Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout241209 Summary Minutes & Verbatim TranscriptTOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 47 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 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 DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 47 GRAY: Commissioner Corey, Commissioner Dapaah, either of you on the line? COREY: Yes, I am. This is Clayton. Thank you. DAPAAH: Chairman Gray. I'm here. GRAY: Very good. All right. Just about 30 more seconds, and we'll get rolling here, guys. All right. Good evening. This is the December 9th, 2024 edition of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission. We've got 10 agenda items tonight, but we will start with a call of order, Pledge of Allegiance, and a quick moment of silence, please. 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. GRAY: Thank you. Paula, a quick roll call, please. WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Here. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Watts? WATTS: Here. WOODWARD: Chair Gray? GRAY: Here. GRAY: Thank you, Paula. Agenda Item 3, call to the public. Paula, any open speaker cards? WOODWARD: One speaker card. Robert Rahm, to the podium, please. RAHM: Well, thank you. That was quick service. I just got here, and I want to congratulate Rick Watts on getting elected to the Town Council. We're looking forward to you being there. I'm here to speak against the granting of the Special Use Permit for TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 47 the telephone company to erect a ugly system in our neighborhood. The document, the thing that is to be erected is an ugly piece of industrial equipment that will be an eyesore in our neighborhood and is not appropriate for any residential facility or neighborhood in this town that prides itself in great vistas and great views. This thing would be an eyesore. If you look at where it's to be situated, the closest nearest palm tree to it that it's supposed to blend in with is 150 yards away. 150 yards away, and there's barely any there, and so it's going to tower above everything in the neighborhood, and it is totally unacceptable, and we wish you would just turn them away, have them find another location, or turn up the wattage or whatever they need to do in order to broadcast from that spot, but we urge you to reject it. Thank you. GRAY: Thank you, Mr. Rahm. With your permission, sir, we'd like to take your text and then move it under Agenda Item 4, which is the public hearing for that antenna specifically. RAHM: Thank you. I didn't understand that. GRAY: No problem. Appreciate that. RAHM: Thank you. GRAY: So Paula, we'll go ahead and move that around on the back end here. Any other speaker cards? WOODWARD: No, Chair. GRAY: Thank you. All right, moving quickly to Agenda Item 4. This is a public hearing for consideration of possible action on a Special Use Permit to allow T-Mobile to modify an existing wireless communication facility located at 16239 East Ironwood Drive, which is the First Assembly of God Church or commonly known as Generation Church today. Mr. Tavassoli. TAVASSOLI: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for reading that off. As you mentioned, this is a Special Use Permit request from T-Mobile that I'll be presenting before you at the Generation Church site. So the property, just for everyone's edification, is at the southwest corner of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 47 Fountain Hills Boulevard and Ironwood Drive. It is the current site of the Generation Church. Previously, it was the site for the Assemblies of God Church. The property is a total of a little over three acres. Now, the church site itself is a little over one and a third acres, and there is an existing flagpole there, and I'll show you some elevations later, but it's a little over 53 feet in height, directly adjacent to the east side of the church building, as well as an equipment shelter shielded behind a screen wall, actually shielding the ground equipment that's currently there right now. So T-Mobile is, with a Special Use Permit, is requesting removal of the existing 53-foot flagpole that also doubles up as a wireless communication facility, and to replace it at that base where the current flagpole exists with a 65-foot monopalm, as well as replacement of the ground equipment behind the screen wall. This placement, the applicant contends, will require a temporary Cell on Wheels, or C. O. W., during construction to continue providing service while the proposed monopalm is being erected. So again, going back to that map, the proposed monopalm will be at the same location where the flagpole is currently located, and new ground equipment will replace what's currently behind the screen wall, which is facing the parking lot and Fountain Hills Boulevard. This is the elevation of the current flagpole on the left. It's about 53 feet from the base to the top, not including the flagpole topper, which probably adds at least another foot. And what the applicant is proposing is a 65-foot monopalm, as shown here on the right. The 65 feet is measured from the base to the topmost palm frond, and the antennas will be placed at the 59-foot level of the monopalm. This is a plan view of the proposed new monopalm. As I mentioned, this is the compound that's directly east of the church site. This here line roughly indicates the church, the east end of the church building, but the monopalm, again, will be placed or installed exactly where the flagpole is currently erected, and the existing equipment will be replaced by some new modified equipment behind the screen wall. One thing I should mention before moving forward, because I know that this has been a question in a lot of people's minds, you know, for whatever it may be worth, the question being are the antennas providing, the proposed antennas providing 5G TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 47 service? And the answer to that, I just got confirmation a little while ago, is yes. Applicant has also included some photo simulations. What you see in the foreground is the northwest corner of Ironwood and Fountain Hills Boulevard looking south, so you can see the flagpole existing as it is today on the left, with the new flagpole on the right -- or the, excuse me -- the proposed monopalm on the right. Incidentally, I think with this photo, it should be worth mentioning, and one of the members of the public brought this up earlier during the call to the public, there used to be a lot more landscaping than what you currently see out there today. I think I made reference in the staff report that the site is fully landscaped. That was based on the Google Street View, the most recent one. There were some palm trees where the current sign is located, just barely cut off here to the left. There were about at least three palm trees, and there were a few mesquite trees adjacent to the church building. Currently, what exists there today, as far as vegetation is concerned, are the barrel cacti that you see on the foreground, right along Ironwood, and further in the back towards the parking lot, one Palo Verde tree, but all the other vegetation, as far as I could tell, has been removed. Another photo simulation, looking obviously east towards the Four Peaks. And so the factors, I'll get into the factors for granting an S.U.P. Well, they begin with section 2.02 that discuss the criteria used for granting S.U.P. in general. Some of the things that the Commission would need to determine is whether or not the proposed use is detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, and comfort or welfare of persons, and whether or not it's detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the area or general welfare of the town. There is a federal preemption that I should note that local ordinances may not impose more stringent environmental impacts, or environmental effects, with limits on radiofrequency emissions, as those are currently set by the F. C. C. There are additional factors for granting an S.U.P., in this case for towers, and they are listed here, and I've gone over them in some detail in the staff report, but the first three, I've colored the text in red because, per the details of the proposal, it is these three factors, as detailed in the proposal, that trigger the need for a TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 47 Special Use Permit. One is the height of the proposed tower. Now, the existing site is zoned residential, even though there's a church on the property which is allowed in any zoning district per federal laws as dictated by R. L. U. I. P. A. The underlying zoning is still residential, and the height limit for residential, in this case R1-35, is 30 feet. Applicant is proposing a 65-foot increase -- I beg your pardon, a 65-foot monopalm, which is 35 feet more than what would normally be allowed in a R1- 35. Also, the proximity of the antenna to residential structures and residentially-zoned boundaries. This takes into consideration the fact that, well, the site itself is zoned residential, let alone the neighboring properties adjacent to the property. Now, this also takes into account the fall zone. If the 65-foot monopalm were to fall, would it be entirely contained within the subject property? The answer is yes. However, in order to avoid the Special Use Permit requirement, the distance of the fall zone to the nearest property line, it would need to be 300 percent that of the height, and it doesn't meet that requirement, so there's another trigger for the need for a Special Use Permit, and also the nature of the uses on the adjacent and nearby properties. Again, the property itself is residential. That alone is a trigger for the need for the Special Use Permit, as is the fact that there's residential zone or residential uses, to be more specific, surrounding the property. Other factors to take into consideration is the surrounding topography and whether or not there are any impacts to the topography with this request. Surrounding tree coverage and foliage, I touched upon that a little bit. One thing the Commission might consider is perhaps including, if the Commission was inclined to approve it, perhaps adding some, what has been referred to as palm tree friends, to kind of reinforce the stealth appearance of the proposed monopalm. Also, the design of the antenna, whether or not it fits in within the context of the neighborhood. Proposed ingress and egress. There's a driveway off of Ironwood which provides adequate access for regular maintenance for the proposed facility, as well as whether or not there were other suitable existing towers, other structures, or alternative technologies that the applicant considered, and I think the applicant could speak pretty thoroughly on TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 47 that point whenever he's asked to come up to speak about this request. So a staff's recommendation is to, we're recommending approval of the monopalm to improve service coverage and to allow temporary placement of the Cell on Wheels, but also staff is encouraging the Commission to continue discussion on how to mitigate the visual impacts based on not only the site plan that I presented but also the photo simulations. And with that, I'll conclude my presentation and open it up to questions or discussion. Thank you. GRAY: Farhad, is there an applicant presentation as well? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, the applicant has informed me a few hours ago that he has no presentation, but he is prepared to speak. GRAY: Okay. In response to inquiries or with a prepared statement of sorts? TAVASSOLI: You know what, I'm not quite sure, but I think -- GRAY: I'm not sure who the applicant is, so I don't know where to point. TAVASSOLI: Oh yeah. He's Michael Campbell, who's a site acquisition manager for T- Mobile. GRAY: Michael, did you want to add anything to Farhad's presentation before we start discussion? CAMPBELL: Good evening. I'm Mike Campbell. I'm a consultant for Crown Castle, who's actually the landlord for T-Mobile, and -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I can hardly hear. CAMPBELL: Okay. Is that better? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. Thank you. CAMPBELL: Okay. Okay. I'll start again. I'm Mike Campbell. I'm a consultant for Crown Castle. Crown Castle is the landlord for T-Mobile. Crown Castle has a lease agreement with the Generation Church for the property. My presentation really is to reinforce some of the statements that Farhad made, and maybe clarify a few things. I don't have a PowerPoint presentation, so if you'd like me to go into that, I can, or if you'd like me to wait until after your questions and comments, I can -- whatever's your pleasure. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 47 GRAY: If there's any added value that you see upfront, we'd like to hear it now, and then, of course, we'll give you a chance to talk after we have the public hearing. CAMPBELL: Let me get my water real quick. GRAY: Sure. CAMPBELL: Okay. All right. Okay. Good evening. I want to thank staff for their assistance in the case. We've been working on this for quite a while. And as staff stated, Crown Castle is proposing to modify the existing site. The need for that is driven by T-Mobile. T-Mobile has minimal capacity in the current flagpole. Flagpoles were a great design 10 years ago, but as the technologies have evolved, the whole demand by the consumer of what can be provided has all kind of rolled out to, we need these different types of antennas, we need more space for the antennas. Obviously, they can't put the Ankers 3 antennas inside the flagpole, and it's very limiting of that they can't put up other antennas, which, yes, this one will convert to a 5G. As an Arris specialist that I work with stated that currently, there are three types of 5G deployments. 5G on existing bands in use, like this site is currently in use. These carriers have been using these frequency bands already in 4G services. 5G technology is being overlaid in place of 4G, much like when 4 came on on top of 3, which came on on top of 2. The ones that are of concern are the ones that are in the small cells, which was in your right of ways. Those are small cells. This is not a small cell that operates at a different frequency. monopalm, as we know, is going in the same location. It's kind of a unique situation where we can use the same foundation. I've been doing this for a number of years and never had that happen before. There'll be some structural enhancements to that, but the placement remains the same, so our setbacks remain the same. We're back off the streets. We're as far away from the residential area as it's been. The site was originally approved in, I believe it was 1999 or 2000, so it's been providing coverage for this community since then, and there's been modifications to the equipment, to the antennas over time. This is the greatest of the group, where the exterior physicality, the physical view of it has changed considerably. As noted, it's going to be 65 feet tall to the top of the fronds. The top of the antennas go to 60 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 47 feet, and then there's five foot of fronds on top of that. Look to my notes. There was a question that surfaced today about locations, and I know Farhad mentioned it. This location was apparently chosen back in 1999 because of the elevation. It is the highest point in that search area. Figure out about a half mile each way from there. There's nothing really higher, and if there is, it's a residential house, so the carriers and the tower companies tend to lean towards the church properties because they are in areas of fairly dense communities, and this helps us and helps them by providing in there. Public notices were sent out by staff. The property was signposted by a company I hire, and I know there's been a mixed return on the comments today. I've seen some, but also, going forward, Crown Castle's asking for your recommendation of approval to Council for this S.U.P. request, and I can answer any questions that you may have as we go on, so -- GRAY: Mike, I have a couple right out of the gate. CAMPBELL: Yes, sir. GRAY: And I'm sure more as time goes on here, but I know in the staff report, it mentioned there were no other towers available to co-locate T-Mobile antennas on. Is that, I know in our -- it's confusing to me because we updated the ordinance in the process of this application, right? So is that something that we need to validate, or do we take that at face value? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, the applicant provides some, I believe, some radio frequency coverage plans of some sort that would demonstrate what the coverage area would be before and after the replacement, but beyond that, I think, you know, pretty much that is the extent of the documentation that would -- GRAY: Because our current ordinance that went into place after this application occurred would require us to prove up that there weren't other sites that antennas could be hung from, and my other question is obviously 65 foot's going to be a sticking point tonight, among several other things, I'm sure. What happens incrementally for every 5 or 10 feet that that height is reduced? You know, and assume TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 47 that we get all the way down to 30 as kind of our baseline of underlying zoning. CAMPBELL: Sure. Mr. Chair, members of the Commission, the difference with a 5 or 8- foot coverage in this area, because it is a higher point, would be minimal as far as RF coverage, and I'm not an RF engineer, but in my 30 years of doing this, I know that 5 to 10 feet does not make or break unless we're in a serious terrain issue. In this case, being the higher point, it's not a bad deal. The current R. A. D. center, where the center point of where the antennas are now, are there at 48 feet, and those were 6-foot antennas that were mounted on there. They're proposing, it looks like the same. These may be 8-foot antennas, so the difference, what currently is up there now in the flagpole is 48-foot midpoint on the antennas, and they want to go to 56 foot, and then you've got 4 feet of antenna above that, and top of the steel, top of the antennas is a common phraseology in us, and then the fronds extend above that. So if this was to drop back down to, say, 50-foot R. A. D. center, you would have 54 top of antennas, and then the palm fronds above that for an additional 5 feet for the disguising. GRAY: Commissioner Kovacevic. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. In the old ordinance, on 1-7-0-6-B-1-F, the ordinance calls for a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether or not construction of a tower will accommodate colocation. Will this tower accommodate colocation? Did we get that statement? TAVASSOLI: No, Mr. Chairman. This application will not accommodate colocation, because, after all, it is an attempt to make it a stealth wireless communication facility, so any colocation of antennas would certainly affect that stealth appearance, certainly below the palm fronds. KOVACEVIC: Okay. How many -- while you're here, Farhad, how many homeowners were within 300 feet of the site that had to be notified? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Kovacevic, if I remember correctly, the mailing labels that were provided by the applicant took up a full page, which I believe it's about 30. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Okay. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 47 TAVASSOLI: And you kind of touched upon this, Commissioner Kovacevic, if I don't mind, and I'm not sure if I mentioned this during my presentation, certainly it's in the staff report, but because the applicant had provided the application in September, which was prior to the approval of the current wireless communication facility ordinance, we were using the criteria from, as you alluded to, the previous ordinance. Although, I don't think the criteria or the factors that I went over were affected significantly by the new ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Did we get the statement on colocation or the notarized thing? TAVASSOLI: You know what, I don't have the answer to that offhand, but I can probably even double-check that on my phone. KOVACEVIC: Let's see, we covered the history of the tower a little bit, so what's the gain of function between a full array of antennas and the double-stack canisters? I mean, is that what allows you to go to 5G? Does it go from wireless cell phones to broadband internet? CAMPBELL: Commissioner Kovacevic, Chairman Gray. The ability to put more antennas in gives it a broader scope of coverage, and the ability of your cell phone, yes, your cell phone, the data. Data currently occupies -- the last time I spoke with my R. F. specialist -- occupies 65 percent of a network, so if you have a site out there that's operating like this one, 65 percent of the draw on that is not for your phone. It's for sitting there, maybe watching this presentation or watching a movie or working on it. The data is the biggest draw, and the additional antennas provide greater scope. Capacity is a better word. Greater capacity to handle the demand by the public. KOVACEVIC: In the course of talking to some people from T-Mobile, I was under the understanding that there were different towers for wireless cell phone service than there were for broadband internet. Is that the case? CAMPBELL: I don't have an answer on that one. KOVACEVIC: Okay. All right. I think that's all I have now. GRAY: Commissioner Watts. WATTS: Thanks a lot. Farhad, I think this is for you first. The original S.U.P. was issued TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 47 in 1999; is that correct? TAVASSOLI: That's correct. WATTS: Has there been any change of ownership in that property since 1995, 1999? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Watts, as far as the change in ownership of the church, it was previously owned by the Assemblies of God Church. I'm not sure if this current church, Generation Church, is nondenominational or if it's somehow affiliated with the Assemblies of God, but I believe there's new leadership under the church. But to answer your question, I'm not sure of who the previous owner was according to our documentation. WATTS: Well, we've historically talked about S.U.P.s following or staying with the property and the ownership of that property, so my question really relates to, is that lease that's in place now subject to the same, the original S.U.P., or is it actually operating outside of an S.U.P. because there isn't an S.U.P. that actually exists today? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, if I understand your question, the S.U.P. runs with the land. GRAY: This is a new application for a new S.U.P. WATTS: I know. This is setting the stage for the next question, so to speak, so I want to know if we're legitimate today or not. TAVASSOLI: Yes. Yes. The S.U.P. runs with the land unless there was a condition made to renew within a certain period of time, but -- WATTS: Runs with the land or runs with the ownership of the land? Because previously we've talked about the ownership of the land. If it changes hands, the S.U.P. becomes null and void. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. It runs with the land. WATTS: Okay. GRAY: Where it becomes, just for clarification, where it becomes null and void is if the improvement is never made prior to the transaction, right? TAVASSOLI: Correct. GRAY: Then there's a sunset at the time of transaction. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 47 TAVASSOLI: Right. WATTS: Okay. And just for clarification, is this actually a broadband application or is it a cellular application? CAMPBELL: Commissioner Watts, Chairman Gray, it is a wireless application which is for voice, data, and T-Mobile has their 5G all-house coverage or home internet package that's out there, so the specifics are this site will allow for everything. WATTS: So we could have the upper end of the frequencies in broadband as well, the same thing as small cell towers? CAMPBELL: No. They would have to -- because small cell's not planned on this. Small cells are set up to only cover, geez, I'm thinking of like on college campuses and up and down streets where there is high density, very short range. It's what Steven Kennedy explained to me, they're very high, dense frequencies in a very short range. This site will have the ability to reach out and cover what it currently is. WATTS: My concern still is if we can operate in the broadband range of radio frequency, that spectrum from 0 to 100, however, it's rated, then are we operating in that upper end that broadband operates in? CAMPBELL: Sir, I cannot answer that. WATTS: Okay. Is this tower anticipated to only cover the residents of Fountain Hills, or does it have further reaching connectivity? CAMPBELL: Commissioner Watts, it would cover the community that surrounds it within approximately a mile, mile and a half. It won't reach down to Shea Boulevard or out to 87 going north. There's other sites within the T-Mobile network. The cellular network, wireless network is basically like a honeycomb, so this is one core inside of there and it just -- as the need, it spreads out as far as the signal will reach and then there's another site which overlaps and connects. This is not to serve somebody that's cruising on Shea Boulevard. WATTS: Okay. And has the applicant provided any data that shows the number of dropped calls, the capacity, that's the reason that they need it? There's something data- driven that basically says here's why we need this new thing. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 47 CAMPBELL: I don't have that information, no. WATTS: So we really don't know whether or not it's necessary? CAMPBELL: Well, it's necessary because across the state and across the valley -- I've worked on dozens of these across the valley where they were, 10 years ago, they put the flagpoles up because that worked then. It does not work for them now. This will enhance their coverage. It'll enhance for the community, for emergency services, everything along the like. We'll see a much better-improved coverage. WATTS: Well, I understand what you're saying, but if you don't have any substantial data that says here's the number of dropped calls, here's the number of the amount of capacity, here's the bell curve, so to speak, that shows me -- CAMPBELL: I understand, yes. WATTS: All of that capacity, then how do I really know whether or not it's needed? I appreciate your comment, but you're not at the podium. Thank you. So we don't have any data is what you're saying? CAMPBELL: I don't have it with me, but what they are not going to go out and do is spend half a million dollars to improve a site without the push from the marketing or from their data services on the back side telling them this site needs to be improved. WATTS: I'd still like to see some data, something that supports the fact that they are having dropped calls, they are having capacity issues, that they need to improve the coverage for that area because it doesn't exist today. If you want to fill out a card, then that's fine, but just from the audience, I'd appreciate not saying any comments. Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No. It's the question you're asking him. If I can give you an accurate testimony. WATTS: You can give me a one-off. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm a T-Mobile customer that lives two blocks away on Ironwood, and I get no service, and I get no internet. GRAY: We understand. WATTS: And so, you're asking for actual data. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 47 GRAY: Sir. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: This is actual data. GRAY: Understood. That's enough. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm not affiliated with them. GRAY: Understood. If you want a comment card, you're welcome to fill one out. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Is there going to be open -- GRAY: Absolutely. That's what's coming next. Anything else? WATTS: Another one for Farhad. Farhad, this, to me, taking down the existing tower and putting in a new tower is new construction. Why are we submitting it as effectively a remodel to the existing tower? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, that point was brought up before by a member of the public, and I concede that it may not be considered a replacement in the true sense of the word, but we were just merely considering the fact that it was being placed in the same exact spot as the current flagpole. WATTS: Well, I understand, same foundation, same walls, but I would assume that the increase in the antennas and so on are going to also require an increase in capacity, capacity for electrical services and that sort of thing along the way, which I think would be a building issue, but I just want to make sure we're covering that base as well. So I would say we need to revise the application to reflect new, not a remodel. For right now, that's it, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. GRAY: Thank you, Commissioner. Gentlemen on the phone, any questions ahead of the public hearing? DAPAAH: Thank you, Chair. COREY: Yes. Yes, I -- DAPAAH: Go ahead. Go ahead. COREY: Thank you. Sorry, I think we're just double talking. Sorry, I couldn't be there in person. I appreciate you calling me out. Yeah, just a couple of questions, and one kind of caught my attention earlier. So this height is significantly higher. What I'm hearing a TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 47 lot from residents is concerns around aesthetics, so possibly a question from Mr. Campbell. I know you started to address this earlier, but can you clarify why the increased height is necessary compared to like other designs that made at lower heights? TAVASSOLI: Yes. That's Commissioner Corey speaking. CAMPBELL: Commissioner Corey, Chairman Gray. The height request was made by T- Mobile's RF engineer, and as it stands, it's an eight-foot increase in the, what I call the R. A. D. center, what's known as the R. A. D. center, or the mounting height of the antenna, and the palm fronds. COREY: It sounds to me -- yeah. Sorry, there's a little delay. I apologize for speaking over you. When I heard you speak earlier, it sounded like there could have been alternative designs that may not have been too impactful, so I'm just wondering if other designs that were a little bit shorter were kind of looked at that could provide significant service that we need without being so tall. CAMPBELL: Commissioner Corey, this is the design that would fit there. The height could be lowered, as I mentioned, to match what currently is there, but to put anything else up there, any other type of a tree or a concrete structure or something to that effect would be, would have a larger, a greater visual impact. COREY: Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Campbell. And my other question is kind of along the lines of that. When we talk about adding additional vegetation or something near there, I heard somebody say earlier palm tree fronds. Can you just clarify what that would be so we all kind of have an understanding of what that might look like? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. I -- Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corry. Yeah, I made the reference to palm tree friends. Typically, well, not typically, but in some cases, whenever a monopalm such as this is proposed, depending on what kind of arrangements are made between the company leasing the property and the owner, one can complement, so to speak, a monopalm with a few natural palms to kind of reinforce the stealth appearance of the monopalm. COREY: Great. Okay. Thank you for clarifying Farhad. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 47 GRAY: Okay. Paula, let's go ahead. DAPAAH: Yeah. Chairman Gray, I have a question myself. So besides this 65-foot tower, at the base of it would also be a pad filled with equipment, right? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Dapaah, yes. The equipment location, the current equipment location is where the site for the new equipment will be. The current equipment will be removed and replaced, but it will be behind the existing screen wall that's there right now to screen it from view from the neighboring streets. DAPAAH: Yeah. Farhad, so you're saying it'll be removed and replaced or it'll be modified? I hear that -- I thought I read that they were going to perhaps just maybe increase, or I didn't understand it to be a replacement. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Commissioner Dapaah, let me go to the site plan here. I beg your pardon, wrong way. Yeah, I got a screen capture here. Yeah, it appears that currently there are two cabinets there on the property. Now, my understanding was that those cabinets will be replaced, and I'm not sure if you can see your screen right now, Commissioner Dapaah, but where my cursor is currently is the current condition of the equipment shelter, and then to the right are the proposed cabinet replacements. And perhaps Mr. Campbell can confirm whether or not those are in fact replacements or if there's any modifications made to the existing cabinets. DAPAAH: And if he can speak to the dimensions, does that change? You know, aesthetics-wise, then, the dimensions, will that change at all? Will that affect it? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Dapaah, it is screened currently. The current equipment shelter, or I should say the ground equipment is screened with a six-foot wall. That will not change. I'm not sure if there's, from a certain angle from Ironwood where those cabinets would appear, but it's certainly screened well from view from Fountain Hills Boulevard. DAPAAH: Okay. Okay, so that will not be visible. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Farhad. GRAY: Vice Chair Watts. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 47 WATTS: There's a mention of a cupola. Where is that? I couldn't find it anywhere. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Watts, that is an erroneous reference in the staff report. There was a template that was used for a previous wireless communication facility, and although John and I worked on revising the staff report accordingly, somehow it did not make it in the published version, but there is no cupola. WATTS: Got you. TAVASSOLI: There is no -- GRAY: Thank you. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. GRAY: Do you want it added? WATTS: No. GRAY: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Is there any comments from the neighbors that was in the meetings? GRAY: I didn't see anything. DAPAAH: Yeah. Chairman Gray, if I may ask one more question. Are other T-Mobile towers in the area also getting modified, or is it just this one here within that community? TAVASSOLI: I'll start off, I guess. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Dapaah, as far as any modifications that would require a Special Use Permit, in my five years here, there haven't been any applications to replace any equipment to the same scale. There may have been replacements, in the true sense of the word, of antennas on existing facilities, like for like, so to speak, in terms of size, but certainly nothing in the way of Special Use Permits. I'm not sure if Mr. Campbell can elaborate. CAMPBELL: Chair Gray, Commissioner Dapaah, I currently do not have any other modifications to T-Mobile locations in Fountain Hills, and I'm not aware of any others that are going on. GRAY: Commissioner, there's been two applications in my time here. One, to add a site TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 47 at the entrance of Adero Canyon, which is a large metal Saguaro cactus, and this site also came up for a renewed Special Use Permit, but it was to essentially increase the size of the flagpole several years ago. I'm saying probably three years ago now, Farhad, that came through-ish. TAVASSOLI: John's nodding his head. I don't think I worked on that case. GRAY: Okay. Commissioner Sveum, did you have one? SVEUM: There was a public meeting with neighborhood or people within 300 feet. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, there is a public participation requirement. At the very least, the applicant is required to send out notices of the applicant's intent to make the request for a Special Use Permit. There was no meeting. However, the applicant -- we asked the applicant to provide contact information on the notification letters, not the public notification letters sent by the town, but the -- yeah. SVEUM: We've had -- I've seen a few comment cards, but I've not seen anything else in this at all. I'm wondering what the comments were from the neighborhood. If there was a meeting that, I assume there was a meeting. TAVASSOLI: There was no meeting scheduled. SVEUM: There was no meeting at all? TAVASSOLI: No. SVEUM: So is there any record of any other comment besides the comments? TAVASSOLI: Comments have come in, Commissioner Sveum. Some of them are -- I think Paula will read off a little bit later -- but I think today only, of course, we had the weekend, but I came back today and there were six. SVEUM: Five or six. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. And there were, there was at least one inquiry, actually one inquiry that I had at the counter from a member of the public requesting more information about the -- SVEUM: Well perhaps we'll hear more public testimony on that. GRAY: Thank you, Farhad. Paula, let's go ahead and open the public hearing portion of the item here. The way TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 47 this process works, if you filled out a card in the back and delivered that to Paula, she will call you up in the order that those were turned in. She'll call the next person as on deck. There's a timer here at the front of the room with three minutes on it. You will get a beep at, what, 30 seconds remaining, Paula? WOODWARD: Yes. GRAY: And then a solid tone as your three minutes expires, so let's go ahead and call the first couple, Paula. WOODWARD: Okay. Our first speaker is Virginia O'Brien, and on deck will be Michael Brahy. O'BRIEN: Evening. What we'd like to do first, it was Michael Brahy, and he was scheduled to go first. WOODWARD: Oh, I'm sorry. Sure. We can switch you. Of course. O'BRIEN: Thank you. BRAHY: Hello. My name is Michael Brahy. I've been a resident of Fountains Hills for 24 years. My neighbors and I are presenting 70 signed petitions opposing the Fountain Hills Special Use Permit application by Crown Castle to erect that 65-foot wireless cell tower in a residentially zoned district. We strongly object to erecting a new monopalm cellular tower 65 feet tall in our neighborhood located on the Generation Church property located at 16239 East Ironwood Drive, Fountain Hills. The church is residentially zoned by the city and part of the Neighborhood Property Owners Association. We the residents and families living in this community have serious concerns for the negative impact that high power telecommunication towers bring with them in residential areas. These concerns are reason why we chose to live in a residential district by Fountain Hills, protected by Fountain Hills zoning and ordinances. Some adverse impacts on residents in the surrounding areas include but are not limited to, an unnatural visual impact and an imposing blot on the landscape. Public health issues surrounding radiofrequency radiation, increased wildfire hazards, concerns for threatened, endangered wildlife in their natural habitat. And we contend there is no need for a 65-foot-tall monopalm wireless cellular tower at this residential location, as TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 47 many other options are available throughout Fountain Hills on commercial property. And by signing this petition, we, the undersigned residents, respectfully request that the Planning and Zoning Commission, our Town Council, and our Mayor, Gerry Friedel, utilize and enforce existing Fountain Hills zoning codes and ordinances to protect and preserve our neighborhoods and community, and therefore deny the application by Crown Castle and Generation Church. Thank you all for your attention. O'BRIEN: Do I give the original copies? Happy to. Good evening. My name is Virginia O'Brien, and I am in thorough agreement with all the concerns expressed in the petition objecting to Generation Church and Crown Castle's request to erect a new 65-foot wireless cell tower on residential property, imposing a huge adverse visual impact that is anything but stealth. The wireless cellular tower would create unreasonable conditions in the opinion of over 72 neighborhood residents in the surrounding area that have signed petitions reflecting this opinion. Upon reviewing the Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning staff summary on this matter, it appears to me that Generation Church and Crown Castle want special approval to waive their compliance of Fountain Hills residential ordinances and violate those ordinances with Town Council approval if the Town Council grants them the Special Use Permit they applied for. Here are three of the special approvals they want to waive ordinance compliance for. The first violation that they want to waive is in regard to the height of the proposed tower. Residential zone structure height clearly states a 30-foot limit for all residents in that area. Generation Church and Crown Castle want special approval to waive their compliance with the existing 30-foot limit allowed in single-family zoning areas so that they can erect a 65-foot stealth tower. The second ordinance violation Generation Church and Crown Castle want waived is in regard to the required fall-down distances. The ordinance requires that any antenna constructed on a property must have a fall down distance which is equal to 300 percent of the height of the antenna in that residential district. This is a precaution against any offsite damage to adjoining properties or structures should it fall, never TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 47 mind the potential for a fire. Per zoning and planning report, the cell tower fall down distance is well short of the 300 percent of the height antenna required in a residential district. The third ordinance waiver Generation Church and Crown Castle seek is the waiver of the minimum 300-foot property line setback. The existing ordinance requires a 300-foot minimum setback from adjoining property lines. Any antenna within 300 feet of residentially zoned property requires a waiver of this ordinance. Planning and zoning staff clearly states that the residential setback requirements have not been met by Generation Church and Crown Castle. It is my understanding that the residential property owner, Generation Church, currently supports this permit to erect the new 65- foot monopalm wireless cell tower. In light of this evening's hearing, the increasing number of signed petitions, and the adverse impact of this tower on a residential neighborhood, I urge Generation Church and Crown Castle to respect their neighborhood community's objections to the 65-foot wireless cell tower in our residentially zoned neighborhood and reconsider their support for a special use application. I thank you for your attention. GRAY: Thank you, Ms. O'Brien. WOODWARD: Next speaker is Liz Gildersleeve. On deck is Jennifer Skousen. GILDERSLEEVE: Good evening, all. Hello, Paula. After reading the attachments for this agenda item, I do also have some questions that I hope this Commission will answer before making a final recommendation for this Special Use Permit. First, and I know it was addressed a little earlier, I'm still not clear on who would be receiving the benefits of this 65-foot tower. Is it all of Fountain Hills? Does it extend into the Fort McDowell community? I just, I didn't get a clear answer on that. The other question I had is why, if it sounds like this is for broadband, mostly for broadband, so why can't this infrastructure go underground or some of it go underground? Third, there are residents who are concerned about the health impacts of the presumably increased radiation. Has any study been done to confirm or deny the health TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 47 issues? Next, if I'm reading the citizen participation report correctly from the applicant, it appears that the letters to the impacted residents were mailed out in May, which, of course, is not a real helpful time since a lot of people in our community leave for the summer, and I'd also -- I didn't see it in the attachments -- but would it be possible for the public to see the form letter that was sent to the impacted residents and how this request for a Special Use Permit for a six-story tower was explained? And finally, if you approve this Special Use Permit, it waters down our ordinance even further and sets precedence for future six-story towers in our town. Should we then anticipate a sea of six-story fake palm trees in the near future from this applicant and other providers? In my opinion, there are still lots of questions, and I know the applicant, the gentleman here, has 30 years of experience, but I wasn't getting a warm, fuzzy feeling that he had all his information with him today, so I hope you delay a decision and get answers to these questions, my questions, and I'm sure you'll hear other questions from other residents who are going to speak. Thank you for your time. SKOUSEN: Good evening, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I stand before you today to express my strong opposition to the proposed installation of a 65-foot-tall cell tower in our residential neighborhood. First, let's address health concerns. While regulatory agencies assure us that radial frequency emissions from cell towers are within the safe limits, multiple studies have raised red flags about prolonged exposure, particularly for children and vulnerable populations. Research has linked proximity to cell towers with increases in headaches, sleep disturbances, and even cancer. My family is personally about to welcome our fifth any day. I've been having contractions sitting out there in the audience, which means all five of our children will be at an increased risk if the Planning and Zoning Committee approves this exception. Why should we take this gamble with our family's health when safer alternatives exist? Second, this tower threatens the character and value of our neighborhood. Studies TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 47 have consistently shown that properties near these cell towers can lose up to 20 percent of their market value. For many of us, our homes are not just places to live, they are our largest financial investment. Installing a cell tower here imposes an unfair burden on our community for the benefit of corporate interests. Third, we must consider the precedent this sets. Approving a cell tower in our neighborhood opens the door for similar projects in the future, gradually eroding the quiet, safe environment we all chose when we moved here. Fourth, added on the fly, the applicant mentioned that this would support first responders. I personally support first responders every day. I sell body cameras and tasers to law enforcement agencies, and in five years, I have never had an agency tell me they use T-Mobile, so I would be curious if our first responders use T-Mobile or if they use AT&T, FirstNet, or Verizon because those are the two primary vendors. I'm not against better connectivity. However, I urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to explore alternative locations for this tower, such as commercial zones or industrial areas where its impact on residents would be minimal. Let's work together to prioritize our public health, our property values, and the integrity of our community. Thank you. GRAY: Thank you. Could you just read your name into the record for us? SKOUSEN: Jennifer Skousen. GRAY: Thank you. WOODWARD: Next speaker is Larry Meyers, and on deck will be Crystal Cavanaugh. MEYERS: Chair, commissioners, Larry Meyers, 43-year resident of Fountain Hills, and I was here when they put up the flagpole. It was pretty unobtrusive. If you don't know it's there, you wouldn't even know it's there, and it's a cell tower. This is a broadband tower. We've had two years' worth of discussions on broadband and all of the impacts that it has. This isn't about whether you get good service or bad service, because I have T-Mobile and I have bad service, and my options are to get Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile gave me a cell spot to put in my house that goes from my phone to the cell spot, to the internet, to the tower, the big tower. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 47 So just to put that aside, most of my concern is once again an S.U.P. and the process. This town has a habit of screwing up the process of an S.U.P. The Target Center S.U.P., the process was poor. This S.U.P., the process is poor. This is not an upgrade. This is a new build. The tower that's there is a cell tower. The tower that will be there is a broadband cell tower. This is a new build, so that's what the application should say and the staff should recognize that and write it as such. Asking for an S.U.P., and in your application, stating unequivocally as Crown Castle did, that there will have no effect on property values, well, the ordinance says it will, and then you're asking for an S.U.P. to get around the ordinance, and then you're telling the town that there will have no effect. It will have no effect on the property values. I don't see any study. I don't see actually anything in this application that resembles a data point which Commissioner Watts was asking for for any of this. In the debate for the last two years, we've talked about how the town doesn't have any expertise in this area, and tonight it's clear, again, they don't, and we've been denied the information from experts on this particular subject matter by our previous Town Council and town attorney. And so I would once again ask that the town consult an expert, cause the applicant to pay for that consultation so that the town can receive the data points necessary to make the proper decision on an S.U.P. that affects so many residents in various means, various forms, property values, health concerns, visual aesthetics, and in such, then they would in fact be having a proper process before granting an S.U.P. that is just a request from somebody who intends to make more money. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. CAVANAUGH: Good evening. Crystal Cavanaugh, Fountain Hills resident. I just have a few points, because most of them have been made, but I want to start off by saying I'm very thankful for this Commission because you all ask questions. Now, you don't always get the answers, which is what I noticed again tonight, and without those answers, it's going to be very difficult to make a decision on this, but I find it even more amazing that we have staff that readily recommend saying yes to things like this without these same TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 47 answers and data. This structure exceeds the height limit by 35 feet. It's a 65-foot structure, and then they use the word stealth. There is nothing stealth about a 65-foot structure. I don't care how many palm fronds you put on it or get them palm frond friends. So the fall-down distance as was mentioned before is inadequate. It also says it's going to use the existing foundation. Is that even adequate? And I particularly get upset when I see statements in these staff reports that say things like staff believes no negative impacts on surrounding property. Well, which staff is making that determination? Do they even live in Fountain Hills is always my question. So little things like this are very disturbing when they want to be rammed through, and I really caution you to continue to search for the answers to your very important questions. Thank you. WOODWARD: Next speaker, April McCormick, and on deck, Lori Troller. MCCORMICK: Good evening. I want to say I am so proud of this town. I believe all of the 75 signatures have been collected over the weekend, and that is a monumental, Herculean effort, and I want to say thank you. Okay. A couple of things about this petition. So this is a six-story building. Every 11 feet is one story in construction, and if you take 65 feet divided by 11, that's 5.9 stories. This is insanity surrounded by all residential zoning districts and homes, so the Ninth Circuit has upheld municipalities asking for what's called a least intrusive means test, and that means you can ask them, have you tried to look for a site that's least intrusive to what you're proposing? And in their own little staff packet prepared by this gentleman, straight up, it says they haven't even looked. Haven't even looked, so you can ask them to look, do their due diligence, and come back and show you other options. Their plans, I don't believe are to scale. I've been in construction my entire adult life, and I went to Google Earth and measured the height of that flagpole which I believe is 49 feet. I also measured how many homes are around that flagpole right now within 1,150 feet, and the reason I did that is because a study from Israel found that if you live within 1,150 feet of a tower or antenna, your chances of getting cancer quadruple. And TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 47 so I stopped counting at 75 homes within 1,150 feet. That's how many people would be grossly affected by the placement of this. The church, I wish the property owner was here. I know they've been contacted by some people in this audience to which they've said they'll pray for your brain, heart, and soul. They seem to care less and be completely motivated by whatever lease payment they are getting. On the plans that this gentleman prepared, there is zero detail of what these transmitters are going to be broadcasting. There's nothing on frequency at all. I mean, I've seen a lot of these applications. I've never seen that. And this is going to be from the little bit I heard, a 5G Macro Tower. I mean, this thing will be -- all of these services are different frequencies. The phone is one, location, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, all of these other things are different frequencies, so there should be detail of how many antennas are going to be in there and what frequency they are going to be using. Right now we're going to be broadcasting Wi-Fi, like this is downtown San Francisco, in the middle of this residential area. It's absolutely crazy, and I know you're in a pickle because it's already there, and I feel so sorry for the people that live in this vicinity. We looked at a lot on the street, did a ton of due diligence to build. And the only reason we didn't build there is because of this. I knew this would happen, and I didn't know when, I knew it probably pretty soon, and I was too scared to even entertain it, and these people have a very legitimate reason to feel the same way. 350 people have been to FountainHillsSafety.com since Friday and they're very concerned. Thank you. GRAY: Ms. Troller, we'll give you the four minutes you asked for. TROLLER: Thank you. Hi, guys. Gentlemen, it's been a while. Hope you had a good holiday. Lori Troller, resident. I'm going to fly through my 18 points real quick, but I think Farhad already gave you the reasons you need to deny this. It's too high, it's too close, and you're setting a precedence with putting this in the residential area as noted. He had those in red on the thing. So I'm going to skip to some comments I had about this entire presentation and reasons for when we come back to the ordinance, these are all things I want you to TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 47 consider when we're writing the ordinance. These are things we got to write in so we're not stuck in this position the next time. I'm kind of surprised that they're even addressing this. This is a sleeping bear. This guy went in in 2019 with no laws. Changing this now to a new build, they're under the new ordinance, so I don't even know why they're doing this, because now they got that in there without any laws, without worrying about the residents or something like that. You ought to just leave it as is. That's my opinion. Number two, to clarify, emergency services never use broadband. They don't. You get that much smoke if you're in a fire, you have that much smoke, you don't talk. It disrupts the communication. Emergency services have their own frequency and it's F. M. frequency. They never use this. This is broadband. Again, we've been talking about this for a long time. It can go underground. You guys have absolutely no obligation to approve this according to federal law because it's broadband. Broadband services do not have the A-O-K to do a build-out like cellular does. It's different laws and broadband just doesn't have it. The appearance -- sorry -- the appearance of these palm trees change quickly. If anybody has driven past the Alamo and you look at that palm tree past the Alamo, that, two years ago, it looked like that. It was that one set of antennas. Right now, there's another set, a second set of antennas, and by the way, a set of antennas, a full set of antennas, you can put more on this one set, which means that level, weighs about a ton. Would you love to be in church and have that hit you? Anyway, the one at Alamo has two levels. It looks far from anything natural because the fronds are now down a whole other level, so if you really want to see what the potential of what this can look like and any other 65-foot palm tree, look at the one at Alamo. It's not pretty. Let's see. Sorry. I think -- oh, Peter, you mentioned that you wanted to ask if we had to validate or take for face value some of the quotes that was presented to you in the presentation. I would say you can go get your own numbers if you want. Many towns get experts to do this, and they don't use town staff. They reference experts, and those experts go to run those numbers, and they check those numbers, so I've never heard of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 47 a town having to take anything at face value. You can check that all you like. There's nothing that would keep you from doing that in any law that I've seen. It also mentions that the base is not going to be changed. I think John specifically mentioned that in this. The base isn't going to change. Well, you've got a base right now that was designed to support that flagpole that has no wind shear to it, basically, because there's no fronds on it. Well, there's a flag on it. And there's a whole different weight component so that base, if that base is only this big and needs to be this big, and the town gives them an approval for an S.U.P. that they even tell you they're not going to change the base and that sucker goes over, now we're up for a lawsuit because you approved something that didn't get engineered properly and that's going to be on the town. So I would ask you to consider that because John specifically said the base will not change, so I don't -- I wouldn't, if I wouldn't put an engineering stamp on that base -- do I still? GRAY: You can take 15 more seconds. TROLLER: Okay. GRAY: Sorry. I know. TROLLER: Yeah, you do. Finally -- I'm just going to -- there's a lot more. There's so much more. One thing I want to say. We want this service. Town wants the service. We don't, we're not denying this. It's already there, so when they use the terms, you can't deny, there's, in the application it says, there's page 8, 9, and 10. There are -- it states the laws. Basically, it says you can't deny service. We're not denying service. It's right there, and it's working, so if they want to upgrade their service, that's up to them and we are not denying it. So by doing a denial, don't be afraid of, oh, the lawsuits and stuff like that because we're not denying anything. And, again, it's broadband. Let's bring it in underground. Let's preserve our values and the beauty of our town. Thanks. Thanks, Peter. WOODWARD: Next speaker is Kevin Rose and after Kevin, Alan Proctor. Kevin Rose? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 47 Did he leave? Okay. Mr. Proctor, please. PROCTOR: Hello. Good afternoon, everybody. So I'm a resident that does live within 300 feet. I got the letter. It was dated November 20th, so that was the first I found out about this a few weeks ago, so I didn't really prepare anything, but I guess just for the record, I am a civil engineer, a registered professional engineer, so I do have my engineer stamp. I'm against this, aesthetically, health concerns, and my property value. I purchased the home about a couple years ago, so I do have concerns about this. I didn't know the flagpole was an antenna. I have no problem with the flagpole, but this new, it is definitely new construction. I also found it surprising about the foundation. Seems like it would need a new foundation. But, anyway, just wanted to submit my testimony under the record, so thank you. WOODWARD: No more speaker cards, Chair. GRAY: Paula, can you tally up what came in via email that may be hand delivered that did not speak for us? WOODWARD: So we received six comment cards by email, and three of the people opposed the project, one was for it, and one was I couldn't decide what it was. They just made a comment. GRAY: You want to read that comment just so we can -- WOODWARD: Well, sure. I think they were for and against, so let's see. So the comment is following: you can neither stem the tide of progress nor fight the federal government. No matter what is said at a public meeting, this 5G invasion of progress cannot be stopped. Perhaps we can keep them away from folks' homes and place them in public parks and such, however. GRAY: Yeah. WOODWARD: How do you interpret that? For or against? GRAY: I'm going to go against. WOODWARD: Against? Okay. There you go. GRAY: Yeah. I mean, the however does, that opens it up again, but I -- just leave it TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 47 against. KOVACEVIC: It does say that they are against if you look above the comment. GRAY: No, that's not very fun. KOVACEVIC: I know. GRAY: All right. WOODWARD: There you go. GRAY: Let's go ahead. We will formally close the public hearing. Farhad, let's bring you back up for any final discussion amongst the Commission with staff. I'll start since the mic's hot already. You know, we heard a lot of the same sentiment that I think, Farhad, you pointed out in the staff report around height, fall distance, setbacks, new versus renovation, et cetera. The thing that gives me the most pause, and I'm of the same opinion as several of the speakers. The service is, the cell service is warranted. The rest of it is highly subjective, but we're talking about this placement on an R1 to 35 property, and that's the underlying thing that I have a lot of trouble with here. So I want to hear what the other commissioners have to say. Commissioner Kovacevic. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I had a hard time. This is a tough vote. You know, because extending the tower 10 feet and expanding capacity to allow a full array of antennas will allow more residents to get less expensive wireless internet and access at home, but the tower doesn't comply with our previous zoning ordinance. It doesn't comply with the new zoning ordinance. When we were charged with reviewing and rewriting Chapter 17, we were given eight model ordinances from other municipalities, and this tower wouldn't meet any of those eight. The tower doesn't meet many of the goals of our zoning ordinance. Goal number one, it doesn't protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of the towers and antennas. Goal number two in the ordinance, it doesn't encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas. Goal number four, it has no provision for colocation. It doesn't encourage the joint use TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 47 of an existing tower site. And then goal number eight, with single-family residences next door and across the street, it doesn't consider the public health and safety of communication towers. So this S.U.P. doesn't meet four of the nine goals in our ordinance. So basing our recommendation to Town Council strictly on planning and zoning aspects of the petition, I'll be recommending denial. This is a non-conforming use. Petitioner's asking us to double down on the nonconforming use. The town publicly states in the ordinance, we don't want this use in a residential area. We have a wonderful town. The ordinances are a big reason why, so there's got to be a better way. GRAY: Commissioner Watts. WATTS: So I'm going to make a comment about the last comment card. I think that there was actually some insight into that comment card that was made, and I think Ms. Troller said the same thing, that we're not here to prohibit 5G in any form. At some point, it's the proper management and implementation. It's how we can do it constructively, how we can do it smartly -- if that's a word -- but not to just -- GRAY: No. It's not. WATTS: It's not a word? Strike the smartly. Thank you. But I just don't think -- I think the height issue, R1-35 doesn't fit. I don't think there's any bumpers in our current ordinances around the radio frequency limitations. The applicant was kind of not real exacting about the reasons and wasn't exacting about what frequencies. It's got internet, it's got broadband, but I think we need to have bumpers around what's cellular. We can't restrict cellular, that's a given, and I'll acquiesce to that, but I think we've got to get something that says you cannot operate outside this frequency and you can't operate within a certain area. So those are a couple of reasons. I know for a fact that the N. P. O. A. has not had an application submitted to get the approval, and I don't believe it would pass the Committee of Architecture. Kind of got a little insight there, so I also will be against voting for moving forward this S.U.P. GRAY: Farhad, can you just procedural clarification for me? What's the procedural TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 47 value of this being considered a renovation versus a new build? Is that purely semantics, or is there either procedural or financial value to the applicant? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure if procedurally there is. GRAY: Nothing. TAVASSOLI: Certainly under the old ordinance, I'm not sure if there's a, procedurally, any value as you said. The new ordinance does have shock clock requirements, so to speak. Had that been submitted after the ordinance took effect, or I should say after the ordinance was approved, I guess then we could start discussing whether the 90-day shock clock would apply here for replacements versus new facility. In my earlier discussions, I think -- and this is all having to do with the new ordinance -- with some staff, it sounds like it's, we would consider it a new facility under the 150-day shock clock. GRAY: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Sveum. SVEUM: Telecommunications is not in my wheelhouse, but I didn't hear just a motion from all of you tonight. I felt there's a lot of facts that were brought out. I appreciate hearing that. I'm not so sure how a tower like this would affect values of property necessarily, but I do think there was no compelling reason to approve this -- this antenna. And frankly, a billion-dollar company ought to be able to design something that's a lot more attractive than something like this. The one that's down east of Saguaro, the first time I saw that, I just laughed, to have that in a town this beautiful. There has to be better ways to do this. And T-Mobile or whoever would like to present a tower to improve their services and create more business, they've got to do a better job of convincing not only us but you as neighbors and those that are directly affected. Just driving by the site after this came out and the photos and everything, I'm picturing how bad this is going to look. And it's one of those, why did we allow that to happen? So until they come up with a better answer, I'm a no, totally no. GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah. DAPAAH: Yeah. Chair, I don't have enough information here to really come to a solid TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 47 decision on this, but I'm not convinced that it is a rebuild. I don't know what the weight of the components that are going to be sitting on the top of this tower that is twice as high as the flagpole, so yeah. I'm not able to move forward with this either. GRAY: Commissioner Corey. DAPAAH: At this time. COREY: Thank you, Chair. Yeah, I'd have to agree with what my colleague said. I think the increased height, it doesn't really align with the character of the residential neighborhood, and I think we should explore other designs or configurations that maybe can give us the communication that we need without it being so impactful, so I think I'll also be a no vote on this. And I appreciate all the feedback that we heard today. GRAY: Thank you, commissioners. I think it's pretty clear the way the recommendation is going to go here tonight. I don't know if anybody has a motion in mind that they'd like to make. Commissioner Kovacevic. KOVACEVIC: Sure. I'll move to deny the request. WATTS: I'll second. GRAY: Okay. Let's do it on the basis of -- I'd like you to include on the basis of it's in a R1 to 35 zoned parcel as one, if you would consider that. KOVACEVIC: Absolutely. GRAY: Secondary considerations? WATTS: Second. GRAY: Well, we've got a second from Commissioner Watts. Any additional clarifying considerations? So R1 to 35, I want to make sure we give the Council good meat to work with. KOVACEVIC: It doesn't meet the goals of our zoning ordinance. GRAY: Okay. So let's say on the basis of siting in a 1 to 35 parcel and, in general, nonconformance with zoning ordinance heavily inclusive of height, fall zone, and setback? KOVACEVIC: Yes. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 47 WATTS: I think the radio frequencies also need to be included, that it's not clear whether it is actually broadband or simply cellular, and that needs to be defined. KOVACEVIC: I think we got that answer. I think it's broad -- I mean, he said it was broadband. WATTS: Well, I don't think it's clear. GRAY: It is, but this is a zoning hearing, so let's -- WATTS: All right. And I think the statement about first responders -- it does not affect first responders, so I want to make sure that's clear to the Council as well. This does not have an impact on first responders. They do operate completely on -- I know for a fact on M. C. S. O. They operate on a different frequency completely or a different system, so it doesn't affect that. I think that about covers it for me. GRAY: Okay. Farhad, enough to work with? TAVASSOLI: Absolutely. GRAY: Okay. So a motion on the table to recommend denial on the basis just discussed from Commissioner Kovacevic, seconded by Commissioner Watts. Paula, just for posterity's sake, roll call, please. WOODWARD: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Kovacevic? KOVACEVIC: Aye. WOODWARD: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Aye. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Watts? WATTS: Aye. WOODWARD: Chair Gray? GRAY: Aye. WOODWARD: 6-0. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 47 GRAY: Thank you, Paula. Okay. So just for clarity, that motion is going to Town Council with a recommendation to deny on that basis. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, may I? On that note about the Town Council meeting, if I may make a clarification. I think the schedule for the next year's Town Council meetings will be officially under consideration next week. There's reference made in the public notice as well as the legal ad that the meeting will be on January 22nd, which is a Wednesday, two days after the Martin Luther King holiday. I believe there is a push to reschedule that on Tuesday, for Tuesday, January 21st, but we'll find out next week, but just for everyone's benefit in the public, and I've asked the applicant to make the change in the sign once it becomes official. GRAY: Okay. Thank you, Farhad. Okay. Let's move on to Agenda Item 5. Another public hearing consideration of possible action amending Chapter 12 of the commercial zoning districts to allow outdoor display of non-gasoline powered vehicles with no more than one ton in weight to the C1 neighborhood commercial and professional zoning district under a Special Use Permit. And, Farhad, let's just give the room a couple seconds here. TAVASSOLI: Sure. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. So this next item is a staff-initiated text amendment for the direction of the Town Council to allow outdoor display of small, non-gasoline powered vehicles, particularly in the C1 zoning district. Now what spurred this text amendment proposal? As you might recall, I believe it came before the Commission back in, I want to say -- actually, I think maybe October, there was a rezone request from a business owner, that business owner being the owner of a golf cart sales business at the corner of Fountain Hills Boulevard and Glenbrook Avenue. And the request was from a rezone from C1 to C2, particularly to allow outdoor display of golf carts. And that was the only instrument that would allow outdoor golf cart display, or any kind of vehicle display TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 47 outdoors, in the C2 zoning district, so that came before the Commission back in October. It was, the rezone was denied per commission's recommendation and also per staff's recommendation at the November 19th Council meeting. However, as staff had expected after the Commission meeting as well as the Council meeting, staff received direction to propose a text amendment to allow golf cart display in the C1 zoning district. And the reason for the denial was there were a whole list of other uses under the C2 that would have been allowed had that rezone been approved, including hotels and drive-throughs, which clearly would not have been appropriate for the area. So, given the direction given by Town Council, we took a number of considerations, did a little bit of research, in looking at not only golf carts but also similar vehicles. We first looked at the scale of these vehicles, and we found that four-seater golf carts can weigh anywhere between 400 to 550 pounds. Six-seater golf carts, which aren't that uncommon, can weigh as much as 1,850 pounds. We also asked the question, well, are there other non-gasoline powered vehicles such as golf carts that are in similar size and weight? And we thought possibly there could be a number of others. The staff report made reference to pedicabs. I'm not sure how frequently they would be used in the area, but they are, after all, vehicles, non-gasoline powered, and not even electrical, or electric powered go-carts, for example. And so we, basically, as you'll see in the suggested text amendment in the following slide, we thought of a limit of one ton for outdoor vehicle, non-gasoline powered, outdoor vehicle displays. We also thought about likely areas for the display. Well, more likely than not, such vehicles would be displayed in the parking stalls, and that brings up a number of questions of would display of such vehicles compromise the parking demand for a particular commercial center? And, also, should we consider this a by-right use in the C-1 or one that would require an S.U.P.? And really, we recommend language in the zoning ordinance that would require a Special Use Permit for outdoor display of non-gasoline vehicles of no more than one ton in the C-1 zoning district. I know there's a reference here to the C-C district in TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 47 that, but this is particularly for, specifically for the C-1 zoning district, this proposed text amendment. Let's see what else I thought of adding. Oh, so that way we can come before you and bring up other considerations that might be associated with the request, such as the parking requirement would, if there's some serious questions about accessibility to a parking lot because of these vehicle displays. Well, that's something that the Commission and Council can consider. Commission and Council can also consider an expiration date or a requirement to come back and renew after a certain period of time. In the earlier presentation, I mentioned that Special Use Permits typically run with the land. However, unless there's a specific time limit placed on or stipulated with the approval, then that can be tagged to the property in question. So, quite simply, that's it in a nutshell. But if you have any more questions about how staff went about this in proposing the language you see before you, I'll open up to questions right now. GRAY: Pretty straightforward, Farhad. Like the idea of it being tied to the Special Use Permit as we delve into new, kind of, should be placid but uncharted waters here with something like this. And I appreciate the background and how we got to this. I'm just curious what the Commission thinks. I almost propose that this type of Special Use Permit sunset with a business license so that we're able to kind of reevaluate that over time. I don't think that that should run with the land like some others do. Commissioner Watts. WATTS: No, I agree. I think the Special Use Permit sunsetting or being limited to the individual that applies for the Special Use Permit. Whey ought to have some stipulations on it, and I'm still a little confused about is it the land, is it the owner. Because I've heard both ways, and I'm going to do a little more research here, but I think this particular one should sunset with the ownership or the business license in this case. Either one. GRAY: Commissioner Sveum. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 47 SVEUM: But if he does sell the business to a relative or a partner or something like that, this would have to be renewed? I don't see why that would be necessary. WATTS: Not if he necessarily did it with the business. SVEUM: Pardon? WATTS: If he sold the business, he wouldn't have to renew it. GRAY: Yeah. The license would stay intact. SVEUM: So it's the type of business you're talking about, not the owner of the business. WATTS: Yeah. In this particular case, I'll use the golf carts. If I sold my golf cart business to you, that Special Use Permit would remain intact because it's consistent, but now if I sold the property to somebody else, then you'd have to apply for a new Special Use Permit. GRAY: John doesn't like it. WATTS: Sorry. WESLEY: Chair, commissioners, I got a particular -- one was the comment about the business license. If you sell the business to Phil, then Phil's going to have to get his own business license. So it'd be a new business license, so I think you'd have to be a little careful in how you might word that. But I guess going with what Commissioner Sveum was saying, if it's really the same business at the same location regardless of who the owner is, again, I'm not sure why that would need a Special Use Permit change. My thought initially is it could just be considered with each Special Use Permit and how you might want to put a tie on it if there's a timeframe or if it's a vacancy or whatever. I certainly, I guess coming back to Vice Chair, your comments is still kind of the confusion that's out there about how these continue or don't continue. If this particular applicant gets approval of his SUP, continues his business, but then for whatever reason closes it down and it gets discontinued, and then after it's discontinued, someone comes back and wants to do the same business, they would have to reapply. It doesn't run with the land after the business has been vacated. It's lost its status at that point, but -- SVEUM: Your suggestion is to make it with the business license as opposed to the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 47 owner of the business. WESLEY: No. I guess I'm not being very clear. I think the business license would be the wrong way to go because I don't think that accomplishes what you're after. I think you could handle it on a case-by-case basis with each Special Use Permit to see if you want to put some stipulation on how it transfers or how it terminates. But just a normal practice, if one business goes out and the property's now vacant and somebody wants to put the same business back in, they wouldn't need a new Special Use Permit. It doesn't run with the land once it's become vacant in that regard. GRAY: But then we're just kind of crystal balling it with each and every application. I'd go back closer to business type and continuity of business. Just simply say something generic to the effect of if the parcel's used for an alternate purpose, the Special Use Permit would sunset at any time. I just -- I don't think you want to leave something like this with the parcel forever to be picked back up 10 years from now. SVEUM: I also, I've got a question regarding why are we talking about non-gasoline- powered vehicles. Is this your business? I thought so. You take older golf carts in on trade? RON RICCI (business owner): I do. SVEUM: Well, I mean, sometimes they might be gas. I mean -- RON RICCI (business owner): I just try to get rid of them. I don't keep gas. SVEUM: Well, but if you want to display them -- RON RICCI (business owner): Yeah. SVEUM: You would not be able to do that under this provision. RON RICCI (business owner): Correct. SVEUM: Or some of your other vehicles or other product, they may be gas-powered as well, right? Electric golf cart, is that what I heard? RON RICCI (business owner): That was -- SVEUM: Oh, I'm sorry, what? RON RICCI (business owner): I don't have the microphone to speak into so -- TAVASSOLI: Okay. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 47 RON RICCI (business owner): I don't deal with gasoline golf carts. If I do take them in on trade, you're correct. That does happen from time to time, but I get rid of them as quickly as I can, you know? SVEUM: Well, in the event that you can't, why are we -- I just don't understand why we're limiting to non-gasoline vehicles. Is there a reason it was written that way? TAVASSOLI: Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Excuse me. I'm sorry. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Sveum, the reason being is that gasoline-powered vehicles with their motors and engines typically generate noise that may not be compatible depending on the area. GRAY: In a residential district. TAVASSOLI: And so there's fewer nuisances associated with a non-gasoline-powered vehicle. SVEUM: Well, there's cars running down the street as well, so I just don't know that you want to limit, in those cases, you might try to display. That's just my opinion. RON RICCI (business owner): I agree, and I guess I would feel better if you took it out. I don't mind the ton. He put a one-ton in there. I'm okay with that. SVEUM: Is there a weight problem if it's a gasoline car? RON RICCI (business owner): No, gas. I mean, a gas -- SVEUM: So a one-ton would be fine? RON RICCI (business owner): Yes. I'd be okay with a one-ton, but the gasoline, you're right. If I take one in on trade and I've got to get rid of it and I'm under the gun, you know, because I can't. SVEUM: You've got money tied up in it. RON RICCI (business owner): Yes, so -- RON RICCI (business owner): And I don't want to leave a gas cart inside the building. SVEUM: Right. So, personally, I would like to provide more flexibility with that and eliminate the non-gasoline power. RON RICCI (business owner): All they'd have to do is remove the gasoline power. They can leave the weight. I'm good with that. GRAY: So I generally am with you, but devil's advocate for a second. What if he takes in TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 47 an unmuffled go-kart or a Razor, and now that's displayed and shown to a prospective buyer in a residential district? That's unfair to the C1 designation. RON RICCI (business owner): And I get where you're coming from because I don't like the Razors. They're loud and obnoxious and they're unlike a gasoline. GRAY: Offensive, too. RON RICCI (business owner): They're not like a golf cart; they’re much quieter. A Razor, they're very, very loud. GRAY: So can we use a different classification? I mean, is there a licensure classification that can be used that would call that stuff out? RON RICCI (business owner): Basically, I mean, I'm a golf cart store. I don't sell UTVs. I don't. GRAY: No interest in selling Vespas or anything like that? RON RICCI (business owner): No, not really. No. Or no motorcycles, you know, no interest. WATTS: Why can't we provide an exclusion for the operation of gas-powered vehicles and a 30-day limit to dispose of them when taking them on trade? RON RICCI (business owner): That's fine. I'm okay with that. GRAY: I don't care. SVEUM: Do something, then you've accomplished that and you can do that. RON RICCI (business owner): Yeah, that's fine. GRAY: Yeah. Okay. So let's try and expedite this. Paula, do I have speaker cards? WOODWARD: No, Chair. GRAY: Commissioner Watts, did you have more? WATTS: Nope, that's it. GRAY: Okay. Final discussion. Is there a motion? Commissioner Watts? WATTS: I move to approve with the additional comments about the exclusion of the operation of gas-powered vehicles and a 30-day limitation on the storage of gas TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 47 vehicles. GRAY: And sunset of the S.U.P. with -- WATTS: And sunset of the S.U.P. with a business light. I'm still confused a bit about the business license versus the ownership versus the business. GRAY: Just say when continuity of the business ceases to exist or something. When business continuity ceases to exist under that S.U.P. WATTS: Okay. When the continuity of the business ceases under the business license of the operation. GRAY: Muddy as all get out. WATTS: Yeah. It gives you a little bit to work with. GRAY: Commissioner Corey, Commissioner Dapaah? COREY: Yeah. My one comment was also around are all golf carts non-gasoline? So I'm glad that we addressed that, and I'm with you on approving. GRAY: Commissioner Dapaah? DAPAAH: Yeah. And would this be restricted to this owner, like John was saying, or is it going to be to the license? And also, would a neighbor of his be able to just maybe decide one day to sell his own and just pull it out front and leave it there with a for sale sign on it? Or can any of the neighbors pull up their cart? So my question is, is this restricted to this address only? GRAY: Yes, it's restricted to this. TAVASSOLI: No. Mr. Chairman, this is a -- if we're talking about the text amendment before you, this is, this will be across the board for anyone. GRAY: But they'll all require a Special Use Permit. TAVASSOLI: That is correct, but it's not for this particular individual at this particular address. Yeah. DAPAAH: Okay. GRAY: But, Commissioner Dapaah, each applicant is going to have to come through the S.U.P. process, so, in essence, the next iteration of this is specific to this business at this TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 47 address. DAPAAH: Okay. GRAY: All we're doing today is modifying the ordinance to allow for the use of an S.U.P. in this application. TAVASSOLI: If approved. Yeah. DAPAAH: All right. All right. Thanks, Chair. Yeah. All right. Well, thank you. GRAY: Commissioner Kovacevic. KOVACEVIC: So if we pass this tonight, does the golf cart business have to then come in for a Special Use Permit? They have to go through that process after this? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, yes. The applicant would require to -- be required to apply for a Special Use Permit, and I'm not sure if the previous permit -- WESLEY: Chairman, Commissioner Kovacevic, so back in October when you considered this before, you postponed or set aside the Special Use Permit request waiting for this, so we are getting it scheduled for your January meeting for it to come back for its approval. GRAY: Commissioner Sveum. SVEUM: Is there a fee that he's going to have to pay for this S.U.P. application? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, no. Well, as John just said, we'll -- WOODWARD: He's already paid once. SVEUM: Oh, okay. Okay, so we're even. WOODWARD: He paid for both, the rezoning and the Special Use Permit. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. SVEUM: Great. GRAY: Okay. All in favor? WATTS: Well, wait. Was there a second? GRAY: No. There was no second yet. SVEUM: Second. GRAY: Commissioner Sveum seconds. So Commissioner Watts recommends approval with stipulation. Commissioner Sveum seconds. All in favor? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 45 of 47 ALL: Aye. GRAY: Thank you. TAVASSOLI: Thank you. GRAY: All right. Straw poll. Do we want to continue on tonight or do we want to defer? What's our next agenda look like, John? WESLEY: So your January meeting at this point, the only thing I'm aware of is the Special Use Permit for the golf cart. Oh, we might have the Special Use Permits up in Plot 106 that we continued from a previous meeting. That may be back also. GRAY: Oh, the proposal. WESLEY: Yes. GRAY: Straw poll. We want to continue on tonight? Well, do you object if I take my straw poll? WESLEY: No. Chairman, this is early input discussion by the Commission, so if you'd rather not discuss it this evening, we can wait. GRAY: Well, I mean, I don't want to give you a memorable one. What do you guys think? Defer it? Okay. If you don't object, John, we'll defer that. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: All right. So Agenda Item 6, we will, it's not a hearing, so we'll just defer, continue that to our next agenda. WESLEY: There's no notice. GRAY: For our next regularly scheduled meeting. Let's see, Number 6, discuss and provide -- no, Number 7, Commission discussion, request for research to staff. Anything for John? Commissioner Kovacevic. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Just in response to the meeting tonight, where does it fall in the town to bring in broadband fiber underground? Who does that? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Kovacevic, at this point, it would be a private TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 46 of 47 industry that feels like it's economically feasible for them to do so. KOVACEVIC: Does somebody in the -- is there -- would that be Amanda that would solicit something like that from private industry, or who would do that? WESLEY: Either that or Public Works. KOVACEVIC: Okay. SVEUM: Or the utility in themselves. KOVACEVIC: Well, yeah, the utility. Obviously, if they saw it as in their interest. WATTS: Well, the interesting -- to your point, and we've talked about before, there's a number of grant-like programs and funds out there to support that effort if it's driven from the municipality. So I think that you're going down a path that we should probably promote, Mr. Mayor, sitting in the back row. KOVACEVIC: That's all I have. WATTS: But to your point, if we found some commercial, heavy commercial, industrial application campus-based, and we were supporters of doing that for that locale, that would be a good thing for economic development to promote. GRAY: Absolutely. Yeah. Chicken, egg, egg, chicken. WATTS: It would be. GRAY: All right, John. Reverse it. Anything for us? WESLEY: No, Chairman. Happy holidays. We've already discussed what we expect to be on your January meeting. So with that, Vice Chair Watts, we'll see you at another meeting. WATTS: Tomorrow night. GRAY: What happens? He goes to the end of the row when he moves up there to the big leagues? WESLEY: He'll decide that, doesn't he? GRAY: All right. John, Farhad, thank you. TAVASSOLI: Thank you, guys. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS DECEMBER 9, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 47 of 47 GRAY: We're adjourned.