) for description, allowances, and standards. Awning or Canopy Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(2) for description, allowances, and standards. Balloon. See Section 6.08(A)(3) for description, allowances, and standards. Banner. See Section 6.08(A)(4) for description, allowances, and standards. Building Wall Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(5) for description, allowances, and standards. Drive-Through Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(6) for description, allowances, and standards. “Electronic message centers” means a permanent sign that is capable of displaying alternating, variable, or changeable copy that is electronically changed by remote or automatic means. See Section 6.07(C)(4) for description, allowances, and standards. “Feather” or “flag banner” means a temporary sign made of fabric or vinyl attached to a pole on one side. This sign type is prohibited, see Section 6.07(E)(9). Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 4 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Flag. See Section 6.08(A)(7) for description, allowances, and standards. Freestanding Wall/Fence Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(8) for description, allowances, and standards. Hanging or Under-Canopy Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(9) for description, allowances, and standards. Monument Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(10) for description, allowances, and standards. “Off-site sign” means a sign portraying information or directing attention to a business, activity, commodity, service, product, or event that is not conducted, sold, or offered on the premises upon which the sign is located. Includes signs commonly referred to as “billboards.” On-Site Directional Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(11) for description, allowances, and standards. “Permanent sign” means a sign made of durable material that is intended to be and is constructed in a manner that is permanent. Such a sign may be either attached or anchored to a building or wall or have its own foundation and structural supports. When detached from a building, permanent sign structures are constructed of durable materials such as brick, stone, metal, concrete, or related materials. Post and Board. See Section 6.08(A)(12) for description, allowances, and standards. Projecting Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(13) for description, allowances, and standards. “Residential directional sign” means A-frame, T-frame, or yard signs used to direct traffic to a home. See Section 6.08(C) for allowances and standards. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 5 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. “Right-of-way” means the area dedicated to the Town for roadway, sidewalk, and utility purposes. The edge of a right-of-way is the same as an adjacent property line and is generally five to ten (10) feet behind a curb or edge of paving. “Roof sign” means a sign affixed on, above, or over the roof of a building so that it projects above the roofline. The top of a parapet wall shall be considered the roofline. The highest point of a mansard roof shall be considered the roofline. Where a parapet wall is combined with a mansard roof, the roofline shall be the top of the parapet. “Sign” means any device placed to attract attention by providing identification, advertising or directional information for a business, service, product, person, organization, place, or building when the display of this device is visible beyond the boundaries of the public or private property upon which the display is made. Included in this definition are graphic devices such as logos and attention-attracting items such as banners, light displays, or logo sculptures. “Sign copy” means the letters, numerals, figures, symbols, illustrations, logos, and graphic characters used to make up the sign message. Sign Walker. See Section 6.08(A)(14) for description, allowances, and standards. “Temporary sign” means a sign constructed of fabric, canvas, vinyl, foam-core, plywood, sheet metal, or plastic that is neither permanently installed in the ground nor permanently affixed to a building or structure and that is intended to serve a short-term or temporary condition. “Temporary signs” include signs resting atop the ground, or affixed to the ground by a temporary anchoring system, including, but not limited to, stakes, ballasts, or by being embedded in the ground (for large temporary signs). “Town Center pedestrian area” is designated as shown in the figure below. TOWN CENTER PEDESTRIAN AREA Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 6 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Vehicle Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(15) for description, allowances, and standards. Window Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(16) for allowances and standards. Yard Sign. See Section 6.08(A)(17) for allowances and standards. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-13, Amended, 11/02/2021; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Section 6.03 Building Permits – Fees A. Except as provided herein, it shall be unlawful to erect, install and/or modify any permanent sign within the Town without first applying for and obtaining a building permit from the Development Services Department. “Modify,” as it is used herein, shall mean any change to: Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 7 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 1. The size or shape of an existing sign; 2. Electrical components; 3. Design; and/or 4. Supporting structures. B. A building permit shall not be required for the following activities or types of signs; provided, however, that such signs shall be subject to any and all applicable provisions of this chapter, including Zoning Administrator approval when required: 1. Street address numbers. 2. Any sign four square feet or less in area not otherwise prohibited by this chapter. 3. Repainting. 4. Minor, nonstructural repairs to signs or sign supports. 5. Temporary signs. 6. Window signs. 7. Changes to a sign panel or copy on an existing sign. C. Failure to conform to the conditions of a building permit, including any conditions and/or stipulations attached thereto by the Town Council and/or Board of Adjustment, shall render such permit void. D. Fees for building permits shall be required and payable in such sums as the Town Council may from time to time establish as part of the Town’s annual budget or by separate resolution. E. A building permit for a sign does not include electrical work (a separate building permit application is needed for electrical work); however, this exemption shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in violation of the provisions of the Fountain Hills Town Code or any other laws or ordinances. F. Building permit applications for signs shall include sufficient information regarding the size of the property, the building, and the tenant occupancy; the dimensions and size of each sign; sign height and location; lighting, including information needed to determine compliance with Chapter 8, Outdoor Lighting Control, of the Zoning Ordinance; materials used; and other pertinent information as needed to evaluate the proposed sign for compliance with this chapter. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Section 6.04 Violations, Enforcement, and Penalty A. Permanent Signs. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 8 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 1. Any of the following shall be a violation of this chapter and shall be subject to the enforcement remedies and penalties provided by the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, Fountain Hills Town Code, and by state law, as applicable: A. To install, create, erect or maintain any sign in a way that is inconsistent with any plan or permit governing such sign or the zone within which the sign is located. B. To install, create, erect or maintain any sign requiring a permit without such a permit. C. To fail to remove any sign that is installed, created, erected or maintained in violation of this chapter, or for which the building permit has lapsed. D. To fail to remove any sign identifying or advertising a business or any product sold thereby in the event the business ceases operation for more than a ninety (90) day period or has no active business license. 2. If any such violation is continued, then each day of a continued violation shall be considered a separate violation when applying the penalty provisions set forth below. In the case of outdoor advertising uses or structures, the violation must constitute an immediate threat to the health and safety of the general public before each day of a continued violation may be considered a separate violation for penalty purposes. 3. The violations set forth in this section are declared to be civil in nature. The responsible parties for enforcement purposes are: A. The owner or operator of the business identified on the sign; and B. The owner of the property to which the sign is directing pedestrian or vehicular traffic. C. The owner of the property where the sign is physically located. 4. Enforcement of permanent sign regulations may be made through the use of the civil citation process set forth in Section 1-8-3 of the Town Code and/or through one of the actions listed below: A. Issuing a stop-work order for any and all work on any signs on the same lot; B. Seeking an injunction or other order of restraint or abatement that requires the removal of the sign(s) or the correction of the nonconformity; or C. In the case of a sign that poses an immediate danger to the public health or safety, the Town may take such measures as are available under the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code for such circumstances; D. The Town shall have such other remedies as are and as may from time to time be provided for or allowed by state law for the violation of the Zoning Ordinance. B. Temporary Signs. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 9 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 1. It shall be a violation of this chapter to install, erect or maintain any temporary sign in a way that is inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter. 2. If any such violation is continued, then each day of a continued violation shall be considered a separate violation when applying the penalty provisions set forth below. In the case of outdoor advertising uses or structures, the violation must constitute an immediate threat to the health and safety of the general public before each day of a continued violation may be considered a separate violation for penalty purposes. 3. Enforcement of temporary sign regulations includes, but is not limited to, the following: A. Issuing a civil citation for the violation as set forth in Section 1-8-3 of the Town Code; B. Confiscation of sign(s); and/or C. Any of the enforcement methods provided for permanent signs, as applicable. C. All such remedies provided herein shall be cumulative. To the extent that state law may limit the availability of a particular remedy set forth herein for a certain violation or a part thereof, such remedy shall remain available for other violations or other parts of the same violation. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Section 6.05 Reserved Repealed by Ord. 23-04. Section 6.06 Sign Plans Sign plans may be used to establish unique signage criteria to a given property or for a combination of properties that function as an integrated commercial complex. A. Purpose. The purpose of a sign plan is to: 1. Allow for unique sign design based on the unique or unusual physical characteristics of a given property; 2. Provide the opportunity to adjust the balance of attached and detached sign allowances; 3. Encourage unified signage in commercial and industrial complexes; and 4. Encourage creative design of signs. B. Application Requirements. 1. A written request signed by the property owner(s) and payment of the required fee. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 10 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 2. A written project narrative describing the proposed sign plan with any deviations from current code requirements being requested. 3. Graphic illustrations depicting, at a minimum: a. Proposed sign locations and sizes; b. The proposed signs including sign base/structure for detached signs; c. Type of illumination; and d. Color and material boards for signs and sign structures. C. Review Criteria and Sign Design. 1. Review Criteria. The Zoning Administrator may approve a sign plan containing elements that exceed by up to ten (10) percent the allowed height and area of signs as specified in this chapter if the sign plan conforms with at least one of the following criteria: a. The development contains unique or unusual physical conditions, such as topography, proportion, size, or relation to a public street that would limit or restrict normal sign visibility; or b. The proposed or existing development exhibits unique characteristics of land use, architectural style, site location, physical scale, historical interest, or other distinguishing feature(s) that represent a clear variation from conventional development; or c. The proposed signage incorporates special design features such as lighting, materials and craftsmanship, murals, or statuaries that reinforce or are integrated with the building architecture. 2. Creative Design. Applications for consideration of a sign plan should include creative design elements that incorporate the design of the sign into the architecture of the building. Signs which go beyond the minimum guidelines provided in Section 6.07(G) by meeting the criteria below can increase their allowed sign area by an additional ten (10) percent. To qualify for the additional sign area, the sign shall: a. Constitute a substantial aesthetic improvement to the site and shall have a positive visual impact on the surrounding area; b. Be of unique design, and exhibit a high degree of thoughtfulness, imagination, inventiveness, and spirit; c. Utilize or enhance the architectural elements of the building; and d. Provide strong graphic character through the imaginative use of graphics, color, texture, quality materials, scale, and proportion. D. Approval. The sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/ 2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 11 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Section 6.07 General Regulations A. Maintenance. 1. Any sign hereafter erected or maintained shall maintain conformance to the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of the Town Code. 2. Every sign allowed by this chapter must be kept in good condition and repair. 3. When any sign becomes in danger of falling, or is otherwise deemed unsafe by the Town’s Chief Building Official, or if any sign shall be unlawfully installed, erected or maintained in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, the property owner, or the person or firm using the sign shall, upon written notice by the Chief Building Official, or immediately in the case of immediate danger, and in any case within not more than ten (10) days after notice: a. Make such sign conform to the provisions of this chapter; or b. Remove the sign. 4. If, within ten (10) days, the order is not complied with, the Chief Building Official may remove the sign or cause the sign to be removed at the expense of the property owner and/or user of the sign. B. Sign Location, Prohibited Locations. 1. Location Requirement. Signs shall be placed on the property for which the business, activity, commodity, service, product, or event is conducted, sold, or offered. The following exceptions may be allowed: a. In the case of condominium developments, the common area can be used for signage for any occupancy within the condominium. b. As provided in Section 6.06, commercial and industrial developments that have multiple properties that utilize a common access and parking field may utilize a sign plan to allow for common street frontage monument signs that provide signage for individual businesses in the development but not on the same property as the sign. c. Temporary signs may be allowed off site in the public right-of-way as specified for each sign type in Section 6.08. 2. Prohibited Locations. Signs are prohibited in the following locations: a. Town rights-of-way and public property. More specifically: i. Within, on, or projecting over the right-of-way, except as: 1. Specifically provided for in this chapter for A-frame, T-frame, post and board, and yard signs; Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 12 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 2. Allowed through Town approval of a special event permit; or 3. Allowed by ARS 16-1019, whether or not a primary election is scheduled to occur during the election cycle. For nonprimary elections the signs may be placed up to sixty (60) days prior to the election. ii. Within a median or on public property, unless otherwise allowed by this chapter. b. In a manner that creates safety, visibility, or access hazards. More specifically: i. Placed in a manner that obstructs the visibility of any authorized traffic sign, traffic signal, or another traffic control device. ii. Placed in a manner that blocks the vehicular line of sight at a street intersection, or the intersection of a street and driveway. iii. Placed in a manner that obstructs ADA access or prevents ingress or egress from any window or door, or other accessway required by the building code or fire code as adopted by the Town of Fountain Hills. iv. Located contrary to the standards of horizontal and vertical clearance from electrical wires and conductors as specified in the building code as adopted by the Town of Fountain Hills. c. In a manner that interferes with or obstructs the architectural design of the building. More specifically: i. Covers the architectural features of a building such as dormers, insignias, pilasters, soffits, transoms, trims, or similar architectural elements or devices. ii. Placed on the roof of a building or extends higher than the highest point of the portion of the building to which the sign is attached. d. Miscellaneous Prohibited Locations. i. Affixed to fuel tanks, storage containers, or solid waste receptacles, except signs related to the manufacturer’s or installer’s identification, warning signs, and placards, and information otherwise required by law. ii. Tacked, painted, burned, cut, pasted, or otherwise affixed to trees, shrubs, posts, ladders, benches, or similar supports if visible from across a property boundary or from the right-of-way. iii. Attached to a standpipe, gutter, drain, or fire escape, or placed in a manner that impairs roof access. e. Temporary signs within the Shea Boulevard right-of-way, except as specifically provided in this chapter. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 13 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. C. Nonconforming Signs. 1. Any sign legally existing at the time of the passage of the ordinance codified in this chapter that, due to changes in this chapter no longer conforms in use, location, height or size with the regulations of this chapter, shall be considered a legal nonconforming use and may continue in use until such time as it is removed or abandoned for a period of six or more continuous months. Except as otherwise set forth in subsections (C)(2) and (C)(3) of this section, any change in the sign, including a fifty percent (50%) or more change of sign copy, shall be considered an abandonment and the legal nonconforming status of the sign shall become void. 2. Whenever the name of a business or other sign text changes, any legal nonconforming signs associated with the business shall be modified to bring them into conformance with this chapter, even though the change is a change of sign copy only. This subsection shall not apply to signs designed with interchangeable letters or panels or to the text area of a monument sign. 3. Legal nonconforming freestanding signs, sign structures, poles and other related equipment that have been abandoned or not in use for more than six months shall be removed and the building, land or site restored to its original state. 4. Electronic message center signs approved prior to the adoption of this section are legal, nonconforming signs which can continue to operate according to the regulations stated below provided, if they are abandoned as provided in subsection (C)(1) or (C)(3) of this section, they shall no longer be allowed and must be removed. a. There shall be no moving or flashing green or red features that can be mistaken as traffic control devices. b. Each message on the sign must be displayed a minimum of eight seconds. c. EMCs shall contain static messages only and shall not have movement, or the appearance or optical illusion of movement, of any part of the sign structure, design or pictorial segment of the sign, including movement or appearance of movement or any illumination of the flashing, scintillating or varying of light intensity. d. Message change is allowed through fade, dissolve, travel, or scrolling modes not to exceed two seconds in transition. e. When a business is closed, the sign may continue to be lit, but may only display a static message. f. Nighttime Allowances. From one hour after official sunset until one hour before official sunrise, the maximum luminance level of any EMC shall be one hundred (100) nits. g. Measurement Criteria. The luminance of an electronic message center shall be measured with a luminance meter set to measure candelas per square meter (nits) traceable to the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) standard and using accepted professional practices for measurement as established by the Development Services Director. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 14 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. h. All permitted electronic message centers shall be equipped with a sensor or other device that automatically determines the ambient illumination and programmed to automatically dim according to ambient light conditions, or that can be adjusted to comply with the one hundred (100) nits maximum nighttime luminance requirement. i. In the event a sign is found to be out of compliance with the luminance levels required by this chapter, the sign shall remain off until the sign is brought into compliance. D. Standards of Measurement. 1. Sign Area Measurement. Sign area for all sign types is measured as follows: a. For sign copy mounted or painted on a background panel or area distinctively painted, textured or constructed, the sign area is the area within the outside dimensions of the background panel or surface. Example Sign Copy Area b. For sign copy consisting of individual letters and/or graphics affixed to a wall or portion of a building that has not been painted, textured, or otherwise altered to provide a distinctive background for the sign copy, the sign area is the area within the sum of the one or two smallest tangent rectangle(s) or other standard geometric shapes (e.g., circle, triangle, regular ellipse, regular rhombus, or regular parallelogram), or combination of rectangles and standard regular geometric shapes that will enclose both the sign copy and background. When two shapes are used, the shapes must include at least one point of common tangency between the two shapes. Example Sign Area Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 15 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. c. For sign copy mounted or painted on an internally illuminated sign or internally illuminated element of a building, the entire internally illuminated surface or architectural element that contains sign copy will be counted as sign area. Example Illuminated Sign Area d. Multifaced Signs. i. One face: the sign area is the area of the single face only. ii. Two faces: if the interior angle between the two sign faces is forty-five (45) degrees or less, the sign area is the area of one face only; if the angle between the sign faces exceeds forty-five (45) degrees, the sign area is the sum of the areas of the two faces. iii. Three or more faces: the sign area is the sum of areas of all the sign faces. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 16 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Example Sign Face Area iv. Three dimensional, sculptural or other nonplanar signs: the sign area will be the sum of the areas of the vertical faces of the smallest polyhedron that will encompass the sign structure. Example Dimensional Sign Area 2. Sign Height Measurement. Sign height is measured as follows: a. Freestanding Sign. Sign height is the distance from the top of the sign face or structure (except for architectural embellishment as provided below), whichever is taller, to the top of curb of the public road nearest the sign, or to the crown of public road nearest the sign if no curb exists. Example Freestanding Sign Height Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 17 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. b. Wall or Fascia Mounted Signs. Sign height is the distance measured from a point perpendicular to the top of the midpoint of the sign structure, to the top of the finished floor of the ground floor level directly below the midpoint of the sign. Example Midpoint of Sign E. Prohibited Signs. Signs not specifically authorized herein are prohibited, including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Neon signs, except as allowed in Section 6.08(A)(16). 2. Any sign emitting sound. 3. Any animated or moving sign, including televisions or signs with streaming video. 4. Mobile signs, except for sign walkers or as otherwise specifically allowed. 5. Billboards. 6. Nonelectrically illuminated signs. 7. Any nonpublic signs in public right-of-way or on public property, except as otherwise specifically allowed. 8. All off-site signs, except as specifically allowed in this chapter. 9. All banners, pennants, streamers, feather signs, balloons, flags, searchlights, strobe lights, beacons, and inflatable signs, except as specifically defined and allowed in this chapter. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 18 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 10. Any sign imitating an official traffic control sign and any sign or device obscuring one or more traffic control signs or devices. 11. Any sign which is structurally unsafe, unsafely installed, or otherwise hazardous to physical safety. 12. Signs not authorized by the property owner. 13. Electronic message centers. F. Illumination. 1. Temporary signs shall not be illuminated. 2. Sign illumination, where allowed, shall be in conformance with provisions of Chapter 8, Outdoor Lighting Control, of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. When externally illuminated, the source of a sign’s illumination shall not be visible from any adjacent residential streets or neighborhoods. 4. No illuminated sign shall be placed or constructed on a vacant or undeveloped lot or parcel. 5. The following types of illumination are prohibited: a. Flashing, blinking, or rotating lights; b. Metal halide lighting; c. High- or low-pressure sodium light bulbs; and d. Mercury vapor light sources. 6. See subsection (C)(4) of this section for luminance standards for electronic message centers. G. Design Guidelines and Standards for Signs and Sign Structures. 1. Permanent signs and sign structures should: a. Be designed to be attractive and artistic; b. Incorporate design features associated with the buildings or structures, and should constitute an architectural component of the overall development that is compatible with, and not incongruous to, the architectural style and character of the development of the property associated with the sign; and c. Utilize materials and design themes consistent with the architectural design theme of the development, as expressed by the building architecture, landscaping, and overall site development. 2. Permanent signs and sign structures: a. Shall be mounted so that the attachment device is not visible. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 19 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. b. Letters attached or anchored to the face of an exposed standard raceway should be architecturally designed and integrated into the building. c. Raceways shall either: i. Be finished to match the color of the building adjacent to the raceway and design elements of the building; or ii. When a raceway is provided as an architectural enhancement to the building elevation, the raceway must be in a contrasting color and material. 3. Temporary signs shall be made of durable materials and properly maintained in good repair. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-13, Amended, 11/02/2021; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Section 6.08 Sign Requirements and Allowances A. Sign Types. The following sign types are allowed in Fountain Hills: 1. A-Frame and T-Frame Signs. a. Description. A self-supporting, temporary, lightweight, portable sign made of durable, nonpliant material such as wood, sheet metal, or plastic that is designed to rest atop the ground without penetrating the ground. b. Zoning/Use. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 20 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. i. Single-family and multifamily residential zoning districts, PAD zoning with a residential land use, and residential developments in commercial zoning districts only when in compliance with subsection C of this section; ii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iii. PADs with commercial or industrial uses. c. Size/Height. i. Maximum sign area for any sign is six square feet. ii. When multiple signs are used, the maximum aggregate area is nine square feet. iii. Maximum sign height is three feet. d. Number. i. In single-family and multifamily districts, as allowed by subsection C of this section. ii. One per business per public entry in commercial or industrial districts with a maximum of two per business. e. Location. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except as provided below: i. On property held in common by members of a property owner’s association or on property owned by the business owner’s landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading area. ii. As provided in subsection C of this section for residential zoning and land uses. iii. In the public right-of-way, including Shea Boulevard, under the following conditions: 1. All commercial and industrially zoned areas and in the right-of-way adjoining these zoning districts. 2. Signs placed in the public right-of-way must adhere to the following requirements: A. Shall not be located on the paved portion of any public street or in any median; B. Shall not be located within a designated parking or loading area; C. Shall not be located in a manner that poses a traffic vision hazard; D. Shall not be located on a public sidewalk except in the Town Center pedestrian area when there is at least four feet of clear passage around at least one side; E. Shall be at least two feet from any curb or edge of pavement; and Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 21 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. F. Shall be removed between the hours of official sunset and official sunrise, except in the Town Center pedestrian area. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Attachments to A-frame signs are limited to not more than four balloons or flags, no more than one square foot in size, each flown with the top of the balloon no higher than ten (10) feet from the ground. ii. Landscaping cannot be modified or damaged to accommodate an A-frame sign. 2. Awning or Canopy Sign. a. Description. A permanent sign that is applied to, placed on, affixed to, or painted on an awning or canopy. b. Zoning/Use. i. Permitted nonresidential uses in a residential zoning district; ii. An apartment building in a multifamily zoning district; iii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iv. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. i. A sign placed on the side or face of an awning or canopy may not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the area of the face of the awning or canopy on which the sign is placed. ii. A sign placed on top of a canopy may not exceed one square foot of area for each linear foot of the length of the canopy on the side containing the sign for single occupancies and for the length of the occupancy for multiple occupancy buildings. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 22 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. d. Number. One sign per occupancy. e. Location. On an approved canopy. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. When placed on top of a canopy, must consist of individual alphanumeric characters only. 3. Balloons. a. Description. A temporary sign professionally made from a bag or similar flexible, nonrigid enclosure that holds gas or air and is attached by a tether to a fixed place. b. Zoning/Use. i. Permitted nonresidential uses in residential zoning districts; ii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iii. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. No balloon shall be bigger than twenty-four (24) inches in diameter and can be no higher than six feet from the ground. d. Number. N/A. e. Location. i. When part of a business, within the area leased by the business. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 23 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. ii. When adjacent to a building, not more than four feet from the face of the building and within twenty (20) feet of the main building entrance. iii. When attached to an authorized temporary sign, in locations where the temporary signs are allowed. iv. Shall not be displayed within the perimeter landscape area. v. Shall not encroach within on-site fire lanes. vi. Shall not be attached to or hung from a tree or shrub. vii. Shall not be erected at the intersection of any street or pedestrian walkway in such a manner as to obstruct free and clear vision, or at any location where, by its position, shape or color, it may interfere with or obstruct the view of or be confused with any authorized traffic signal, sign or device. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Balloons must be tethered to a secure location that prevents high winds from removing the balloon or causing it to create an obstruction. ii. May be displayed for a maximum of thirty (30) days per calendar year. Additional days may be approved through approval of a temporary use permit. 4. Banners. a. Description. A temporary sign made of canvas, plastic, vinyl, or other pliable material attached to a wall, frame, stakes, or other support structure by at least the four corners of the banner. b. Zoning/Use. i. Permitted nonresidential uses in residential zoning districts; Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 24 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. ii. Multifamily developments containing more than ten (10) units in multifamily or commercial zoning districts; iii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iv. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area shall be thirty-two (32) square feet. d. Number. One per occupancy. e. Location. i. Within the area owned or leased by the business or use. ii. Shall not be displayed in any parking space, drive aisle or the required perimeter landscape area. iii. Shall not encroach within on-site fire lanes. iv. Shall not be attached to or hung from a tree or shrub. v. Shall not be erected at the intersection of any street or pedestrian walkway in such a manner as to obstruct free and clear vision, or at any location where, by its position, shape or color, it may interfere with or obstruct the view of or be confused with any authorized traffic signal, sign or device. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. A banner permit must be obtained from the Development Services Department prior to display of a banner sign. Except for new businesses as allowed in subsection (A)(4)(f)(iii)(2) of this section, each permit shall be for a maximum of thirty (30) days. ii. Banners must be affixed to a secure location that prevents high winds from removing the banner or causing it to create an obstruction. iii. Display of banner signs is subject to the following time allowances: 1. A maximum of thirty (30) days at a time for a total maximum of one hundred fifty (150) days per calendar year. Additional days may be approved through approval of a temporary use permit. 2. New businesses, as documented through the issuance of a new business license, may be approved for display of a banner sign for up to one calendar year from the date the business opens or until a permanent sign is erected, whichever occurs first. Sign must be maintained in good repair. Message on the sign may be changed up to four times. 5. Building Wall Sign. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 25 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. a. Description. A permanent sign mounted flat against or painted on the wall of a building with the exposed face of the sign in a plane parallel to the face of the wall. b. Zoning/Use. i. Permitted nonresidential uses in residential zoning districts; ii. Apartment complexes containing more than twenty (20) units in multifamily or commercial zoning districts; iii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iv. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. i. One and one-half square feet of sign area is allowed for each lineal foot of occupancy frontage along a street. All occupancies with an exterior wall are allowed a minimum of twenty-four (24) square feet of signage. The maximum allowed sign area for an individual sign is one hundred (100) square feet. ii. Corner buildings may transfer up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the area from one building frontage to the other if the angle of the building at the corner is between forty-five degrees (45˚) and ninety degrees (90˚). Each side of corner buildings with building frontages less than forty-five degrees (45˚) and between ninety degrees (90˚) and one hundred eighty degrees (180˚) shall be considered as one frontage and may not transfer sign area. iii. Sign area must allow a minimum of a two-foot border from the edge of the building or suite frontage, or a minimum two-foot separation between signs, whichever is greater. d. Number. One sign for each fifty (50) feet of occupancy per street frontage, or portion thereof. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 26 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. e. Location. Shall not be located in a manner that is prohibited in Section 6.07(B)(2)(c). f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Each wall sign may project no more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the wall to which is it attached. ii. Reverse pan channel letters with halo illumination must not exceed a one and three-quarters inch separation from the wall. iii. In the C-2, C-3, and TCCD zoning districts, a building wall sign may be added to a secondary entrance in addition to total aggregate sign area if the following criteria are met: 1. Sign area shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the primary total aggregate sign area. 2. The secondary entrance must not be visible from the main public entrance. 3. The secondary entrance must face a rear parking area, common area or public use frontage. 6. Drive-Through Sign. a. Description. A permanent, freestanding sign adjacent to a drive-through, typically placed in or near an area where orders are taken from occupants of a vehicle. b. Zoning/Use. Commercial or industrial zoning districts or PAD with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area shall be twenty (20) square feet. Maximum sign height is five feet. d. Number. Maximum of one per drive-through lane. e. Location. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 27 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. i. Within five feet of a drive-through lane. ii. Cannot be readable from any public street or alley. iii. Must be at least one hundred fifty (150) feet from any residential zoning district or fully screened from residential view by a masonry wall. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Minimum of four square feet of landscaping per one square foot of sign area shall be provided at the base of the sign. 7. Flags. a. Description. A fabric sheet of square, rectangular, or triangular shape that is designed to be mounted by a cable or rope to a pole at one end. b. Zoning/Use. Allowed in all zoning districts. c. Size/Height. i. The maximum size of a flag is twenty-four (24) square feet in residentially zoned property or property zoned PAD with residential uses and sixty (60) square feet in all other zoning districts. ii. The maximum flagpole height is the height allowed in the zoning district and Section 5.07(B). d. Number. i. If hung from the side of a building, one per unit or tenant space. ii. Each flagpole may contain up to two flags. e. Location. Flagpoles must be located so that if the pole should fall, it will remain on the property containing the pole. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Developed single-family lots may contain one flagpole. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 28 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. ii. Model home complexes may have two flagpoles on one lot and one flagpole on additional lots up to a maximum of five flagpoles. iii. All other properties may have up to two flagpoles. iv. The length of the flag, which is the longer side of the flag that is perpendicular to the flagpole, shall not exceed one-third of the in-ground pole height. v. May be hung on the side of a building only on national or state holidays. 8. Freestanding Wall/Fence Sign. a. Description. A permanent sign that is applied to, placed on, affixed to, or painted on a wall or fence that is not part of the building(s) on the property. b. Zoning/Use. i. Subdivision entry feature for single-family and multifamily developments in all residential zoning districts; ii. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and iii. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area is twenty-four (24) square feet. Maximum sign height is six feet. d. Number. One per development entry. e. Location. Part of or attached to a perimeter wall surrounding a development. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 29 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. i. A minimum of two square feet of landscape area per one square foot of sign area shall be provided at the base of the sign. ii. Sign area may be back-lit such that the source of illumination is not visible; provided, however, that back-lit, nonopaque panels are not allowed. iii. The text area of the sign may be illuminated by fully shielded, ground mounted directional lighting. 9. Hanging or Under-Canopy Sign. a. Description. A permanent sign suspended from and located entirely under a covered porch, covered walkway, awning, or canopy. b. Zoning/Use. Any commercial or industrial zoning district and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign width is twenty-four (24) inches, maximum sign height is twelve (12) inches. Minimum clearance is at least eight feet from the bottom of the sign to the sidewalk or surface beneath the sign. d. Number. One per occupancy. e. Location. Under an awning or canopy associated with the business or activity. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. If located over an abutting Town right-of-way, must obtain an encroachment permit from the Town. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 30 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. 10. Monument Sign. a. Description. A permanent sign mounted on or incorporated into a solid, self-supporting base that is not part of a building or wall. b. Zoning/Use. i. Permitted nonresidential uses in residential zoning districts; ii. Entry feature into a subdivision in single-residence zoning districts; iii. Apartment or condominium complex containing more than twenty (20) dwellings in multifamily zoning districts; iv. Commercial or industrial zoning districts; and v. PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Table 6.08(B). Size and Height Allowances for Monument Signs Zoning District Maximum Size Maximum Height Single Residential 32 sq. ft. 6 feet Multiresidential 32 sq. ft. 8 feet Commercial/Industrial 50 sq. ft. for an individual sign 12 feet d. Number. One monument sign per lot or parcel for each full three hundred (300) feet of street frontage. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 31 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. e. Location. i. Along a street frontage, but not within a public right-of-way. ii. Must be separated from any other monument sign on the same property by at least one hundred fifty (150) feet. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. A minimum of two square feet of landscaping per one square foot of sign area provided at the base of the sign. ii. Sign may be internally illuminated. iii. Sign area may be back-lit such that the source of illumination is not visible; provided, however, that back-lit, nonopaque panels are not allowed. iv. The text area of the sign may be illuminated by fully shielded, ground mounted directional lighting. 11. On-Site Directional Sign. a. Description. A small permanent sign located adjacent to a driveway or drive aisle. b. Zoning/Uses. Commercial or industrial zoning districts and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area is four square feet. Maximum sign height is five feet. d. Number. As needed. e. Location. At least twenty (20) feet from a public street and within five feet of a driveway or drive aisle. 12. Post and Board Sign. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 32 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. a. Description. A temporary sign constructed of plywood, sheet metal, thick plastic, or similar material attached to one or two posts fixed in the ground. b. Zoning/Uses. Allowed in all zoning districts. c. Size/Height. i. Developed properties and undeveloped properties five acres or less in size, the maximum sign area is six square feet. Maximum sign height is five feet in residentially zoned property and eight feet in nonresidentially zoned property. ii. Undeveloped property more than five acres in size, maximum sign area is thirty-two (32) square feet. Maximum height is eight feet. d. Number. One per lot per street front. For two- and three-unit condominium developments, may have one per unit. e. Location. i. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except on property held in common by members of a property owner’s association, a condominium association, or on property owned by the business owner’s landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading area. ii. A property owner may place a sign within the public right-of-way, provided all portions of the sign structure and sign face are at least two feet from the curb or edge of pavement and do not overhang a sidewalk, and the sign is not within a sight visibility triangle for a street intersection or driveway. 13. Projecting Sign. a. Description. A permanent sign attached to a building in a manner such that its face is not parallel to the building to which it is attached. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 33 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. b. Zoning/Uses. Commercial or industrial zoning districts and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign width is three and one-half feet. Maximum sign height is six feet. Minimum clearance is eight feet from the bottom of the sign to the sidewalk or surface beneath the sign. d. Number. One per building. e. Location. On the building outside the tenant space for which the sign is located. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. If encroaching over an abutting Town right-of-way line, must obtain an encroachment permit from the Town. 14. Sign Walkers. a. Description. A person who wears, holds, waves, or balances a sign in order to convey a commercial message. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 34 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. b. Zoning/Uses. Commercial or industrial zoning districts and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area is five square feet. d. Number. One sign per business. e. Location. i. If located in the right-of-way, a sign walker shall be positioned behind the curb, or, if no curb is present, ten (10) feet behind the edge of pavement. ii. Sign walkers shall be positioned so as to not obstruct vehicle sight lines and road “clear zones” established by the Town Engineer in accordance with traffic engineering standards. iii. Sign walkers shall not obstruct the free movement of pedestrians on sidewalks. iv. Sign walkers are not allowed in the medians of public or private streets. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. Sign walkers shall not erect or place tents, temporary structures, umbrellas, chairs or stools anywhere within the public right-of-way or on adjacent property. 15. Vehicle Sign. a. Description. A sign painted, attached, or affixed to a trailer, watercraft, truck, automobile, or other form of motor vehicle. b. Zoning/Uses. Commercial and industrial zoning districts and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. N/A. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 35 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. d. Number. N/A. e. Location. Vehicle must be parked in an authorized location and in a lawful manner that is not distinct or different from the predetermined parking area design. f. Miscellaneous Requirements. i. The vehicle must be operable and currently registered per Town Code. The primary purpose of the vehicle shall be in the operation of the business, e.g., transporting goods or providing services, and not displaying a sign. ii. Business or commercial vehicles displaying signage or advertising as a normal part of business activity may be parked in an off-street parking space adjacent to the business to which the vehicle relates as far from the public right-of-way as possible. If the vehicle is visible from the public right- of-way it shall not remain in the same parking space for more than forty-eight (48) hours. iii. Unless otherwise permitted, signs mounted, attached or painted on trailers, boats, motor vehicles or any moveable object placed on premises specifically to serve as additional signage are prohibited; they shall not become additional, permanent freestanding signs. iv. No sign shall be erected or attached to any vehicle except for signs that are magnetically attached to or permanently painted or wrapped on the surface of a vehicle. 16. Window Sign. a. Description. Any poster, cut-out letters, painted text or graphics, or other text or visual presentation affixed to, or located within six feet behind, a windowpane and placed to be read from the exterior of a building. Such signs may be permanent or temporary. b. Zoning/Uses. Commercial or industrial zoning districts and PADs with similar uses. c. Size/Height. May not cover more than fifty (50) percent of any window. d. Number. N/A. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 36 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. e. Location. On a window or within six feet behind a window when intended to be viewed from outside the building. f. Miscellaneous. May use neon signs for interior window displays in commercial and industrial districts. The total amount of neon signage for any one business shall be six square feet. No more than two neon signs shall be allowed for any business. 17. Yard Signs. a. Description. An easily portable temporary sign up to six square feet in size that can be implanted in the ground without use of tools. b. Zoning. Allowed in all zoning districts. c. Size/Height. Maximum sign area is six square feet in single-family zoning districts and eight square feet in all other zoning districts. Maximum sign height is three feet in single-family zoning districts and five feet in all other zoning districts. d. Number. i. In single-family districts or uses, two signs per property. ii. In multifamily districts or uses, two signs per property; if two- or three-unit condominium development, two per unit. iii. In commercial or industrial districts, one sign per business. e. Location. i. On private property. ii. On property held in common by members of a property owner’s association or on property owned by the business owner’s landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading area. Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 37 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024. Disclaimer: The town clerk’s office has the official version of the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance. Users should contact the town clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. Town Website: www.fh.az.gov Hosted by General Code. iii. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way in residential zoned areas, except when used as provided in subsection C of this section. iv. In the public right-of-way adjoining commercial or industrial zoned property, except on Shea Boulevard. Shall be removed between the hours of official sunset and official sunrise, except in the Town Center pedestrian area. B. Temporary Sign Allowance for Construction on Undeveloped Property. Undeveloped properties with valid building permits may display one temporary sign per street front not to exceed eight square feet in size and a maximum height of five feet. The sign must be on the construction site. The sign must be removed no later than the date when the final inspection is completed. Required government signs for construction projects are exempt from this requirement. C. Other Signs for Residential Uses. 1. Each single-family lot, condominium unit, or model home may place one A-frame, T-frame, or yard sign anywhere on the property. Further, each single-family home, condominium complex, or model home cluster may place one additional A-frame, T-frame, or yard sign off-site at each turning movement beginning at the subject property out to a major street with a maximum of five additional signs. 2. Signs shall not be located within the public right-of-way associated with Shea Boulevard at any time, but may be located within the public right-of-way of any other street between the hours of official sunrise and official sunset. When located in the right-of-way, shall be placed at least two feet from the curb or edge of pavement. 3. Miscellaneous Requirements. a. No sign may be attached to any utility pole or box, light pole, street sign, bus shelter, or any structure within the public right-of-way. b. Signs shall not damage any vegetation or rest against other objects or vegetation. (23-04, Amended, 10/17/2023, Deleted and replaced; 21-13, Amended, 11/02/2021; 21-09, Amended, 05/18/2021, Deleted and replaced) Ch. 6 Sign Regulations | Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance Page 38 of 38 The Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance is current through Ordinance 24-15, passed October 15, 2024.