Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout240610 Summary Minutes & Verbatim TranscriptTOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 45 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 10, 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 JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 45 CHAIR GRAY: All right. Good evening. This is the June 10th version of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission. If you would all please rise for 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. CHAIR GRAY: Thank you. Paula, roll call, please? WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Here. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Watts? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Here. WOODWARD: Chair Gray? CHAIR GRAY: Here. Thank you, Paula. Agenda item number 3: Call to the public. Paula, do we have any speaker cards? WOODWARD: Yes, Chair. One speaker card from Larry Meyers. MEYERS: Farmers, butchers, those of lower intellect. I want to talk about how much work you put in and what you get out. I see you guys putting in a lot of work, and then I see you not getting a lot out. The town council under this administration isn't the first town council to have viewed planning and zoning in a lower or lesser light, but never to the level that we see currently. Dennis Brown, in the last council, once said in 2018, while we were arguing about whether to put a nursing home at the entrance to Fountain Hills. Well, the planning and zoning commissioners do a lot of research, and they're pretty smart, but they don't know how to run a town like we do. That was the level of his insult. The level of insult that was exhibited by our council towards this body in the last council meeting is absolutely beyond my 42 years here in Fountain Hills, TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 45 which includes having worked with or worked for commissions the government. I've known every mayor we have, dead and alive. I've seen lots of Planning and Zoning Commissions. I've seen some that work hard, some that don't work hard. Most of the time they take the input of residents, and they take it seriously, and they consider it, and they make their decision, and they pass on their recommendation. They don't make policy. Obviously, the council makes policy, but sometimes the council places people on the commission and gives them a mandate. It's happened before. It's happening now. We're ignoring the intent of Fountain Hills because when it was created, there was an intent. It had nothing to do with apartment buildings. It had nothing to do with crosswalks. It had nothing to do whether you had an acre and a half or an R1-10 zone, it had to do with what it was planned from the very beginning. And then you purchased it, and when you purchased it, you expected it to be your neighbors as to what you expected. So I would encourage you to do as much work as you feel fit. Know full well that the people are behind you, and we're ignoring the council and their insults. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Paula, any more speaker cards? WOODWARD: No Chair. CHAIR GRAY: Thank you, Paula. All right. Agenda item 4: Consideration of possible action on two sets of meeting minutes from April 8th, '24 and May 13th, '24. Commissioners, any conversation or a motion, please? Commissioner Watt? VICE CHAIR WATTS: I move to approve as submitted. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: I'll second that. CHAIR GRAY: All in favor? ALL: Aye. WOODWARD: five, zero. CHAIR GRAY: Thank you. Paula. All right. We're going to flip-flop to make best use of people's time here this evening. We'll flip TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 45 flop agenda item 5 and agenda item 6. So keeping with the with the numbering on the agenda, agenda item 6 is: Public hearing, review, and consideration of rezoning of two lots on Indigo from R1-18 to R1-10A. And I don't see a case number on that. WESLEY: I guess I forgot to put the case number on. That's okay. It's not required. Commissioners, good evening. I will step through a presentation of the request and then see what questions that you have. As has been mentioned, we're looking at a couple of lots on the west side of Indigo, between Kingstree and Emerald Drive, currently zoned R1-18, with a request to rezone to R1-10A. The proposal is to then also subdivide the two lots to create four, and the R1-10A specifically allows the 30-foot access drive configuration, what's often called a flag lot type development. They're proposing that on the lots then, that they will be built with homes ranging in size from 22 to 2,800 square feet and one story in height. So here is a map that illustrates the existing zoning pattern in this area. So the lots in question is shown in green. And you can see the surrounding zoning that ranges from the R3 to the R1-18. The area was initially platted in 1972, with block 8 having two lots. Those two lots have subsequently been further subdivided so that the lot 2 on the north is now two lots, and the lot on the south has also been divided into two lots. So looking a bit more closely at this zoning pattern and the history of development that has occurred on this property, starting with the lots to the north, back in 2015, there was a request to rezone those parcels from the R1-18 to R3 with the proposal to put a four-unit condominium building on that lot. That was approved. However, the condominium development did not go in, and the owner decided instead to divide it into the two lots that we have today and build those homes on there. The lots to the east are, as were originally platted, to R1-18 lots, each with one house. The southern lot built in some time prior to '86, and the one to the north prior to '93. To the southeast, we have a R-2 zoned lot. It was originally platted as one lot in 1972. Subsequently, replatted into four lots, and each built with a home between '98 and 2000. To the immediate south, abutting this property, we have originally zoned R3 tract. In TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 45 '96, it was rezoned to an R-3 PUD for the condominium development. Originally platted in '72, Replatted in '99 for the condos, and homes were pretty much built out in that by 2000. Immediately to the west, we also have R-3 zoning. Originally platted in '72, condominium plat in '97, and homes constructed in 2000. So you can see three sides of this abuts multiple residence zone at R-3 and then multifamily to the southeast and single-family immediately to the east. When we look at all these together, you can see the types of units built and the density on those properties. And we take the entire area there, leaving out the parcels in question for the rezone, we have an average of 6.7 units per acre. General plan and the character element has a couple of goals and some policies that relate to the request that address infill development and how we might view that in context of the surrounding neighborhood. I won't review all those specifically here because I'll cover them a little bit more in just a moment. But also of note, the previous general plan, which was more specific in terms of designations, did designate this entire block as multifamily medium, four to ten units per acre. So going through the request and looking at it, particularly with the general plan designations in mind, does the requested rezoning encourage infill development in a manner that will maintain and protect the existing neighborhood? As shown, the proposed lot sizes and density is very similar to the existing development, particularly that to the southeast across Indigo. It will continue to develop single-family homes along Indigo, and the anticipated house sizes and sales prices are very similar to those in the neighborhood. Having flag lots is a little bit different. We don't see those all the time, but there are examples of those in town, so this isn't totally unique. Particularly, the one-off of Chicory Drive is pretty much the same type in an R1-8 district. And also having zoning districts across from each other that are somewhat different is not unusual, as you can see from these different examples of many that could be shown from around town, of smaller lots across from larger lots. Again, a very common zoning pattern here in town. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 45 Will the infill development be compatible with adjacent densities and development form? Again, the densities being proposed is very similar to what's in the area, lower than the average, similar to what's to the southeast. The R-2 and R-3 properties that are in this area would allow a 50 percent lot coverage. The R1-10A allows a 40 percent lot coverage, and the R1-18 allows a 25 percent lot coverage. So it's again in that same similar range. Existing zoning districts allow 30-foot of height, as does the R1-10A. Everything in the area is one-story except for the multifamily to the west and south, which are both built as two stories. So again, very similar to what's there. The last one from the general plan: will the proposed development provide a wide range of housing types, densities, and prices support the current projected populations? It's a pretty small development. So there's really not much different going on here in terms of providing that wider range of housing that we're looking for in the town. Citizen participation. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting; 24 people attended. We received multiple emails about this request, which have been passed on to you and were the ones we had, at the time of the packet, were included in the packet. And we've had a number of concerns listed. You can read them here: Not in line with the character of the neighborhood; people in the area bought their homes based on a certain zoning development pattern and expect that to stay; concern with traffic, character, environment; having multiple backyards where they weren't expected; privacy and esthetics and diminishing views. In the staff summary, we find that the proposal is consistent with the previous and current general plans; provides the transitions from the surrounding higher intensity R-3 zones to the R1-18 across the street; the impact of two additional homes will be minimal on the area and on the traffic; and it is consistent with the density and character of the area, therefore, staff has recommended approval. I've included one additional slide here, as you have the citizens come speak about this, it might be helpful. The stars represent the properties that we had emails from of people expressing their opposition to the request. In addition to the ones shown there, we had TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 45 one with no address listed, so we couldn't put it on. And one with a property there, Kingstree and Indigo that indicated she owned two lots but didn't say which two lots those were, so I couldn't put the stars on those. Otherwise, those represent the locations of the people with emails. So again, as people come up this evening to speak, hopefully, they'll make it easy for them to identify where they're from in the neighborhood. Any questions you have for me at this time? CHAIR GRAY: Question to John, Commissioner? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Not at this time. WESLEY: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: I don't think so, John. Paula, let's go to speaker cards. WOODWARD: All right. There were written speaker cards that -- there were 11 written speaker cards against the project. And we have four speakers. The first speaker will be Larry Meyers, and the speaker thereafter is Rick Murdock. MEYERS: I won't insult you again, Chair and Vice Chair and commissioners. So out of the playbook, written and adapted many times over for Fountain Hills, we have a landowner who seeks to make more money by coming to the town for a rezone. We also have a realtor who is also seeking to make more money because the more the landowner makes, the more the realtor makes because they're probably selling the land. We have neighbors who purchased their properties, knowing that this was zoned one way. And then we have our general plan, which is written by -- I won't insult them -- people who don't take any of those things into consideration and only pass judgment for the rest of us for the benefit of the town. The town being everyone, I guess. So this playbook's been run over and over and over again. It was run on the five-acre parcel at Saguaro and Trevino when they wanted to rezone it to C-2 so they could make more money -- bought the land distressed, rezoned it to C-2, sell it for $2.5 million. Screw the neighbors who are on the hill looking at a three-story nursing home. Ran it there. Ran it at Daybreak -- blow the top off of a mountain, change L-3 lodging resort into a bunch of apartments next to multi-million dollar homes TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 45 looking down on the crappy complex. Ran it out on Ivory and Pueblo, bought distressed property, couldn't use it for what it was zoned, you guys rezoned it to multiuse with some sort of a condo thing going on upstairs, and it still hasn't been built. Let's see Kingstree and Saguaro. Bought that commercial, couldn't make that work. So now we're going to rezone that to multiuse, and we don't have enough parking for that. And then, again, we have the Target Plaza, which was bought distressed in 2014. It should have never been a shopping center in the first place, so it didn't work. So now we're going to change that into a whole bunch of apartments. The playbook goes on and on and on. And this is just another example. The people, especially across the street in those big old homes, they didn't think they were going to have a bunch of little homes across the street from them. And over the years, we've changed all of the zoning in this area so that it could be higher density. I don't blame them. I wouldn't like it either. You're devaluing someone's investment. They came here for a reason, and now you're giving them a reason to be mad. So please don't listen to town staff. Recommend not approval. Thank you. WOODWARD: Rick Murdock. CHAIR GRAY: Commission, Rick is going to speak on behalf of a large number of homeowners. So no time on the clock for Rick. MURDOCK: Appreciate it. Good evening. Thank you, Commissioners. Rick Murdock, 11200 North Indigo Drive. I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight. And thanks to the Harr family as well for hosting the participation plan meeting that we participated in several weeks ago. Filled out their complete office with many of our neighbors that are concerned about this, that are here tonight and those that have sent letters, and unfortunately, those that may be traveling and weren't able to attend tonight. So hopefully, you can get a feel for really how that map of all the stars represents just a few, and there's much more than that. We do have a great neighborhood. We're very well organized, and we have a great deal of respect for one another. We've hosted many -- several in-person meetings with one another where we've been able to share our concerns. We've attended meetings to talk with the Harr family about the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 45 construction and our concerns about their development. And we've shared numerous emails, more than I can count, about the concerns and how best we could come together as a one unit to present to the town our concerns about what is happening here with this rezone. We, collective -- the collective "we" that I use is that we have invested millions of dollars into this street and this neighborhood. We continue to invest as we improve the community. We do this as we build out our properties, as we expand our properties. And we've done this all as we've followed the letter of the current zoning, we knew that this was a contract when we came into place, and we continue to follow it to today. The change in the zoning that's been requested allows for variances that we believe are completely outside the character of the neighborhood. If you had an opportunity to drive this lot and you look at this space and you imagine the four homes going in there, visibly it's just hard to even visualize what that might look like because it's so tight. Allowing for these houses to be double-deep housing in here, essentially adding an internal road into our neighborhood -- in the very middle of our neighborhood, isn't really rational when giving our current residential layout here. Thanks to the staff that showed the video of current flag pole developments that have happened in this community, you saw the very first example of Chicory Street. It looks very crowded, very congested. I couldn't even tell you whose backyards were and belonged to which neighborhood there. We believe that the intent -- if you look at the current map that's shown here, the intent when this committee, not necessarily you individuals, but when this committee approved the subdivision into these four lots, the intent were for four homes to be built on this lot. Now we're here chasing after one developer's pro forma. Rather than investing in the community the way it's been, supporting the community members in the way that they've developed and followed the rules, we're asking that we continue that as we move forward. We would completely welcome two new neighbors into our street. We love our neighborhood. We know that we can bring value into the entire community, but we want to do it as the character of the neighborhood currently exists. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 45 I think I'll close there with just saying that we hope that the commission supports what we know the vision and intent has always been for these four lots. We appreciate the time, and we hope to work with the Harr family in finding a solution here. Thank you. WOODWARD: Next speaker is James Miller, and then Ashley Gerhardt. MILLER: Good evening. Thank you for your time tonight. My name is James Miller. My wife, Rosemary, and I live at 11208, the corner lot between Indigo and Emerald. We bought the house exactly four years ago this month. And when we bought it, we asked the realtors that were involved, what about that land? Oh, two home -- zoned for two homes. Okay. That was what we expected. And you know, I think what Rick was saying and other people have said, we're looking to get exactly what we expected when we bought the house four years ago; it's not unreasonable. If you bought -- if you lived on a cul de sac in town here, and then the town decided someone would rezone, take some land out of a ravine, and make a through road, those people, they'd go nuts. They say, wait a second, we had a nice, quiet street, now we've got a throughfare. Not that a throughfare is bad, it's just not what they expected when they bought the home. The kids play on the cul de sac. They expect that there's not traffic going whizzing past. And that's what they expected. We expected to have two homes built there one day, and we expected them to be a similar home. The density of these four homes is twice what it should be, and the noise level we'll get from the homes, with cars coming out into Indigo straight from that flag lot, will be, you know, a lot more than what we've seen there. We just don't really want to change the character of the neighborhood, and we feel that this is a character changer for us. I've spoken to many realtors, and they all tell me -- I said, well, is it going to impact the value of my house? They all say yes. You've got a -- you've got postage stamp-sized homes built one house away from you, it's going to downgrade your neighborhood. The Harr family, very nice presentation they have -- they were very, very gentlemanly -- but they're talking about selling these houses for anywhere from 1.2 to 1.6. I don't know. I see houses in Fountain Hills that are having trouble selling up higher, with great views and bigger homes, and they're having trouble getting $2 million. So I don't -- I think that TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 45 1.6 is a dream. It's not going to happen. And then we're going to have homes in there that are much less valuable than ours. They're going to be less. This is a poster-sized lot. It's a lot less square footage. The homes are going to be worth less. He's trying to say, well, because they're new homes. My home is only four years old -- four or five years old, you know, it's it's not been devalued because of its age. It's still quite valuable. So I think, you know, just in closing, I'd like to say we want to maintain the same type of neighborhood we bought into when we moved here. And just like the cul de sac -- person who lived in a cul de sac and get a through street, they weren't expecting that, they weren't planning on that, and they don't want it. So thank you very much for your time. Appreciate it. CHAIR GRAY: Mr. Miller? MILLER: Yes. CHAIR GRAY: You're the southeast adjacent parcel there? MILLER: I'm the star at the top of the corner of Emerald and Indigo. 2B. CHAIR GRAY: 2B, okay. MILLER: The one that has a lot of improvements I put in -- we put into the home. Hundreds of thousands of dollars we put into the home. What's that? All legally done. GERHARDT: Hi. Good evening. I'm Ashley Gerhardt. I reside on lot 2A, 11200 North Indigo Drive. So much like Jim and what Rick has stated, we purchased these homes not too long ago with expectation that the lots would be zoned as current state. So we heard a very good presentation tonight about the reason why, and it showed some examples of zoning. But they missed the mark on the north and east properties, which my property sits directly to the north. And personally, I think has a great deal of impact here with the requirements that they're requesting, such as seven-foot setbacks. As you can imagine, that would be a little tight to current zoning. So honestly, it's very disappointing that we are here tonight to discuss these requirements that have been in place for several years and that we all bought into. The proposed setbacks will unreasonably encroach on my property, as well as the other neighbors that you see on the other lot in the Emerald Townhomes. And we've discussed these concerns with the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 45 Harr family in their meetings. We've tried to come up with some solutions with current zoning requirements, only to receive a response that does not fit in their pro forma. That was very disheartening to hear. And I'll just close on, I support, too, the properties being zoned as current zoning. And I do feel that we do need to have some new neighbors, just not four at a time. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Farhad, are you going to look into Mr. Miller's permit applications? Okay. Any more speaker cards, Paula? WOODWARD: No Chair. CHAIR GRAY: All right. Mr. Harr, no time on the clock for you. But if you'd like to speak, you're welcome to. HARR: Thank you for your time. I just want to, probably, maybe hit the highlights. That the neighborhood is a mixed -- a mixed character neighborhood. The property that we are on, that whole block, including the neighbors to the north, are all zoned -- except for us at this point -- are zoned multifamily. The people to the north, if somebody were to purchase their house, they could tear it down and build apartments at this point or condominiums, and still be within the existing zoning that is on their property. The average density surrounding the area is 6.7 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density for the lots that we were doing will be three dwelling units per acre. The character of neighborhood is currently multifamily or smaller lots. There is no cul de sac planned for this lot. It's two homes sitting on the center of what would be the both lots with a easement -- two easements in the back to access the back. So yes, there are four driveways, but there's two houses on the street. The -- you know, if it's a big thing for the owners to the north of us at the 10200 hundred North Indigo, we would be happy to stipulate a ten-foot side yard setback abutting their property. They do have a six or seven-foot block wall fence there at this time. I don't know how much difference that would make, but we would be happy to stipulate to that. With the requested change, we are actually building on lots of similar size to most, well, probably 90 percent of the other single-family residential homes of similar value surrounding it. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 45 According to the general plan review, infill is compatible with adjacent residential densities and development to protect the character of the residential neighborhoods, which I believe we're doing by buffering between two-story multifamily condo developments and single-family residences on the east side of the road, which there's if I remember correctly, there's five; four of which are on smaller lots than we are proposing. Character type typically includes lots between 6,000 and 15,000 square feet. Ours are a minimum of 11,700 up to 16,600 square feet. These lots have been vacant for 24 years since all the surrounding properties have been built. And lastly, according to the staff report, to meet the policy of the general plan, a more appropriate consideration would be to have smaller lots to achieve a density of six to eight units per acre for more variety of housing options. We're proposing three units to the acre, which is half or less than what the general plan suggested. So thank you for your time. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. A ten-foot side -- I assume the houses are going to be oriented -- it would be to the east. HARR: The the houses, the front of the houses will face east, the rears where most of the open space is -- KOVACEVIC: Okay. HARR: -- will be to the west on all four lots. KOVACEVIC: And what do you anticipate the -- I mean, with a 103-foot minimum frontage, what do you anticipate the width of the houses to be? HARR: They'll be in the 68- to 74-foot wide, which is about typical for all the properties to the to the south or to the east, the four lots there. I don't know if there's a specific -- there's no designator on there, which those lots are. Yeah, those four lots. I think they average 86-foot wide lots. And they're probably, my guess is they're probably under 70- foot wide homes on those lots. And then as far as the two lots to the north, I believe TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 45 those lots -- and this is going from memory -- I believe they're 89- and 96- or 97-foot wide. The zoning as it is, of our specific property of R1-18 requires 120-foot-wide lot. And I'm going to try and look up really quick what are frontages are on the lots that we were -- that we are proposing. Here it is. An average of 103 feet. KOVACEVIC: Do do the lots narrow as they go back? HARR: No, they do not. Not -- well, a little bit, but not. KOVACEVIC: Not a lot. HARR: But the frontage is still - KOVACEVIC: I'm -- HARR: -- exceeds any other lots. KOVACEVIC: Okay. HARR: Except for the one directly across the street. KOVACEVIC: Because just the one thing and I appreciate your offer to -- your stipulation of a ten-foot side yard, but that's still only ten percent of the width of the lot. HARR: But typical sidewalks are either seven foot or ten foot. That's the -- that's the zoning and the building setback and the people -- which is the correct? Well -- sorry. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Broke it. HARR: Okay. That would be better. This property here and this property, their average side yard setback is ten feet. And so they were asking -- what I got out of the conversation was that the owners of this lot were saying that they have a ten-foot side yard setback on the the left side of their house, which would be the south side. And were -- felt that the seven-foot setback that we would have abutting their property wasn't the same. And so we're saying we would meet that ten-foot side setback on that side of the property, so it matched their setback. That make sense? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. That makes sense. As my experience with these is pretty much a -- and it's not necessarily here, but a ten percent side yard. HARR: That's not the case -- KOVACEVIC: -- is -- so anyway, that's where I was coming from because it's not ten percent. So --okay. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 45 HARR: Again, just to reiterate, the typical side yard setback is anywhere from seven to ten feet in the building envelope requirements in Fountain Hills. So what we're offering is to go to the same that they have on the lot next door. KOVACEVIC: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: Before -- Commissioner Watts, I'll get to you. But before we move off of that -- and, John, maybe you can speak to this, maybe you can't. But what's interesting about the prior subdivision of these -- the original lot to the current lots is we've had other zoning cases in the past where we've actually turned down variances. The one on Trevino sticks in my mind. Trevino and Nelson, there's a parcel there that was R-1 to 34. When it was subdivided, all of the original setbacks were required to be retained in that. Why would this be different? Because we would have gone from side yard setbacks here of 20 foot now down to 10, and now we're saying down to 7. So is there precedent there? WESLEY: Let me just see if I can follow your comments. Are you talking about on these two lots or the lots to the north? Or on other lots? CHAIR GRAY: Well, I'm just saying, once upon a time, this -- what's in green there was 1 to 34, right? WESLEY: No. CHAIR GRAY: It was never. WESLEY: No. It's always been R1-18 from the original zoning at the time. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. I thought that that was 1 to 34, which would have had 20 yards. So it was always ten? WESLEY: Yes. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. Okay, Commissioner Watts. VICE CHAIR WATTS: You mentioned that those lots have been vacant for 24 years. Why? HARR: Well, they've been vacant for 50-some years since the town was built, but it's been -- I was referring to the -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Well, I guess the question really isn't how long, it's why. And with TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 45 this market, the way the real estate market is, and the way lots get snatched up here, why have they been sitting for so long? HARR: Well, my guess is because of -- they're surrounded on two sides by two-story multifamily structures. SEVERAL UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: No. That's not correct. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. And this is the second time in recent history that I've heard reference to the general plan that you don't want to make any concessions other than that ten-foot setback to a seven-foot -- or seven-foot setback to a ten-foot setback. Any other concessions? HARR: Nobody has asked for other concessions other than us to just build two homes, one on each lot. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. And you told the residents that were at the meeting that it wasn't in your pro forma to just build two homes there? HARR: What I probably said is it did not make financial sense based on the size of these lots and the fact that they're surrounded on two sides by multifamily, to be able to build a house to generate the income -- the sales price to pay what we're having to pay for these lots. It's not -- it's a financial decision. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. Thank you. HARR: Which is probably why they haven't sold in the past. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Corey. COREY: Yes. Hi Mr. Harr. HARR: Hi. COREY: I think I read in one of the comments that one of the neighbors was concerned they would have two yards adjacent to theirs; maybe that was in 2A. So is that the way that that configuration would be set up? They would be split in the middle and then have two yards next to their property? HARR: John, can you go back to that screen (indiscernible). COREY: With the red lines, yeah. Thank you. The one you accidentally went to earlier. HARR: Both of these -- so this is the property of the person who made that comment. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 45 COREY: Okay. HARR: And so there would be two side yards. These two lots would abut their property. What I can say -- what I can say is that these are side yards -- COREY: Okay. HARR: -- they're not the backyards. So it's not like there's going to be pools or anything else, especially on the front lot. There's no -- there's not going to be any pool or area there that is going to create, I would think, a lot of noise. Yes, there -- it's possible that somebody will put in a pool here or play in their backyard. Same thing for here. But you know, with this -- with a ten-foot side yard setback, if that was approved, that's not space to do anything on the side here. COREY: Okay. So it could be a portion of that backyard but just not directly facing it? HARR: Correct. COREY: And then, if I'm imagining where all four driveways would be, there's two in the middle. HARR: Um-hum. COREY: And then where would the other two be? HARR: They would be on the opposite sides. So on the far right, the far left. COREY: Okay. Just concerned about that house that is -- HARR: 1104? COREY: -- directly -- is it 1104? Looks like they may have four driveways facing them. I could see a lot of lights hitting that house as the people are leaving their driveways there. Was there any other configuration that you looked at? HARR: Not that would be able to allow us to build a house of the size that we would want to build, to be able to support and not diminish the value of the homes in the neighborhood. COREY: I'm seeing this -- so I'm just seeing that dirt road on the bottom left there. Was there any configuration that, maybe, would have one driveway on the left with one home in the back instead of four, or any other configurations that you looked at there? HARR: Entirely possible. You know, I mean. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 45 COREY: Okay. Because I could definitely see driveways would be a concern there. CHAIR GRAY: Even if it is, you could put a (indiscernible) over it. COREY: That might just be less impactful to the neighbor there. Okay. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioners -- Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Yes. So Mr. Harr, what are you looking to do by design? What, two-, three-, four-bedroom homes? HARR: They're all three-bedroom plus den. Triple car or bigger garages. One level. Mostly contemporary styling because that's what buyers want right now. And then nice outdoor areas in the back for patios and outdoor living. DAPAAH: Yeah. HARR: It would be in the 20 -- I think 2,400 square feet is one of the plans that we've designed. The others would be in the 2,800 feet range, 2,900 feet range. It would be probably priced in the 1.2 million to 1.6 million range, because, economically, that's what it has to be based on the cost of building today, and plus the cost of the lots, the long driveways, in the case of the two in the rear. And I believe we actually had our realtor do us a map of the area. I don't know if it was included in this package. It was included in the package, too, when we had the -- what was it called? The meeting that we hosted shows Zillow values for the area -- the houses in the area and our homes would be right in with what the values of the existing homes are, both on Indigo and on Emerald Drive. DAPAAH: So John, as dense as the area is now, what has been the process to make sure that the infrastructure is good for homes? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Dapaah, at this point in the process, it's maybe somewhat minimal. We have been looking at the subdivision plat. It has been reviewed by the town engineer and also by the sanitary district, and nobody's raised any concerns about infrastructure capabilities in this area at this point. HARR: If I may follow up with that? We have checked with both SRP and the water company, and they have the facilities there. They would -- we would not have to tear up roads or anything else. It would just be additional taps. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 45 DAPAAH: Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioners, bring John back up? VICE CHAIR WATTS: I got one more question, before we do that, if you would? CHAIR GRAY: No problem. VICE CHAIR WATTS: The 22 to 2,800 square feet that's a livable area. What's the footprint of the house? HARR: I think it ran almost up to the 4,500 square feet between covered patios, garages, and front porches. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And that's -- HARR: Which, really, it did not exceed our our allowance of imperviable area. VICE CHAIR WATTS: And that's for the three-car garage. But you couldn't put a four-car garage in because that would push it over? HARR: On one of the lots we plan on a four-car garage. VICE CHAIR WATTS: You could do a four-car? HARR: Yes. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. I just want to clear -- make clear was livable -- HARR: Yes. VICE CHAIR WATTS: --and what the -- what the footprint was. HARR: Yeah. That is actual livable square footage. Again, it's three bedrooms, three baths, a den, a great room concept as well. We typically build -- the homes we build in Fountain Hills are in that same typical 2,800 to 3,000 range. They're in the 2 to $2.5 million range. This is a -- this is an opportunity for us. My background -- our background are family homes. As we built 3,000 homes over the last 49 years, most of them were back in Washington State, where it was more of a -- affordable housing back then, which is a real great desire of ours to provide housing to anybody that -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. HARR: -- we can. COREY: Just one more quick question for Mr. Harr. The lots in the back, and I'm not familiar with, like, the elevation back there, but is there any -- what would be the -- is TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 45 there any view back there for the homeowner? HARR: When you're on those lots, and you know, you see the -- this area right here, this fence? COREY: Yep. HARR: There is no fence there right now. It just looks onto the condominium units right behind it. We've shot our grades, and by the time we put in a six-foot masonry fence, it will have views of the McDowells. COREY: Okay. HARR: And it will not be looking in the windows of the units behind it. The actual -- the fence will come up above the window height. So we'll see a little bit of that roof, but it will have McDowell's. And then if you -- if you were able to look this direction, you actually will get Four Peaks views. The lots in the back might be (indiscernible) because of the views. COREY: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That is not correct. Incorrect. We live there. I walked over there. I live in the corner, and when you put six-foot-high fences, people on the first floor will have no view. People on the second floor will have a nice view into the backyard of the people. But that's it. HARR: I'd be happy to meet you there, and we can show you. I mean, we -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The lots are like 12 feet above the parking lot of every (indiscernible). Are you talking about Main Street, or you're talking about the -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We're talking about Four Peaks. I'm talking about that (indiscernible) right there. HARR: Yeah. MILLER: the ones they're building on the south side there, those would be the ones that are somewhat in question. The ones below that are way down below that. Anything you put up is going to experience -- WESLEY: The person recording this is not able to get this, plus, anybody watching TV they can't hear any of this discussion that's going on, which probably should come to the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 45 mic if you're going to allow it. CHAIR GRAY: Yeah. Mr. Miller, do you want to come up and repeat some of that? We we've got folks watching at home and a transcriber. MILLER: Those are all condos that you're looking at there. The ones that are to the southwest there, those are up higher than the other condos. The other condos that split they are way below the ground. My house sits on the corner there, and then they're quite far below me. So any view that they have over there, any type of -- any type of wall or fence, they're done. And most of those people don't have a view on the first floor anyhow. It's the second floor people. Now, as you go for the second half to the south of those condos, I walked over there and looked at them and stood there, and currently the people on the first floor have a view of the mountains. You put up a six- foot-high -- they're like this. You put up a six-foot-high fence like this. The closer you are, the more elevation it's going to take to see. You won't see them. It's not going to happen. And the people on the second floor will see over the wall right into the backyard of these people. I also think that -- you know the traffic -- you know, those people in the back lots there, they're not going to be backing out of that lot. They're coming out headlights first. And so now we've got that. And if you put a three- or four- car garage in some of these homes. You know, I think you're going to have headlights coming out on the street all the time, and -- and people like Vicki (ph.) and stuff like that, you know, who live across the street of that are going to get that in their face all the time, which they don't currently. Again, it's the character of the neighborhood is changing to the point where, you know, you sit in your house, and you get headlights that are right in your windows, and you say, who's here to see me? Nobody. Just somebody who's leaving. There's four houses there now. Certainly, two of them are going to come out head first all the time. HARR: Maybe for a point of clarity, and I'll show this again. From this point here on the property, to this point here on the property, there's nine feet of climb, according to a survey topography. And so that is why this backyard here actually sees over this fence and across there and has views of the the mountains. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 45 CHAIR GRAY: John, let's bring you back up. MILLER: Can I ask one more -- one more question before you go. On the on the north, are you building a fence or wall screening on the north end of the property against the single-family lot? HARR: There already is a six- to seven-foot wall on this whole length of property. MILLER: Okay. HARR: We will be building a wall here. And then we'll be building a wall coming down this way. MILLER: Okay. HARR: Which this -- and this wall because the topography from this point to this point also rises quite a bit. People on their patios here will be able to see over the wall. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, they won't. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No possibility. HARR: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: All right. John? So, I guess, first and foremost, this is a zoning case. So we can talk about walls and views and everything, and it's all hypothetical, right? WESLEY: Correct. CHAIR GRAY: If I was going to develop these lots at this price point, I'd be putting a two- story structure in what precludes that from happening in this rezone? WESLEY: Mr. Chairman, both the existing and proposed zoning allow up to 30 foot of building height. There's nothing here that could -- prevents that from happening. CHAIR GRAY: What's that? Can you repeat that? WESLEY: The current 1-18 and the proposed R1-10A both allow 30 foot of building height, so there's no change in that. Saying that's allowed on all the surrounding lots. CHAIR GRAY: Has the town done any analysis on why these lots haven't been developed historically? WESLEY: No. CHAIR GRAY: It seems to me watching them over time, it's purely price point of the lots with the current ownership. And I'm not sure that that's a really good reason to force TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 45 something into a rezone, but it's something to consider, nonetheless. General plan, we reference a lot. We reference it every month that we sit here, I think. I think I've always interpreted the intent of the language in the general plan to be geared towards soaking up the vacant C-1 and C-0 and essentially converting, doing a lot of what we've done over the years here, which is convert commercial to residential. Do you feel that this is in line with that intent being underlying residential already? WESLEY: So yes, Chair. The general plan is meant to cover all different types of land use and development aspects within the town, including situations such as this, and giving some guidance and direction for the things the commission and council should look at in considering whether or not a request is appropriate for the town. CHAIR GRAY: Didn't really answer, though. WESLEY: So -- CHAIR GRAY: I mean, so words on the page aside for a second, the underlying intent or the spirit of it is really, when we set that up, it was to soak up -- it was to soak up vacancies, right? But it was predominantly geared towards soaking up commercial vacancies. Which can have and we've seen evidence of it, it can have impact on existing adjacent stakeholders. I don't think we really intended to apply that to residential and down zoning. WESLEY: Chair, I guess I can agree in part and disagree in part. CHAIR GRAY: I figured you would. WESLEY: The language with regard to infill development is intended to look at all types of development that could occur. Now, for the most part, the residential situations that we have are a lot here and a lot there -- see if I've got one of these maps that kind of has some of that if we go all the way to the last one again. But yeah, so for instance if we look at this lot just to the east here, I believe it's undeveloped. And so certainly we would expect, in terms of infill on that lot, it's more in the middle of the neighborhood for the general plan to suggest anything other than maintaining exactly what's there. CHAIR GRAY: We wouldn't expect it. WESLEY: You would not expect that. But here where you've got a different set of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 45 circumstances and the variety of zoning that's going on around it and the variety of dwelling types that are going on around it, you could think that it's not unreasonable for a property owner to want to do something that blends a little bit more with those surrounding uses. And so yes, the general plan was meant to give at least some level of guidance and thought on how do you look at that. It is general, though, as stated. And so what is the character and what impacts character, and how to maintain the character, that is an important aspect of it. And would, in the Commission's view, the proposed change, change that character or somehow take away from that established character of the area? If you believe that is true, then you should recommend denial. If you feel that it is consistent with what's there and would just continue to add to the overall land use quality and development pattern, then you could recommend approval. CHAIR GRAY: So I mean -- I'll answer. I'll answer split by return here, I guess. As zoning principles go, this makes sense, right? I mean, if you were to do this -- if you were to do this in a blue ocean, carte blanche, let's zone forty acres of state trust land, this makes sense. Whether it's 1 to 7, whether it's 1 to 10, whether it's 1 to 18, it all makes sense. It's all hierarchical, it's all step up or step down, right? What I want to be really careful of is that we don't look at a recommendation through the lens of the general plan as though it's prescriptive, right? So it's got to be applied in consideration of the context of all of the other adjacencies and the stakeholders, and I guess, frankly, the investments that have been made. So I just want to be clear that it's a guiding principle -- WESLEY: Yes. CHAIR GRAY: -- but it's to be applied to the situation, not a mandate. We hear so often that it's a mandate. The general plan is in place, and we're supposed to drive more residences into holes in the map. And that's just not always the case. WESLEY: Correct. So I guess, maybe a couple of things I can add to that. Hopefully not belabor the point too much. CHAIR GRAY: I like belaboring things. WESLEY: By statute, in order to approve a rezoning, you need to find that it is consistent with the plan. So that is one of the founding reasons here, why we review the general TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 45 plan. If what's been requested, you believe is not consistent with the general plan, then you really shouldn't, couldn't recommend approval. The previous general plan was much more prescriptive by showing specific land use types and densities. So the previous general plan showed this at multi-residence four to ten units per acre. So, actually to do this rezoning, they would have also had to do a general plan amendment under the old plan to reduce that density. So it would be consistent with what was being proposed. We went from being that prescriptive to something that gives more flexibility to the commission and council to really take into consideration what's going on in the area as part of making that recommendation. It makes it harder in some ways but gives that an opportunity for really thinking about an area and what's important, rather than just to color on a map. CHAIR GRAY: Changing gears a little bit here, has town staff seen any sidings or side adaptations of structures on the parcels yet to see how all these relationships work? WESLEY: Chair, it seems like they showed us a sketch one time. I have that in my mind, but I look back through the documents that were submitted, I don't have one. And so either I'm thinking of something else, or they just showed it to us and didn't submit it. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. Commissioner Watts? VICE CHAIR WATTS: John, I think the first thing that caught my eye is in the staff recommendation, it's a proposed slight reduction. When it's a 45, 40 percent reduction in size, I don't consider that slight. Is that just a typo? Because that -- you know, going from 18 to 10 is more than slight. WESLEY: Chair, Vice Chair, without going back to seeing where I put that in, as I recall, what I was thinking was in terms of the overall density of the area. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. WESLEY: Rather than the specific lots. VICE CHAIR WATTS: But it says in lot -- a reduction in lot size. So I think that's a little bit disingenuous. I'll accept the fact that it was maybe an improper word or an incorrect word at that point in time. But the the sentiment that I got was, that's doggone near a 50 percent reduction, which I don't consider slight. I have the same concerns, without TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 45 seeing any elevations, without seeing what the actual orientation is, we heard what the applicant said about orientation of the homes and so on, but they could just as easily turn the houses north and south, east, west, whichever way they wanted to. So I'd like to see some elevations before I support this. And the last thing is -- CHAIR GRAY: It's nonbinding, so it doesn't matter. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I understand that, but still. And the last thing is, I'd really like to help our town council along by doing what they profess to do, which is listen to the public. And I haven't heard one person other than the applicant be in support of this. And if the town council truly believes what they say, which is we listen to the public, then they'll go along with denying this. And if they don't, then their words are for naught. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioners, any other discussion? MILLER: Can I make one comment? CHAIR GRAY: One second. Anything else, guys? KOVACEVIC: Well, just a comment. I know you mentioned that it is a variety of housing. But I think given the location, how it's more on -- are we talking -- is this Indigo? I forgot what the road was. Yes. It's more -- I kind of see it encroaching a little bit because the other properties you kind of enter from other areas. So I understand what the goal is here, but I can also see how it is not compatible with the residents that are on Indigo. Given that, it kind of seems like we're encroaching on those properties a little bit. So I can see that. And when we talk about -- you know, this is very difficult because we've had many different discussions like this. When we talk about zoning is a promise, I think about that more so when we're talking about residential properties, because somebody bought their property, and they expect that the land around it would stay the same. If it's commercial, it's a little bit different. We have flexibility for mixed use housing around there. But I hear that what the neighbors are saying here, when they knew this was two lots, I would be concerned looking at splitting this into four. But I also wonder if there's, like I mentioned earlier, any -- was there any discussion on maybe splitting it into three. I think the two that are on the front of Indigo would be sufficient. And if TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 45 there is any room to maybe fit one in the back there, maybe that would be a compromise. But I think four is a little bit against the plan for that area. CHAIR GRAY: Mr. Miller, do you have a comment? MILLER: I'm just going to make my comment. MURDOCK: Chairman, Vice Chairman, you both asked a question about why these properties have sat vacant for so long. It's because the owners of the Indigo or Town -- sorry, Kingstree Condos, went in together and purchased this property, and they've held it back from the market, especially when we subdivided it into four. They immediately knew what the current zoning they could go to 30 feet blocking their views. So they -- four families got together, purchased those lots. It wasn't until recently that they passed away and moved on that these lots came to the open market. An investor bought it a few years ago. It sat vacant since then, and now we've got the Harr family moving in. And to the question, I think one of the commissioners was talking about with the number of people that are impacted here because of the density is high, we're talking about several hundred people that are involved in this particular lot being over- developed. And so that's what we wanted to call out as well. So thank you. COREY: Rick, which -- can you clarify, you at that property right above, right north to it? MURDOCK: The first part of the drive. COREY: The first one? MURDOCK: Yes. COREY: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: All right. Commissioners, any final discussion? DAPAAH: Yeah. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Yeah. It's a straightforward zoning case, and we're the zoning commission. I believe that the use transition from the R-3 high-density residential to the low-density residential is entirely appropriate. And I don't like the flags. I don't like the -- I would like to hear the developer decide to have a larger side yard to the north, but I'm inclined to support the development. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 45 CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Corey? COREY: I'm done. CHAIR GRAY: You're sure? COREY: Yeah. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. I don't often go against Commissioner Kovacevic. I'm really kind of torn on this one. Mr. Harr, I know you do a very nice product. I've seen several of them here in town. I do completely concur with Commissioner Kovacevic that as zoning principles go, it's an appropriate step up or step down. There's no dispute there. The difference here is the citizen participation and the adjacent stakeholders. I mean, normally, we see a ratio of for or against or those that are rather agnostic. And in this case we're, I've got all the tick boxes in the against category. I think the reason we're here is the price point that the current investor wants to get out of their parcels, and I don't see that as a reason to change the rule book given the adjacency. So if this was first in and the rest of the lots were vacant or still with MCO, that's a different story. But this is last in, and I don't think that we're obliged to change the rule book to make that pro forma work in this case. Absolutely appreciate the conversation between residents and developer and town staff. We get a lot of these that are not amicable. And I think from what we've observed tonight, I think you guys have held the bar pretty high in that regard, so very appreciative of that. But in this -- in this particular case, when we consider the intent of the plan, the change that's related to the ask, and the adjacent stakeholders I'm going to be a recommendation to decline on this. But I'll withhold a motion for Commissioner Watts. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I move to deny the application for rezone, and I don't have the details, but the summary version. CHAIR GRAY: You don't have. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I can scroll up and get them. CHAIR GRAY: Yeah. Put them in the motion. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Hang on. I move to deny the rezoning of 11044 and 11052 North Indigo, located on the west side of Indigo Drive, north of Kingstree, from R1-18 to R1- TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 45 110, to allow for the construction of single-family homes. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioners. A second to Commissioner Watt's motion. DAPAAH: Yeah. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah? COREY: I'll second that as well. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah seconded. Commissioner Watts has made a motion to forward a recommendation to the town council of denial of the rezone on the basis of context discussed here tonight. Commissioner Dapaah has seconded that motion. Paula, let's go to a roll call. WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey. COREY: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah. DAPAAH: Nay. CHAIR GRAY: You just seconded it. DAPAAH: Oh. I'm sorry. I meant no, not to change the zoning. So sorry about that. CHAIR GRAY: That's a double negative. Paula, he means, aye. WOODWARD: So you want to backtrack? CHAIR GRAY: Let's start over. WOODWARD: Okay. All right. Commissioner Corey? COREY: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Nay. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Watts? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Aye. WOODWARD: Chair Gray? CHAIR GRAY: Aye. WOODWARD: Four, one. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 45 CHAIR GRAY: Thank you, Paula. All right. We are going to backtrack to agenda item 5, consideration of possible action in regard to the annual report and the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. Farhad, let's give the room a couple minutes. WOODWARD: It's four, one. CHAIR GRAY: Oh, Paula, let's just do a quick five-minute recess. Let everything clear out. [RECESS] CHAIR GRAY: All right. Farhad, let's continue the party. TAVASSOLI: Ready, Mr. Chairman. CHAIR GRAY: Yes, sir. TAVASSOLI: Or should I wait for Paula? CHAIR GRAY: Do you want me to do it? I've never done it. Ever. TAVASSOLI: I'm used to it. CHAIR GRAY: Not in my DNA. TAVASSOLI: All right. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, as you recall, I came before you with the annual report highlighting the progress we made in implementing the general plan in the calendar year 2023. I highlighted for you, I guess, progress as far as the implementation is concerned. At the conclusion of that meeting, I was asked to revise and resubmit, following some corrections to some typos and also removing some references to the environmental plan, particularly the reference to biophilic design -- actually, any reference to the environmental plan was removed altogether. And I have also added some page numbers and there were some comments made by the public as well, and I've tried to reflect those in this revision. So -- CHAIR GRAY: Can I ask you, while you're on the word "biophilic", did it actually prove out that the council had taken action to remove that from the plan? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, I believe staff is still seeking some clarification with council members. That has been -- those discussions have been TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 45 taking place -- CHAIR GRAY: Okay. TAVASSOLI: -- outside my realm. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. TAVASSOLI: And for the time being, I -- CHAIR GRAY: I was just curious. I mean, I -- TAVASSOLI: Right. CHAIR GRAY: -- the letters and the word are a little out of context, and I just -- a solution to that is to tie it down to the American Institute of Architects' definition of biophilic. If that continues the Ninth Circuit's version. TAVASSOLI: So yeah. If you have any more questions, I welcome them. CHAIR GRAY: I just wanted to ask you just for the sport of it, really. We talked a little bit about the, well, a couple things. So look at my highlights here. We talked a little bit about the state trust land and is that -- is that really a viable aspiration or study for the town? I don't suppose in a month we've learned anything from State Land Department, but any anything new on that contextually? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, I don't have anything new -- CHAIR GRAY: No. TAVASSOLI: -- on that. CHAIR GRAY: And then we talked a little bit about the -- on page 5, let's call it paragraph one, two, three, four, paragraph 5. The visitor analytics software under economic development. I'm just curious. I have no real feedback on that as a bullet point in the report if it's accurate, but -- and maybe I should just table this for later, but I think it would be interesting to understand that a little bit. Just contextual understanding, what is the software, and what do we actually get from it? Not that it relates to zoning, but that's interesting to me. And then let me find my last -- just one clarity, in page 11 of 11. Middle of the page mid-range and long-range goals. Under goal, work with ASLD. I didn't see Arizona State Land Department and then ALSD identified earlier in the report. Maybe I walked past it, but might just spell that out. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 45 TAVASSOLI: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: I don't think most are going to know what that is. And I missed my other. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, so that was goal was taken verbatim from the general plan. But I could in brackets. CHAIR GRAY: It just -- it took me a second to ALSD, what's ALSD? TAVASSOLI: Right. CHAIR GRAY: I have to find -- I've got one more. Sorry, Farhad. TAVASSOLI: No. No problem. CHAIR GRAY: Page 5 of 11, paragraph 3. And again, nothing wrong with it as a component of the report. But something I'd like to understand is it says, "2023 calendar year, following parking review, staff entered a contract with a consultant." That's after the parking table adjustments that we -- I think we did that in early '23, right? TAVASSOLI: Right. CHAIR GRAY: Is this a new -- is this layered on top of that? TAVASSOLI: Right. This follows that, Mr. Chairman, and this is particularly focused on the downtown area. The parking -- the adjustments that you're talking about that were approved last year, earlier last year, those are townwide. CHAIR GRAY: And being an outside consultant, is that contract -- that's with the planning department, or is that with -- TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, that's what the Public Works Department. CHAIR GRAY: Public Works Department. So it's not with the town attorney, then? TAVASSOLI: Not. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. TAVASSOLI: Not having seen the contract, I can't say for sure, but I know this is a joint effort between the Public Works Department and the -- and the consultant. CHAIR GRAY: I was just curious, contextually, what would be the difference in that consultant study and the other studies we've been talking about of late. So I'll yield. Commissioner? COREY: Yes. All right, Farhad, just the one thing that stood out to me was in the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 45 immediate goals was the staff plans to kick off a -- kind of almost like, project management kind of work for all the capital improvement projects. TAVASSOLI: Um-hum. COREY: So you were saying here, the -- here it is, "The plan monitoring system coordinating with capital improvement projects." CHAIR GRAY: No. COREY: So it almost looks like there's not a whole lot of organization around what's being done and what needs to be done. And you said there were some issues during COVID. CHAIR GRAY: That's all outlined. COREY: So what's the status of that? Have they figured out some sort of mechanism for tracking all this? TAVASSOLI: Correct. Mr. Chairman, commissioners, I mentioned somewhere in this report that we're going to be forming an ad hoc group. COREY: Yep. TAVASSOLI: Between mostly planning and public works, to kind of coordinate and jointly discuss the Capital Improvement program, in which policies in the general plan those aim to implement. COREY: Okay. When you say "planning," is it the planning department? Like, you wouldn't be engaging us or -- TAVASSOLI: It would be -- well, it would be the planning division, which is really myself and perhaps John, but we're within the Development Services Division. Yeah. Or Development Services Department. COREY: Got it. Okay. So that hasn't kicked off, but that is going to be a group that starts to evaluate -- TAVASSOLI: Yeah. That is -- we still intend to get that going this summer. Okay. COREY: Yeah. It sounds like that would be a good idea to kind of get a grasp on planning all those activities and organizing them appropriately. Okay. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Commissioner Watts? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 45 VICE CHAIR WATTS: I think the first comment is the last couple of pages when you consolidated the things that were scattered in the original presentation. You did a nice job of summarizing them, so the topics that I'm scrambling to try and tell you exactly which ones, but it's where you've got short-term goals, and then you've listed each of the goals. And they were kind of scattered in the original, and now you've consolidated them. So that makes it much easier to read. I was curious about in the Pumphouse Project on page 4, the word "local" is gone. TAVASSOLI: Yes. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I thought the original approval was for local artists only. Did we change that? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Watts, I cannot say for sure. I've been -- again, that's another, I guess, dialogue outside my realm. It's between the Community Services Department and perhaps whichever artist they're soliciting for their work. But I have not been involved with the Pumphouse Art Project, either directly or indirectly. VICE CHAIR WATTS: But my point was that if it was originally approved for local artists, we don't really have the ability to change local to anybody. And that's what this document is now saying. No, you don't agree? CHAIR GRAY: Well, I get your point, but this document isn't changing anything. It's merely 60,000-foot reporting out on delivery of the general plan. So if you want to put the clarification and put it in, but it's not -- nothing in this changes -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: The original plan? CHAIR GRAY: Correct. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. No, I agree with that. So this is kind of a summary of where we're at today. So shouldn't we include what the original verbiage was, which included local. CHAIR GRAY: Or go the other way and say it's been expanded out? VICE CHAIR WATTS: That's fine, too, because part of this is conditioned upon these being amendments. And if it's an amendment, if it's deleted, then it should be noted as an amendment. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 45 TAVASSOLI: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: Recommended amendment? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Or recommended amendment. And Chairman Gray stole my, the results viewable for the visitor analysis. So I'd still like to see that. I'd still like to see the safe design. And I think one of the notes that on page 5, I'm pretty much sure I made a comment about including the Indian community because they are part and parcel of the garden center -- TAVASSOLI: Yes, you did. VICE CHAIR WATTS: -- and we don't have that. Is there a reason we don't have it included? Are they not? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Watts, yeah, I do remember you making that that comment. Although, it seemed like that comment, as you had written in your red line, was out of place. So what I did was the reference where I did make reference to merely tribal communities, I believe it was -- let me find that bullet here. Page 5, last bullet where I talk about the grants. That was the only place where I mentioned, in the original report, I had mentioned the tribal communities, and in this case here, as you can see here, I actually mentioned them by their proper names. Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, as well as the salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Right. No, I see that there. I didn't know if there was any necessity to give them recognition in relation to the community garden, though. I know we've got some -- planted some beds up there that -- and I don't remember exactly how many kids are working those garden beds. TAVASSOLI: Okay. I -- you know what? Maybe I didn't find that reference to the -- with the tribal community and their involvement with the community garden. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. Because I think it's good that we've got the tribes mentioned in the grants, but -- that's positive, but that recognition in the community gardens as well, I think if we can -- TAVASSOLI: Okay. I see the point that you're trying to make now. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. It's -- TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 45 TAVASSOLI: I did not know they were involved and -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. They're -- TAVASSOLI: Yeah, I see. VICE CHAIR WATTS: On page 7. This is kind of out of context, I'll admit that. The natural resources and the fourth bullet point, where we require restoration of disturbed areas of native plants. Is that only applicable to construction, or is that anytime, anywhere? Is there another building a town code that requires it? If somebody lets their landscaping get out of hand or it's not complete? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, so this reference is made particularly for residential projects, projects that are on -- that are what we would classify hillsides where the slopes are greater than 20 percent or more. Now there may be some cases -- so each hillside lot has a disturbance limit depending on size and slope and so forth. So in cases where they do need to exceed that, for example, to provide, for example, like a construction corridor around the property or if there's like a slight disturbance outside the disturbable boundary, those areas need to be reseeded with native vegetation prior to inspection. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. I think that answers it. We've got some expansion on it because of fire requirements now. But that's a different topic, different day, so. And then the last thing is the project management chart as well as the capital improvement projects. Is there something in the works to do, something like a project chart or a Gantt chart to show what the processes are going on and where they're at in their whole scope? TAVASSOLI: Right. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I believe there will be -- I'm sure there will be a visual representation of all this following our ad hoc meetings between public works and myself. VICE CHAIR WATTS: That will be next week? TAVASSOLI: Well -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. TAVASSOLI: It'll certainly be there for when I come to you about this time next year for TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 45 the 2024 calendar year. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Farhad, I want to clarify for Commissioner Watts, he indicated that I stole words from him. I just want to point out I was actually faster to my mic than he was. Commissioner Corey? COREY: Commissioner Watts, they'll add you to their JIRA board, you can see all the activity. One thing I noticed you mentioned the Pumphouse Project, and I was just going back to reading this. I don't know if you -- you said local, and I don't see local in here. And I know that's come up in the past, but as far as I know, that Pumphouse artwork project was not meant to be local. It was going to change year over year to be different installations. And I think the last one was a special niche portrait that anybody could contribute to, so. And I think that's good because actually, I heard that somebody traveled into town who was one of the artists. So there's a benefit in having that not be local is that it could attract people to come to Fountain Hills. They could participate in this thing. And then, oh, this Town of Fountain Hills is going to share my art. I'm going to go visit and see what it's all about. And I think one artist did that. So I think it does change every year. And it may come back to being local again with, maybe, ducks in the pond or something. But I think it is supposed to be broad. And then the second thing I noticed, we're saying that we installed chargers, I use them, the two here at the community center are broken. The handles are broken. In order to use them, you have to get like a penny in there and try to flick it up so you can plug it into your car. CHAIR GRAY: That's dangerous. COREY: Yeah. Yeah. Well, you just going to -- or a fingernail or something. You have to try to pick up the piece of plastic that's broken so that it charges. I don't know about the ones at the fountain, but I use the ones here, and they've been broken for a while. TAVASSOLI: I'll tell our facilities manager. COREY: All right. And they're slow. It takes a long time to charge anything, so I don't know if we put that in the plan for -- if we include more in the future, maybe we can up TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 45 that power level a little bit. TAVASSOLI: Like super power? COREY: Yeah. KOVACEVIC: I'm sure even a hybrid. COREY: No gas. KOVACEVIC: Electrical vehicle. COREY: But other than that -- CHAIR GRAY: You know who shares your view on chargers? COREY: Who? CHAIR GRAY: The councilman. COREY: Sharron? CHAIR GRAY: No. KOVACEVIC: Peggy? CHAIR GRAY: No. No. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Allen. CHAIR GRAY: Allen. All right. Yeah, well. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Good for him. So I'm just clear -- Clayton is -- Commissioner Corey, sorry. Were you saying that the in the original verbiage about the Pumphouse, it did not have local in it? COREY: I don't know where the original one is published. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Okay. So I -- and so I don't disagree. I just was seeking clarity because I think it should be expanded. But if the original said local artists then we should stay with that. And if not, we should amend it and just make sure we're clear. COREY: Ah, so if it's referenced somewhere else? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. I mean, if it's referenced somewhere else and it's just -- it's just something we left out, then I'm fine with that. COREY: Sure. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Because I think it really comes out nice. And I spent a lot of time there looking at some of those -- the talent of those photographers and artists. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 45 COREY: Yes. Okay. I agree. VICE CHAIR WATTS: It was pretty amazing. COREY: Yeah. I wasn't sure what you were saying there, but yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: No. I just want the word either -- note that it's in or note that it's out, one or the other, so. COREY: Yep. CHAIR GRAY: I wonder if it's biophilic art. VICE CHAIR WATTS: That would be different. CHAIR GRAY: Environmentally engaging art. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Environmentally engaging biophilic? COREY: Yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: I'll leave it at that. I think Commissioner Corey and I can figure this out. COREY: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: All right. Paula, speaker cards? WOODWARD: Yes, Chair. There's two speaker cards. The first speaker is -- CHAIR GRAY: Who might those be? WESLEY: -- Larry Meyers, and the second speaker is Lori Troller. MEYERS: I'm going to go back to farmers and butchers. Well, I'm going -- I'm going. I'm going there. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Who's the butcher? MEYERS: I'm going to try -- I don't know. I never did figure that one out. Anyway, in general, the general plan, since I've seen them all, it's a really nice document written by generally the SPAC people. Who are populated by the environmental, social, and economic justice sustainable crowd. Always have been. Probably always will be. They write this stuff down for Fountain Hills, then nobody reads it and then they vote on it. And then everybody, when it's convenient, leans on the general plan when they want something like Kingstree and Indigo or the parking that we waived for the Target Center apartments. That seems to be part of the general plan, and we redid it, but it didn't fit TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 45 down there. So we just sort of looked the other way on that one. So the general plan generally is generally useless to me, who's lived here for 42 years because the people, left to their own devices, would probably come up with something. And by the way, if you go back and check the motion, biophilic was removed -- amended and removed and voted on four to three to remove the word biophilic. I don't give a crap what their discussions are now because I'm sure they're discussing how to put it back in, in private, in secret, and nontransparently. So with regard to this general plan review, it's just like all the other general plan reviews. When it fits, we lean on it, and when it doesn't, we look the other way. I wish I could stand up here just once and say something positive. But if you look up at the Adero Canyon mountainside strip mine that's taken place courtesy of Art Tollis and a few others from back then, vegetation being put back in? Uh? I haven't seen any. Also, the medical center who completely cut the hillside out and was supposed to put 100 trees in? Haven't seen a single tree. It's part of a plan, right, John? It's not there. There's two instances where the general plan says to do something, and we didn't feel like doing it, so we didn't. So our discussion of this falls on deaf ears to me, who has probably stood up here a million times. Every time it comes around, I say the same thing, and the same thing happens. So I appreciate you just listening to me. Someday, I'm going to step up here, and I'm going to say something positive. Thanks. TROLLER: Chair, Commission, Lori Troller, resident. I'm going to kind of go against what Larry said. I'm going to put a little more importance on this document. And my angle right now is the verbiage of it. So the verbiage of our previous general plan has been casual and not restrictive as to let our development go where it's going to go with the original intent of the community years ago. So the tone of the document is really important, and it's part of our permanent record. And the council can and will refer back to this and any embellishments we make here. But the tone can lead to us saying five years from now, how do we get to this point? And I'm very concerned about that. It's a big issue with me. It's a big issue with a lot of people. So whenever anything wonderful is built, people want to be a part of it naturally, but they want to make their TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 45 changes to it. And again, kind of comes around to, how do we get to this point? So the fact that this was a retirement town 30 years ago is the very thing that preserved it. Isn't that ironic? The preservation being one of the goals that's what's in this general plan. It's on page 3. That's our goal, is to preserve it. We keep trying to change it. So the original town community doesn't want public showers for the homeless. And that's just an example of how do we get there when it happens. So the verbiage of this entire document it's open as it always was, but I think it's time to tighten it up a little bit. So at the beginning of the general plan, it talks about the preservation of neighborhoods. And in at least two years, the preservation of neighborhoods in this town was fought by us. It was fought tooth and nail to keep sober homes, residential detox, overpopulated housing, sex trafficking, and now the invasion of utility equipment over or off or away from our properties. And that's the residents. We don't have to go by this general plan, the council does. And when that when this document is open, that leaves us fighting for all this stuff. We're getting a little tired, but we'll stay here. So that's my point. On page 10, this reads, "With the changing socioeconomic and environmental factors, it's worthwhile to review the specifications to determine if they meet the town's current needs." That's this open -- that's this open feeling I'm talking about. We don't want this. We don't want to lay ourselves open like this. There's another on page 3, where -- you know what I've got? I've got the last month's thing, so it might not be page 3. It's right underneath thriving neighborhoods. It talks about, hey, we're we're here to preserve the neighborhoods. But then the very next paragraph is to accommodate a variety of housing types. It's not specified. The council goes wild with it. They start putting -- and voting in high-density housing. I just think the verbiage of this document is really important, the tone of it. It's our permanent record. And that's my point. Thank you. CHAIR GRAY: Thank you, Lori. Farhad, just for my understanding and clarity, so that the reference that Lori made there on page 10 is the top -- the first of the three goals there, it's commission, a cost-benefit study to identify the gap between actual subdivision regulations, infrastructure specification and determine the cost of meeting such TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 45 specifications. That, and the next -- the paragraph under it, those are lifted straight out of the general plan today. Correct? TAVASSOLI: Yes. That is true. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. So Lori. I think your position on the inclusions in this, I think when you go to council, you're really saying, hey, I think we ought to propose amendments to the general plan because this is all verbatim language that's in the published general plan today. And this report is recommending no amendments today. And what you're suggesting is, hey, we need to tighten it up and really ought to consider a few amendments. So all right. Thanks. COREY: Yeah. Farhad, I just have one last thing. Lori said a word that triggered me. It was "naturally." I don't know what context she used it in, but it reminded me we have in addition to the new logo, we have that new branding that I didn't see in here. "Naturally Fountain Hills, Naturally Innovative. Naturally" -- there's a whole, like, theme around those, and in fact, it's on the home page of our town's website right now too. So maybe we could add that in as another achievement. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey, I did make a reference here to our rebranding, but I can get into the logo and -- COREY: Yeah. And I don't know what they call it, but it's right there, "Naturally Fountain Hills." It's the new -- CHAIR GRAY: (Indiscernible) what you call it? COREY: The new slogan or something? Maybe. Okay. Thank you. TAVASSOLI: Okay. CHAIR GRAY: All right. Commissioners, a motion? The options for a motion are simply -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: Aye or nay. CHAIR GRAY: -- continue. Well, there's no nay. Nay is not an option. So it's either continue for modifications or a motion to recommend. We forward this to council for their review, inclusive of tonight's conversation. Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Do we need one more look at it after the amendments that were made TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 45 tonight? CHAIR GRAY: We were advised by the vice mayor not to let perfection get in the way of progress. So I'll let whoever makes the motion make that determination. COREY: Think that you've done a great job taking our feedback and making updates, and I think we just discussed some minor stuff tonight. So I think it'd be appropriate to motion to move that forward. CHAIR GRAY: I agree. VICE CHAIR WATTS: How many changes did you count that we -- or suggestions that we made that you've got to incorporate? Half a dozen? TAVASSOLI: You mean prior to today? VICE CHAIR WATTS: No. Tonight. You got most of them already. So how many? TAVASSOLI: I probably, like five or six, yeah. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Five or six additional. TAVASSOLI: I can go back and look at the -- VICE CHAIR WATTS: And they're just tweaks too. I mean, that's really what they are. They're not significant, so. CHAIR GRAY: Yeah. I'd let them roll. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yeah. CHAIR GRAY: Personally. VICE CHAIR WATTS: No, I agree. I second the motion. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. All in favor. ALL: Aye. WESLEY: Five, zero. CHAIR GRAY: Five, zero. Thank you. Paula. All right. Typical combo of agenda item 7 and 8. Commission discussion, request for research to staff. Slightly out of turn, John, but we didn't get the chance to speak to Commissioner Dempster before she resigned the commission. Some of us worked with Susan a long time. I was trying to count how long. I think I had six years with her. Clayton, you were pretty close to the same. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 45 COREY: Yeah. CHAIR GRAY: Really going to Commissioner Dempster's input here. She rounded us out on a lot of topics and was very, very grounded in her positions and research. So appreciate her time here and wish her all the best in her next ventures. KOVACEVIC: I'll second that. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Me too. Do we have any candidates at this point? It's probably not appropriate to ask you, but I'm going to anyway. CHAIR GRAY: Well, it's appropriate. WOODWARD: Yes, there are candidates. And we're currently setting up interviews with the town council subcommittee. CHAIR GRAY: How many? WOODWARD: I believe there are four. VICE CHAIR WATTS: Are they properly trained in John Deere equipment? CHAIR GRAY: Or how to site dress cattle? WOODWARD: We will keep you posted. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. Why John Deere? VICE CHAIR WATTS: It's the only big green harvester that I know. CHAIR GRAY: You're such a sucker for marketing. Okay. So we think they'll be in place possibly by the July venue? COREY: Are we meeting July? CHAIR GRAY: That's the hope. All right. COREY: What's the summer schedule like? CHAIR GRAY: Summer schedule for us is July what? 10th-ish. VICE CHAIR WATTS: 9th. CHAIR GRAY: July 8th. COREY: We're going to meet in July? VICE CHAIR WATTS: Yes. CHAIR GRAY: We have to. We have to meet on Chapter 17. John might as well give commission an update on the council's feedback on that, so we can prep accordingly for TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS JUNE 10, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 45 of 45 the July session. WESLEY: Yes. Chairman, in case anybody's not aware, the town council, at their meeting last week, considered the topics of release of the Campanella draft ordinance. Chose not to do that. And also considered the topic of combining Town Code Chapter 16 or Article 16-2 in with your review of Chapter 17 of the Zoning Ordinance and chose not to do that. So the commission is focused on just looking at and recommending potential amendments to Chapter 17. At your May meeting, the work on that was continued to your July meeting. And so that's what we'll be on that agenda. CHAIR GRAY: So and inappropriate, probably, to continue this, but from recollection -- I have to look back at our meeting minutes, but we talked a little bit about combo-ing, but really what we were asking, I think what we ended up with on the table was, can we look at 16? So if their denial was on the basis of combo-ing it, I get it. But I think we were -- we had stumbled on the idea that they were highly complementary to each other, if we're going to talk about towers, let's talk about towers and placement throughout. I'll just ask, is there any chance of of going back for a second opinion, or is it all in and all done? WESLEY: Chairman, the commission -- or the council was presented with four options. One was to basically keep things going as they are, just review Chapter 17, and that's it. One was to allow you to give some thought and comment on anything that ought to change in 16-2 while you working on 17? Three was a little bit more aggressive than that, in terms of specifically looking at and offering suggestions on the small cell wireless. And four, was a total combination. And they chose not to do anything. I can't remember how they actually worded the motion, but I recall it was just focus on 17, and that's the direction that you have. CHAIR GRAY: Okay. So that'll be taken up at the July 8th meeting, then. WESLEY: Correct. CHAIR GRAY: Everybody present for that meeting? Yeah. August, we're definitely out. Okay. Anything else? Commissioners. Anything else, John? Okay. Let's adjourn.