Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout250310 PZC Summary Minutes and Verbatim Transcript TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 10, 2025 A Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning & Zoning Commission was convened at 16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains in open and public session at 6:00 p.m. Members Present: Chairperson Dan Kovacevic; Vice Chairperson Clayton Corey; Commissioner Mathew Corrigan; Commissioner Peter Gray; Commissioner Dan Kovacevic; Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, Economic Development Director Amanda Jacobs and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2025 1. CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Chairperson Kovacevic called the Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on March 10, 2025, to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chairperson Dan Kovacevic; Vice Chairperson Clayton Corey; Commissioner Mathew Corrigan; Commissioner Peter Gray; Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, Economic Development Director Amanda Jacobs, and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. 3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC None 4. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning January 13, 2025. MOVED BY Commissioner Corrigan to approve the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission January 13, 2025. SECONDED BY Commissioner Sveum. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 5. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Ordinance 25-02 amending Zoning Ordinance by amending Chapter 25, Entertainment Overlay to Chapter 25, Downtown Overlay District, with associated permitted uses, parking, lot coverage, and setback provisions. The following resident addressed the Commission: Alan Koby Roger Isaacs Larry Meyers MOVED BY Commissioner Sveum to continue agenda item #5 to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, Monday, 4/21/2025. SECONDED BY Commissioner Corey. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 6. REVIEW, DISCUSS, AND PROVIDE DIRECTION: A) Overview of wireless communication ordinances, resolutions, and associated documents and Town Council direction for review and possible modification; and B) Review of Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Telecommunication Towers and Antenna compared to draft Campanelli ordinance. Planning and Zoning Commission March 10, 2025 2 of 2 The following resident addressed the Commission: Lori Troller No Action Taken. 7. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Annual report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. MOVED BY Commissioner Corrigan to recommend the Town Council approve the Annual Report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. SECONDED BY Vice Chair Corey. Vote: 6/0 Unanimously 8. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff. 9. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director. 10. REPORT from Development Services Director. 11. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Kovacevic adjourned the Regular meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on March 10, 2025, at 8:44 p.m. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 59 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hill Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes March 10, 2025 Transcription Provided By: eScribers, LLC * * * * * Transcription is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. * * * * * CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 59 -Gap in recording due to technical difficulties- KOVACEVIC: All right. Item number five. Hold a public hearing consideration possible action regarding ordinance 2502. Amending the zoning ordinance by amending Chapter 25 entertainment overlay. WESLEY: Okay. Chair, Commissioners. Good evening. I will go through a presentation on this. We discussed it briefly last month. So some of this will be a little bit of a repeat. But for those who are here and participating in this. So council l approved a downtown strategy back in September for moving forward to implement the --the plans for the downtown area. The strategy calls, among other things, for an update to the zoning regulations with the goals of providing for a more active and vibrant downtown area, creating more employment opportunities, providing for more mixed use, and to address and maintain vacant properties. Current zoning in the downtown area, as shown here. We've got -- most of it is C2. There's one small area of C3 with a planned development overlay. The area south of Palisades down to Avenue of the fountains from, well, Montana over Saguaro also has two overlay districts. One is an entertainment overlay and the other is a planned shopping plaza overlay. It's proposed that we create a new downtown overlay that we will call downtown overlay, with the goal of replacing the two existing overlays that are in existence and expanding it to include the area north of Palisades. So let me back up, I guess one. So this map does show that there are three proposed districts for this area. The Avenue District along the avenue, the business district through the middle, and then an then an innovation district. I'll review each of these individually. So the Avenue district again is shown as proposed to front along the avenue, but then also include Verde River as it goes north from there, with the idea that that's kind of an extension of the main commercial core that we have in the downtown, the Verde River north and south, and then the Avenue District or the Avenue of the Fountains. So in this District will allow the same uses that are allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-zoning districts, similar to today. The change would be that it would restrict ground floor uses in this area to active uses CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 59 trying to reduce -- eliminate the service type office type uses on the ground floor. So restaurants, cafes, bars, taverns, retail stores, entertainment venues, those types of things to provide that more active area that was envisioned and the feedback we got from the public through the planning process. It would continue to have the entertainment overlay uses just as they are currently outlined and provided for in Chapter 25 of the zoning ordinance. It's proposed that this would -- as drafted, would increase the residential density allowance from the current eight units per acre up to 15. And it would limit steps that are allowed in the area to just increase in the residential district on upper floors. So some comments and questions we've received as we've been able to meet with the public and discuss the impacts of this and what it might mean to them. So one of those questions is, how does this affect current ground floor uses that would be consistent with the zone? So the offices that are on the avenue currently. It would allow them to remain as long as they continue to be there. It's only when a space would become vacant when the ordinance then apply so they could continue on if they're there still 10 or 15 years from now, and that's fine. The ordinance would allow for that to be grandfathered in. Okay. The area limiting ground-floor uses be changed or reduced. So again, this is the map as we put it out. That's as staff looked at it, what we felt was a good area. But could that be changed or reduced? And certainly the answer is yes. That could be changed. That's what we're looking for. Feedback from, from the public and the commission as we go forward. Here are a couple of alternate layouts for that Avenue district. Again, the -- the whole the size of the District itself could stay the same, but the area that's restricted to just the retail restaurant type uses could be reduced from the total area and focus it more on the avenue. That's something that we'd be looking for, any comments or discussion about this evening. It could be more descriptive of the uses that would be allowed on the ground floor? The ordinance language itself is a little bit broad in saying that it would be a commercial or retail type uses. We didn't want to get too prescriptive because as soon as we start a list, we're going to leave something out that would be CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 59 appropriate and things change a little bit over time. But what we can do and have done and had a more detailed list in your packet, looking through the national codes for different types of uses have been identified. Identify the types of uses we do believe would be appropriate, and there's quite a long list of things. So there's been some concern that we're just trying to get bars and restaurants. And that would be a difficult retrofit to lot of the buildings. There's a lot more than just the restaurant type uses that we think are appropriate. Then the other one is with regard to the change in density. Again, currently we allow eight units per acre above the ground floor by right. The proposal when I drafted the ordinance, I thought, well, if I about double that to 15, that seems like a pretty big jump. But in actuality, given the size of the lots involved, it really doesn't make much change at all. Today, with the 1.1 units per acre allowed, contrary to what we usually do, I've rounded that up because I just know it's not practical in most cases to do one. So I've told people they can do two. And that's all the change to 15 units per acre really does is legitimize what we've already been doing and saying that you can do two by right. So I looked at some other options. And using the R4 and R5 density kind of as a guide in terms of the number of units per square foot allowed in those districts. Another option for your consideration would be to change it to allow one unit per every 2,000 square feet of floor area. That'd be the same basically as the R4 zoning district. And so for example, if you had a typical 6,000 square foot lot and about nine -- about 5,000 square foot of floor area per floor on your upper floors, you could have two units by right, or four units total in that 6,000 square foot. And if there's more than that, then that would get you into needing a special use permit. And chairman, if it's okay, I think maybe we can entertain some discussion on those items before we move on to the other districts. Or would you rather me go ahead and go through the rest -- KOVACEVIC: No. We can stop and -- and any -- any comments from the commissioners? Yeah. COREY: Just one comment. So I think if we do go with the option of incorporating CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 59 Avenue District into Verde River and trying to promote some of those businesses that are not foot traffic, creating businesses to go into the next area, then we should -- I would recommend we include that area into Verde River because we want to make that an that an enticing area. We want to promote foot traffic in that area. And I would, you know, prioritize getting that area improved. Otherwise, right now, it's not really a kind of place that you'd think you'd want to walk down at this point, you know. WESLEY: So Chair --Vice Chair Corey. COREY: Yes. WESLEY: So you're suggesting that this ought to stay in if we if we reduce it and maybe cut off some other areas you think we ought to at least maintain? COREY: I think so given that the -- the next two zones are going to be right, we're just we're enhancing all of them. And if we want to bring people into the business district, that really is the gateway. So I would -- I would think that we want to make sure that we prioritize ramping that -- ramping that area up. Yeah. Not close it off, keep it open and kind of make that an entrance to the business district. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Any others? Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: John, the density of housing that we most recently approved, I think, came up to something like 96 units per acre. Right. I mean, was that 12-unit building we did.? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Sveum, those were right around 42 or 43 as I recall, units per acre. The 12 -- because 12-- 12 units on 12,000 feet squared , that's one per 10 -- 1,000 feet squared. So 43,000 feet squared is an acre. So that's 43 units per acre. SVEUM: And that's per acre? WESLEY: Yes. SVEUM: And it doesn't seem to be, you know, extraordinarily dense, but it's just because of the size, obviously, of the -- of the lot. And I did I think I saw in there they could apply for a special use permit to increase it. WESLEY: Yes. We would still keep that option. SVEUM: That would be based probably on the architectural design and the parking structure et cetera, right? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 59 WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: Okay. Have you thought about having -- I think one of the things that concerns me and two things to -- to disclose. I don't own any property on the avenue. I do consulting work for one of the real estate companies there. But my question is from a building -- if a building owners perspective if they lose their office tenant on first floor and the economy is such what it was whether COVID or recession, and they can't find a restaurant to convert that space to, is it kind of onerous on that property owner to be able to survive with -- I mean, none of these -- none of these business owners in this list would probably be able to survive either. I mean, I think that I don't know if there's been conversations with property owners that do have office tenants on first floor, and how this might impact them as their leases expire. But I think it's just something to think about, in my mind. With that in place, though, or with that thought, has there been any thinking about having offices possible for upstairs on second floor so they could -- WESLEY: Yes. SVEUM: Because the conversion costs of these existing buildings is -- is high. It would be much less for an office user than it would be for an apartment. Apartments to be converted, right? WESLEY: So Chair -- Commissioner, yes. This -- the limitation is just for a ground floor trying to have that active uses on the ground floor. So you have people coming and going and generating that traffic on the ground floor. But second, third floors, they're perfectly fine for office or other type service uses. SVEUM: Okay. In the conversion of even the office spaces for first floor to a restaurant or retail. I mean, obviously some of these wouldn't cost much money at all, but also we have such -- it seems to have a hard time finding retail users as it is, and it's expensive. So I guess I'm not -- I understand the kind of the rationale of this of driving business towards sales tax, et cetera, but I just -- I'm concerned about limiting that first floor. Once there's an office user that has to move out or close their business or whatever it might be. So I don't know. I'm not asking you to solve my concern, but I do have that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 59 concern about this -- this overlay. WESLEY: Yes. So Chair, Commissioner and I understand that concern and where it comes from. At the same time, if we just keep letting things go as they are, we'll never really get to that point of having that concentration of the types of uses we want to have, because the office will be the easy thing to just to keep renting it to. SVEUM: Well, I think that that's -- it has to start somewhere, I agree. But I also -- I'm concerned about those property owners that that have that space and may result in a devaluation of their property because they can't -- they can't find a -- the ability to rent. They don't have the ability to rent it out to someone else besides an office user. So anyway, I just like I said, I'm just concerned about that day that comes to comes to pass. Maybe it never will. Thanks, John. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners? WESLEY: Okay. Are we ready to move on, then? KOVACEVIC: No. Just one. I wanted to echo Commissioner Sveum's comments that -- I'm concerned also about that there's more space than we would have potential users. And I'm wondering if the if the town has done a study is staff done a study on what the -- what the demand would be particularly for an entertainment district and for you know, more restaurants and more -- because, I mean, it seems like the town is an early closer. And maybe that would change if we had, you know, a number of the users. But I'm wondering if a study has been done. WESLEY: Chairman, no, we haven't done a specific study that I'm aware of for that in the downtown area. But we do believe that the combination of making these ordinance changes, as well as in the streetscape improvements, will create that district that will help drive the traffic and the interest into the future. KOVACEVIC: And I -- just one more question before we go to other Commissioners. So Commissioner Sveum said if a, if a tenant runs out of their lease and there's but it's currently first floor space is currently being used as office, can they not release to a new tenant? Is that -- does their right to use the office expire with the lease? WESLEY: If it's a different lease with a different business, then yes it would. If it's just CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 59 re-upping a lease for an existing tenant, then no it wouldn't. KOVACEVIC: Oh, okay. Thank you. Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: So regarding the streetscape, are you going to address that coming up? It doesn't look like it's in the slide deck. And that's -- that's my major concern is the cost associated and many other concerns. So are you going to address that chair? WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Schlossberg. No, that's not part of this presentation or discussion this evening. This is just about the zoning text amendment. That's a budget item for the town council. There will be a public meeting next week on Wednesday, where we're looking for feedback and we'll have that discussion. SCHLOSSBERG: Okay. So I think that -- basically for I think for our discussion, if I know we're making a recommendation, but I'm concerned, I mean, overly concerned after I saw the numbers for this whole thing. So I'm -- I don't know where I am with that. I'll let you keep going. But that that's a major concern. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners, any other comments? WESLEY: Okay. Then we get to the business district, which is the bulk of the of the middle part of this area. And so fewer changes in this area keeps the same allowed uses as far as the C0, C1, C2 districts. Continues the entertainment overlay for the outdoor activities would again increase the residential to the 15 units per acre or more, as directed by the commissioners we discussed that. And the SUPs for the residential density above the whatever the allowed unit is. And then North Palisades and the Innovation District again, allows the same things that are allowed in the current zones, but increases that by trying to get in a little bit more of the employment type uses with the laboratories, the light manufacturing and assembly and continuing then to allow residential by the SUP. Temporary uses was another item that that came up in the discussions, input from the public. We've got a number of vacant lots in the town center. There are some things we could do to allow for temporary uses of those lots. So they're making some service to the town but not requiring them full improvements. And so we include then a temporary use provision and developed some guidelines that can be used by myself and the town CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 59 engineer to guide those uses. Parking and setbacks. Those are not being changed from what's in the current ordinance. However, there's, again, a modification we could make to the ordinance as it was drafted. So currently we have a minimum setback, which basically allows you to bring a building to the property line or an easement if there's one there, but it doesn't require you to. And so that you can still then end up with buildings that are set back and not creating that urban street wall that would really like to see particularly along the avenue. So maybe we ought to look at having a build to line. So you require the building to be brought up closer to the street, rather than leaving the flexibility. They can put it as far back as they want. And then again, with regard to vacant properties I mentioned earlier, allowing the temporary uses. And then we have on our -- our list to look at other things we might be able to do in town code to address vacant properties and maybe increase some of the property maintenance requirements there just to help them look as good as they can, because a lot of visitors do come to our town center, and we want the vacant properties to look as nice as they can for vacant properties. So with regard to the process and where we're at, so you've got your public hearing this evening for the ordinance. And this evening, you may feel comfortable with making a recommendation to town council, and you may not. In which case you could continue it to a future meeting and continue that discussion and give us direction on -- on -- on modifications that you would like to see. Once council does -- once you do make a recommendation, we'll go to council. Our hope is that would be within the next few months, and we can get it to council before they go on their summer break. But the, contrary to what was in the report and the ordinance, as I have thought this through a little bit further. The proposal had been and what we sent to you and this agendize is amending existing Chapter 25 of the zoning ordinance to switch the entertainment district to this new downtown overlay district. We realize in terms of all the pieces and how this works together, that really doesn't quite work right. And so what we are -- what you're looking at when this comes back, goes on to council will actually be chapter 27 of the zoning ordinance. We'll create a CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 59 new chapter instead of amending chapter 25. And so we'll keep the existing chapter 25 and 26 that are in the code for a period of time. And so then the next step after the adoption of this new overlay district would be the actual rezoning process to notice property and work with property owners, to process that rezoning, to actually apply the overlay to the district and take off the existing overlays and apply the new one so that we envision would happen probably next fall if this moves along in a timely fashion. Questions? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: John, can you bring up the Innovation district, please? What -- can you --so how are the -- how are those tenants affected? The current tenants, because there's a lot of medical people that are -- medical businesses that are there. WESLEY: Those would still remain as allowed uses. SVEUM: Pardon? WESLEY: Those would remain as allowed uses. SVEUM: Well, if -- okay. So what's there right now that would not be able to remain. -- remain as a use if some of those tenants decide to leave? WESLEY: There were a few uses that are allowed through special use permit that haven't been applied that get lost in this, but they were adding in new items that that would be allowed as listed. SVEUM: So what -- what do you imagine this to look like over time? I mean, it's a little employment district. WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: But you've got some residential that's allowed in there, right? WESLEY: Right. Which is today. SVEUM: Pardon? WESLEY: That's allowed today also through the special use permit process. That's no difference. SVEUM: Perhaps a second floor type of residential -- WESLEY: Correct. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 59 SVEUM: -- not converting buildings over to full residential? WESLEY: They could, but it'd be a special use permit that had to be approved by town council building. SVEUM: Vertical building? WESLEY: You could. SVEUM: So we -- but we've got employment space here -- WESLEY: Right. SVEUM: -- that is possible. I think it's -- that would be one of the objectives here is to remain or to retain opportunities for commercial users to come in and for jobs. WESLEY: Correct. SVEUM: Rather than convert to more residential. But there could be some that were above first floor. Is that what -- WESLEY: Right. So the zoning ordinance today allows -- so that area north of Palisades is zoned C2. It has no overlay districts with it. So just like any other C2 area, a property owner there today could request a special use permit for residential ground floor, second floor, whatever come through PNC and council and could be approved or denied. This overlay district at this point is not changing that. You could, you could decide that because we of the desired employment district that we don't think residential will ever fit there. And you could remove that option to apply for the special use permit, or you could restrict it to just second floors. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: I just want to back up a little bit, John, to page 3 under the ordinance. WESLEY: Under the ordinance. Okay. I have to go over here to actually get to the ordinance. And that will take me a me a moment. Let's see. Okay. What? CORRIGAN: Yes. On the on the avenue district. It refers to a noise ordinance. And my question is, I'm not familiar with that. The decibel level, there's incremental decibel levels allowed that range from hour to hour. So during certain hours fifty decibels, other hours seventy, and so on. In a practical manner, do we have the facilities on -- for example, a sheriff's MCSO vehicle to monitor that. How is that done? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 59 WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Corrigan. So Section 1117 the town code has the noise ordinance provisions. And as of three or four years ago, we no longer use decibel readings as part of implementation of that ordinance. Part of the challenge is being a little bit where you were headed a moment ago is having the proper equipment, maintaining it in terms of its calibration, and people being properly trained in using that equipment was a challenge, and there's often so much background noise that goes into doing a decibel reading that again, it becomes a challenge in court. So under advisement of the town prosecutor, we no longer use decibels. There's another set of criteria that are used. Basically a reasonable person kind of approach to is this too much noise? Is it causing issues for other people in the area? CORRIGAN: So it's a matter of consensus or complaint, complaint driven. And then there's some sort of an assessment by the officer? WESLEY: Correct. CORRIGAN: Okay. And that assessment is based on? WESLEY: There's a list of criteria in the in the ordinance. CORRIGAN: Okay. So it's based on experience and acceptable common complaints, acceptable noise level, the number of complaints? WESLEY: I don't recall that number is there, but it is based a lot on the situation location. If you are off in some purely residential area, the noise level you would expect there versus what you might expect on the avenue would be different. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Yes. Two quick questions. So the temporary use types, did we say that we were going to have guidelines onto what those types could be. I can't remember? WESLEY: Chair. Vice chair we have some criteria in terms of how the property itself might be developed in terms of kind of the minimum standards that would go with it. It's been a little while since I looked at those draft regulations, but I think if I hit the back button here -- so the temp -- those temporary use guidelines were included in the packet. Okay. And -- CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 59 COREY: Is this packet that was 400 pages or something. WESLEY: Yeah, just a few. So basically it's anything that's allowed in the, in the zoning district itself. So any in this case C2, C1, C2 type uses would be potentially possible again. Can they make it work in a kind of a temporary type setting would become then the challenge. COREY: Okay. And then you commented earlier, do we prefer a build two line or a minimum setback? I don't know about you guys, but I tend to think a build two line would create some consistency and uniformity. Like, I would say that on Avenue of the Fountains we have a build two, right. There's kind of lined up? WESLEY: They are lined up, but they wouldn't have to be. There's nothing there that prohibits somebody building on one of these vacant lots of setting back 10 or 15 feet if they wanted to. COREY: Okay. But the build -- the build to line would keep them all in in a row. WESLEY: At least make sure we could set it at 5 feet or 10 feet or whatever you want to say. COREY: Okay. WESLEY: It would be so that yes, there is more consistency. And again, nobody's setting back too far and creating that break in that. COREY: And I think that -- that might be easier for people who are walking around, because you can kind of visit one to the next without having to, you know, like I think we have the hair studio or which is now the flower shop is kind of way set back. You kind of have to walk back to that. So if they're kind of in a line, then that would make it easier for foot traffic to visit the store. So I that's what I would recommend. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Anyone else? GRAY: Chair I have thoughts are probably unpopular thoughts, but thoughts nonetheless. I agree, I think with the Vice Chair that a build to line for uniformity just makes sense. But. I -- I've always thought that going down this path was warranted. I think that an overhaul of, of this whole, this whole area is something this town should CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 59 strongly consider. But I wonder if -- if we're, we're just trying to dip our toe into this thing. Right? We're trying to you -- can even hear up here, we're talking about, you know, minimalism. We're talking about, you know, noise. We're talking about all the things that we always talk about that kind of keeps this town stagnant. And so I think the question we should ask ourselves is, what's the overall objective? Is the is the objective to gentrify downtown? Is it to bring it forward in time? I'm looking at Amanda to see if she nods or not. Is it to create something that doesn't exist today? Is it to try and mimic downtown Gilbert? you know what, what are we trying to achieve? And for me, I think if I had a magic wand, I would say it's two things. It's one, it's to re gentrify. And by that, I mean a lot of the business placements that are in downtown achieved placement in downturn economies. And I don't think that this Phoenix market is headed back there for a very long time. I don't think we're going to see the cycle that we've always seen. So I think we take a different lens on it this time. And then I think as we're adjusting or proposing to adjust all of this language, the only way that that change comes about is if there's a catalyst that makes that happen, right? And so what can be put in here that is enticing enough to bring capital investment into this market, into this town, into this into this zone that's going to push us over that line, that's going to develop the avenue of the fountains. If I wanted to be overly aggressive. And the only thing I can think of is it's our residential density piece. And I'm not a residential density person. I don't like that generally across most of our, you know, the land holdings in this town. I don't like when we talk about it, but I think if there was a place to talk about it, it's here. And while we're proposing 15 right is what we're proposing? WESLEY: That's what was in the excuse me, Chair. Yes. That's what was in the draft ordinance that went out. I've begun to second guess that and think it should be higher. GRAY: And I think it should be right. So it should be. If we want a catalyst to drive change and the only way that you get there. I don't know that it needs to be the park place 45 is the density of park, but I don't know that it needs to be that. But 35, 40, 45 that's the only language I can see that could be introduced into something like this that's CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 59 going to tell developer X, Y, and Z. I'm, I'm interested in coming into downtown Fountain Hills and playing and revitalizing and investing. And there's a byproduct of that that I don't necessarily like, but if we want to drive change, we've got to find a catalyst. And that's my preamble. WESLEY: Chair, if you don't mind Commissioner Gray along that line. So again, we Because we're dealing with mostly small lots in the downtown area, 6,000 feet squared. Every time someone comes in, we say, okay, well, you know, eight units per acre. Oh, okay. Well, I can do. Well, no, you can't, because you're only you're only this little piece of an acre, that's what I mean because it's harder to like easily understand what you can get from the 2,000, you know, 2,000 feet squared. So on the example given, you have four units on 6,000 acres, that's about 28 units per acre. So if you up that to 1,750 or 1,500 or whatever, you could get up close to that 35 or 40 that you're thinking about. But get us in that ballpark. GRAY: So I agree with that. And I agree with pushing that envelope for the council to -- to consider. I also think we just have to be careful that -- that we should use those terms, but we should also use terms that that the developer market understands as well so that it's, you know, it -- WESLEY: Probably work both ways. GRAY: -- doesn't take a translation exercise. KOVACEVIC: So do we have any we open up the public? WOODWARD: We have three speaker cards. The first speaker is Alan Colby. Second speaker is Roger Isaacs. And on deck after that is Larry Myers. Mr. Colby? COLBY: Thank you. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you, John, for the presentation. Our concern here is -- WESLEY: Close to the microphone. COLBY: Our concern here is in regard to a number of number of questions. Number one, height restrictions on these buildings. Has that been taken into consideration at all, or is it going to remain the same along the different zones that were proposed? And the other thing that I would ask is on the noise. Is that going to be consistent through CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 59 certain hours as it gets later? Does it still allow it to be louder, or how is that going to work? Basically, you know, if you've got residential above or below or next to. I'm sure they're not going to like loud music at two a.m. or whatever it is. So if they're I don't know the particular code, but I was curious about that. And the parking. How is that going to be affected on these smaller lots? And if you combine a couple of lots, you may have, from what I understand or what I've read, and so far you may have to have to provide an equal number of parking spots if you have certain restrictions in the size of your units. So those are the my questions on that. And I agree that the residential density would probably be a good way to start. And the higher -- for the smaller units, a lot of people can't afford a 2,000 square foot unit, but you might get younger people to come in and maybe take a job here if they can rent apartments that are 800 to 1,000, or who knows what if you're single, maybe less. So that was my comments. Otherwise I'm in favor. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. SVEUM: Does he represent the plat 208 or what? What's your what's your position? COLBY: Well, my brother and I, he owns, and we, I managed a couple of units here, the building on the corner of La Montana and Park, North Palisades, the white building now as we used to be red. And we also owned the building on Saguaro and Parkview, the where the Greek restaurant is. So and we have a couple of empty lots, but we're planning on doing something with those, after all, this is kind of settled. Would appreciate clarity on all those issues. Thank you. Any other questions? KOVACEVIC: Thank you. No thank you. SVEUM: You're welcome. COLBY: Thank you. Jeff. WOODWARD: Roger Isaacs? ISAACS: I'm Roger Isaacs. I own the former bank building on the corner by the roundabout just across the street. I served as a board member for plot 208 for the last 16 months. I'm no longer -- I backed out of that at this point. I want to thank all of you for your service, and also acknowledge that John and his staff have been very helpful in CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 59 helping us answer questions and try to make some adjustments. In general, I support the movement towards the overlay. However, there are some serious problems specifically with the Avenue of Fountain. People up here brought up several of those today, and I'll reinforce my perspective on that. And also, many of the other owners that I've talked to that are on plot 208. One of the problems is that this is an ineffective approach, in my opinion, to get what we want. I think if we want to look at past experience, I got very excited a little bit over six years ago when the last overlay went in, and we were going to allow mixed use because I had an office here in town for 25 years, and I have a house in Sunridge for 25 years, and we're ready to downsize and move those together so I can work and do things like that. That's why we bought the bank building. And as I started to look into mixed use and talked to other people and bring architects on and work with the Colbys and others, we found out that effectively it wasn't possible. It wasn't cost effective. It couldn't be done, be approached in most of the properties here. So again, it was a bold move to move to mixed use but ineffective. And I look at this as the same thing. And in my opinion, one of the big problems is you've got the Avenue district, and yet you've only got half the avenue involved. Why isn't the South side on that map as part of the Avenue District? What I believe is going to happen, and we already see it today with our with people moving across, is that you're basically saying you can't have offices and services on the north side of the avenue. South side of the avenue is unlimited. So what are you going to do? Come around the corner down by sports bar, real estate, real estate, real estate. But the names on those buildings are different right now than they were two years ago. So we could expect within two years all those offices are going to empty out, move across the street because you want to be on Avenue. So if I was to predict what we're going to see in the six years of this is we're still going to have empty lots sitting, occupying most of the space there between Chase and our businesses down at the other end. You're going to have all offices on the south side, and you're going to have empty offices on the north side. You might ask why my office is sitting empty after 26 CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 59 months of ownership. My run rate is about 5K a month to hold the building. The reason it is, is because John was honest with me -- thank you for your time. I could spend 30 giving you this. My summary is I think you guys should ask John to go back. We've got a number of inconsistencies in what they're trying to do here that I think could be much improved. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I'd like if you could finish your thought. Finish your thought as to why the building is still vacant and -- ISAACS: Our building is vacant because when we came in, I went to John, and I talked to him about what we're going to do with mixed use. And John explained to me, we'd like to maintain commercial both on -- on both two street sides. Which meant for us to effectively do mixed use, we have to build new construction in the back with the first floor parking and the rest residential above that. I didn't have a problem with doing that, but that was all predicated on the fact that our building could be office. I felt it was a little bit out of out of context with Fountain Hills, because when you say you can't have first floor residential, you're not acknowledging the fact that a lot of our opportunity and need is for handicap enabled access. And so it's very difficult to provide that. If you say, I can't have first floor. So as we got involved with that, we were told, why don't you put a hotel in, you can go to a hotel. otherwise you got to go to a special use. Special use takes one to two years and cost a lot of money. And the entire time you're in that process, you don't know if it's going to be allowed. So I said, I'm not going to go to special use. We'll just do it right and put it in the back. My neighbor Vladimir went over, started to put a hotel in. He spent a year putting a hotel in. Once he put the hotel in, then the town says, we're going to eliminate hotel as a use. And the entire time he was doing that, he really wanted to put in condos and mixed use with residential on the first floor. You guys permitted that. Okay. But he spent a year delay pretending to put a hotel in, in my opinion, that he's never had an intention to do. So you guys and this process is dragging things out ineffectively. And my position now is I don't want to invest a couple million dollars in a new building behind and then have an CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 59 office building that's unoccupied. We have people stop us every day and say, what are you going to put there? Why aren't you doing anything? And we say, because the town won't let us. And I'll answer that question. Why? Why won't the town let us do this? Everyone, without exception, says I want a restaurant here in this building because it's a big building. You guys may not understand that the three big lots on avenues, Allot (ph.), Chase, and where the what do you call it, executive office building is. None of those properties could put a restaurant in. We're prohibited from doing that because by code and town ordinance, this whole thing about the 1992 size restriction, we have 11 parking spaces. By code, I have to have eleven parking spaces. They all have to be on my 24,000 feet squared. Okay. If I was to convert that to a restaurant, I'd need five times that many parking spaces. I don't have that, and I don't have the opportunity. Even though I'm one of the top funders of plot 208, I'm not allowed to use plot 208 as part of my staff. Neither are any of these other three. So if you look at that landscape, when Chase goes out, when the executive officers want to do something because they lose all their people across the street, none of them are going to be restaurants in because your current overlay says they can't. They have to have the parking and they don't have the parking. And in fact, if you look at parking in general, what the town should have done is they should do a parking study to show that we don't have the infrastructure to support bars and restaurants on that site, and we don't have the infrastructure to support an extreme number of mixed use. Mixed use -- bars and restaurants take five times the number of parking spaces that office does by code. Okay. Plot 208 would have to provide that. And they're not going to add any more parking spaces okay. By code, mixed use requires about the same as office, but it can no longer be shared parking. And so again, we're losing the five time multiplier that the town uses when they look at number of parking spaces and what you can use. So again you have very limited amount of parking. Not to get into the fact that you have no gas down there, so you don't have the infrastructure to put commercially viable restaurants in on the north side. On the south side, you've got a much bigger CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 59 space of undeveloped land that could have gas, that could have building spaces bigger than 6,000. Why aren't they part of this? KOVACEVIC: Thank you. SVEUM: What's your vacancy of the office space? ISAACS: Our vacancy? SVEUM: Yeah. ISAACS: Totally. It's totally vacant. We did a demo, and then we just been sitting on it. We have lunch there. We have some of our vehicles and equipment parked there. I'm a general contractor in Arizona. And so I can do that, but like I said, we're kind of on hold because we bought the building with the intent of making an office, but I'm not going to put a bunch of money into someplace that then is grandfathered out and people turn over too quick. It just doesn't make sense. Thank you. MYERS: Chair. Vice chair. Commissioners. So I'm going to approach this from looking at this entire downtown area. In August I'll be -- have been here 44 years. And I know how hard she tried to utilize the entertainment and overlay district, which is in fact, what you really want downtown. He could never get the money to actually do it. I think I agree with Commissioner Gray. This isn't a project where you sort of nudge yourself into it. I think I agree with the two gentlemen -- the last gentleman, Mr. Isaacs. I have no idea why the south side of the street is excluded from this. You're just going to push all of the offices off the north side of the street, over to the south side of the street, and create the same problem over there. You know how much I love apartments. So your mixed use crap. Yeah. Okay. Fine. I'm not a big 800 square foot kind of guy. I sit on the Economic Development Committee, and I have to listen to a business owner who thinks that having an apartment is going to cause somebody to drink a $40 bottle of wine. That's not happening. So an 800 square foot apartment isn't where I come down. I think downtown Gilbert is something you could strive for, except for we don't have -- nobody's coming to Fountain Hills because we're not a hub. Gilbert's sort of a hub, but you could take that model and make it for us. And you might have some people who come out and spend the day. But when I say CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 59 make it for us, I'm talking about the people who already live here and the people who live here. Most of them can afford to afford to live here. So making something, trying to shoehorn something affordable into this plan, and I do like the fact that we're planning then zoning -- pet peeve of mine. I think it's -- I don't know that you can do it like this little at a time. And when you're talking about noise, if you're going to live in an apartment above a bar, then that's what you like, and you're not worried about the sound. And if we're going to cater, if we want to make the town younger, we're going to get loud. And the people who don't like it, then they're just not going to like it. And that's my opinion on this. I just think it needs to be more aggressive. And there's not -- we should have three minutes on each part of this presentation because the other parts I support as well. But you realize why we have -- just give me 30 seconds. The reason why we have to do the other part of this is because we zoned out the places where it should have gone. And I'm talking about the target Plaza where -- what Amanda wants to do, that was what it was intended to do 44 years ago, 50 years ago when MCO master plan. That's where her vision and John's presentation, that's where it was supposed to go. And we thought a shopping center was the answer. Now it's two thirds empty and we're going to slap up a bunch of apartments. So think about -- think about it. The reason why you have to do this. But it's got to be done unless you're going to going to do it somewhere else. And I don't know where that is. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: All right. Commissioners, do we have any additional comments? Yeah. Oh. All right. We'll close the public hearing and then John. WESLEY: So yes, Chair. Commissioners looking for any direction? I -- not sure if you're ready to go ahead and make a recommendation on to council tonight. I think maybe I heard enough discussion that there probably are a few adjustments that I need to make and bring this back at a future meeting but looking for your direction on those items. KOVACEVIC: All right. Commissioner -- Commission vice chair Corey? COREY: Thank you. I did want to just address a couple of things that we heard tonight, if you can clarify. So somebody mentioned, do we have height restrictions? And I saw CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 59 you nodding your head as they were asking. So we do have the height restrictions in place right? WESLEY: So Chair, Vice Chair the zoning ordinance in the C2 district has a maximum height of 40 feet and that's not modified by the overlay. COREY: Thank you. The second comment I heard twice was sound. Once from Larry and once from the other gentleman. And I tend to agree. I think we've talked about this before. If there's residential above commercial, then they know that that's what they're getting into, and we can't -- we shouldn't be applying some sort of a sound ordinance to that area just because people chose to live there. WESLEY: Right. Chair, Vice chair. One of the specific comments, was there a time frame on when the noise is different? The ordinance again has some general criteria. One of those is judging it by the time of day. So noise at 2 in the afternoon versus 2 at night. Yes, it would be different in terms of how it would be looked at. But there's not a specific time like 11:00. It's got to change from this to that. That's not in there. COREY: Okay. And the third comment is involving the south side. And I saw that in your -- in your documents here that that's an option we can consider, right? WESLEY: Chair, Vice Chair. It could be. It hasn't been included at this point for several reasons. One is that it's not in the current overlays and the zoning that's there. The DCCD district mirrors some of the things that are in the other overlays. It does not have the use restriction on the ground floor, but we are talking about lands that do have development agreements on them that would impact the uses as well as then it's got the -- the town campus here that, that, you know, wouldn't be impacted by it. So just the ability to actually apply the overlay on the south side would be a bigger change and more challenging because the development that's there. COREY: I'm sure it would be. But I, I can understand where the residents are coming from that they're just going to move to the to the other side of the street, and we'll have the same problem on the other side. So I think it's something that we should consider. Yeah. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 59 SVEUM: I'm not I'm not so sure that the officers would all move to the south side because of the rents. They're significantly higher over there. However, my -- my question would be why? Or maybe it's possible that this could also go to the Economic Development Committee for them to discuss and maybe have more conversation about some of the nitty gritty about -- well, Mr. -- the gentleman that owns the -- the corner, I think they should be listening to his concerns because obviously he's been through that for the last couple of years. And John, I'm sure you've heard a lot of the concerns. But I think that the People that are on that committee should hear them as well and talk about the economics of, of this whole thing and some of the barriers of success. Looking at it, it's always difficult to forecast, but I don't -- What is -- Amanda, what's the what's the process for economic development committee? AMANDA: So Mr. Chair, Commissioner, there's a narrow focus on the economic Development Advisory Committee. The committee was not appointed by the town council. It was appointed by Mayor Friedel. The scope is to work towards attracting and getting a major employer. They are aware of what Mr. Myers mentioned, of what is the difficult part in attracting a major employer, and we have missed out on opportunities is because we don't have the industrial zoning. And so several of the committee members have said, you know, this is ginormous. This is something -- something separate. So we're going to continue to -- to narrow our focus. So it's -- it's not it's not a traditional commission. This is not something we'll present to them. But they are aware of the innovation district. They're supportive. And as we continue to -- to talk, I appreciate, Commissioner Gray. I think you started with maybe some stuff not being so popular. It was popular with me. But as we continue to talk, as we continue to delay, it's just delaying the economic development efforts in trying to attract a major employer, because, again, we've had a couple of folks that are not just health care, but bioscience. And so when they're meeting with John and myself, John is the zoning administrator. And so if they're saying they have wet labs, you know, clean rooms, that is industrial. And then if just five percent of their model is administrative or commercial, it's again -- we're having to say CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 59 no, because otherwise we're setting them up for -- for failure. And Mr. Myers and I sometimes agree to disagree that, you know, when do you do the zoning. But I've been doing this for over twenty years. I've mentioned that to several of you. And sometimes you can get folks on the hook, but then they have to rely on seven of you and seven of some of my council members and mayor who are here, fourteen people to get the zoning. And so sometimes it hasn't happened here. But it -- it goes into a million pieces because fourteen people say no. So again, hasn't happened here, but just in my history. SVEUM: My -- the issue I've got is that there are already current problems with what with -- with the Code, there's going to be more problems with changing it to the overlay for current office building owner. I mean, how is how is he going to function? He's going to have to turn in that building into a restaurant, right? Or one of the other retail users, correct? WESLEY: So Chair, Commissioners, if you went forward with the ordinance as it's currently laid out, yes, that would be the case. But one of the discussion points this evening is should that be changed, should that area be modified. Maybe this far end of the avenue doesn't need that limitation and could keep offices on this end. So we could adjust that area that has that limitation. SVEUM: I think it's -- it's -- I just think it would be better to take some more time and to hear more -- get some more information from folks that have property there. That -- that we can actually decide on something that doesn't harm a property owner. I mean, right out of the gate, it seems to me and maybe I'm wrong, but I think that there's -- there's still information that needs to be collected to make, at least in my mind, to make a decision on this. AMANDA: I just have a question and it might be rhetorical, you don't have to answer it. But how many business owners is it going to take? And then do we have to do we have to fill up the room and I'll just tell you, and there's some business owners sitting on here that some of our folks because time is money or they're working, they have a family, they have kiddos to take care of. They're like, Amanda, we're not going to show up for planning and zoning. And it's no disrespect to the commission, but they're like, we're CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 59 going to go to council. Like we can only pick one. Or when they see the slide of next steps with John of, well, this can take a couple of months, but as long as we can try to do it before June, unfortunately we can -- we just can't get people to show up. And then I always tell the town council, this is for 24,000 people. I know our council takes an oath. As staff, we don't take an oath, but we're trying to look at the 24,000 and try to grow this town. And so I think as part of the direction, if you guys don't feel comfortable in making a recommendation to the town council, what do you need from staff? How many people need to show up? Do we need to have a full room for you guys to feel comfortable in moving -- in moving forward? And we know this is -- this is a little bit tough, but leadership and change is tough. And if we don't make changes I think Commissioner Gray mentioned this, we're getting the same old, same old. And again as staff and council is dealing with just you with the legislator, we've lost the rental tax. There's talks about losing the food tax. If we don't start making changes at some point. I've told council and I've told our town manager, Rachel Goodwin, we're going to need to have some serious conversations of, are we going to have to start talking about, I'm going to get people shooting stuff in my back, about a property tax. Because what we're trying to do again, with these uses is to generate more sales tax and bring more people here to retain our businesses and to attract major employment. And we need some of these mixed use opportunities. That's all I have to say. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Actually, I agree with Commissioner Sveum. I think rather than making a bold, rash move, we should hear more discussion, we should hear more from the Economic Development Committee, which is newly formed, and I'm anxious to hear about that. I think talking to these people -- we don't want to make the wrong move. Some consider the Target Center a wrong move years ago, that may be. And I think we don't want to make a second wrong move in my opinion before -- and acting too quickly can do that. So I think we should deliberate. I think we should give it an opportunity to hear it out. And those are my thoughts. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 59 KOVACEVIC: All right. I just have -- I have one more question for you. The -- with the parking for the bank building is under the Avenue District overlay, would the property owner still have to provide restaurant parking should he choose to put a restaurant in there, or would they be able to use the plat to avoid parking? WESLEY: So chair, if I may, I'll use the cursor here again a little bit. As Mr. Isaacs mentioned, there were a few lots in here when this was originally platted that are a little bit larger. There are over 10,800 feet squared. And by the ordinance that's been in place those lots are required to provide their own parking. And this lot, when it was originally plated, it's been subdivided now was one of those lots. So they're supposed to provide their own parking. Does that prohibit their customers from parking in the plateau property? No, it does not prohibit them from parking there. But they have to meet their parking requirement on their lot. That's the way the ordinance is currently written and has been. We could change that going forward. That's part of what's on the table. KOVACEVIC: Okay. That answered my question. Thank you. Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I mean, I think that should certainly be something we discuss in the future, but a couple other questions of, I guess their chicken or the egg questions, but I think the point made in the public hearing, you know, regarding public utilities and what's available you know, natural gas in particular, how close has public works looked at, you know, opportunities to support, collaborate to -- to bring additional utility services into this core that that would foster some of this? And then I just keep looking at the map. If we're -- if we're really finally going to go after a big anchor employer in this town, why wouldn't we blend the innovation district in the business district together and create a larger opportunity zone that's broader and can be more things to more folks? And then my final statement is, I know we're going to keep going back to this, you know, how do we please all people? And that that's an Achilles heel of this town that I've never understood. But we do it over and over again. I think you could allow anything to be grandfathered, anything by right. I really think the focus here needs to be what's the catalyst going to CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 59 be to drive the change? Because then market forces will take -- will take their -- will take their path. And we might see a different outcome. KOVACEVIC: All right. So we are looking for a motion or we are -- we need to continue to a date certain? Right. And -- yes we do, the April meeting, I will not I will not be here on the 14th. So if we want to continue this to April, I guess I'll ask the commissioners if they would mind if you would mind meeting on the 21st next month? GRAY: Yeah. Chances are I won't be here. But I would like -- I would like to get some feedback or some discussion about (indiscernible) those. KOVACEVIC: Okay. So yeah. All right. So Commissioner Gray has asked about your thoughts on or Amanda's thoughts on combining the innovation District and the business district, if you have any comments on that? WESLEY: I'll start. I'll see if Amanda walks up here behind me while I'm talking, Chairman. There's a balance there, Commissioner. I see what you're saying. And so at least pulling it apart for part of that business district can make some sense, make that a little bit larger. We were trying to trying to keep the -- there's still a lot that happens in the business district along Parkview in particular. That works well in terms of the continued expansion of that active commercial area. Does it dilute it too much if we make it too big and the lot sizes are so small, over on South of Palisades. Does it really have that same opportunity? It's -- it is a little bit more challenged in that regard. Again, do you have any thoughts about extending part one way or the other? GRAY: Well, I would say it was the inverse, John or the innovation district, would it be afforded more opportunities if it could encroach? WESLEY: Right. Yes, that's what I'm looking at. AMANDA: Mr. Chair, Commissioner, love the idea. I think again, if you're going to bring it back to staff, I'd want to have some more conversations, because when you bring up industrial and I've spoken to lots of residents, businesses at first when you hear industrial, right, you get this and people freak out. So when I said it's just this narrow area, there is calm and support. So we would -- if you're going to kick it back, we would want to float that. But John and I have talked quite a bit. And again, business CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 59 community talking to residents feel comfortable with breaking out this way. GRAY: So my reservation and this is just food for thought. But my reservation is, is that when you look at that innovation district today and the way it's built out, it's largely built out and it's modern. It's, you know, it's -- it's what you would probably want to see, right? So I just wonder, you know, I just wonder if it's lip service. We're creating an innovation district. We're trying to entice a large anchor, you know, to come into the into the jurisdiction. But there's no room in the end, so to speak. And so it seems to me that the business district zone -- I think the avenue is primed to be redeveloped, but I think the business district zone is where you have a lot of redevelopment opportunity as well, through plot combos. et cetera, et cetera. AMANDA: I would just say it wouldn't just be lip service, but I get I get what you're saying. There is also opportunity for some areas to be redeveloped. And yes. We'll leave it at that. KOVACEVIC: Okay. So we're looking for a motion to continue or to recommend or. -- what -- what would the commission like to do here? SVEUM: I'll make a motion to defer. KOVACEVIC: A motion to continue? SVEUM: Continue. KOVACEVIC: And we need a date certain. Is everybody okay with an April 21st date next month? Okay. So we have a motion to continue the hearing until April 21st. WESLEY: Second. COREY: second. KOVACEVIC: Okay. All in favor? ALL: Aye. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Opposed hearing. None were approved. WOODWARD: Six zero WESLEY: So Chairs we wrap that up. So things that that I heard that we will be looking at specifically is any possibility for extending the uses in the business district to include some of the innovation district ideas. We'll look at increased residential densities, a bill CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 59 two line. We will evaluate a little further the size of the Avenue District. Limitation to ground floor, nonoffice uses. I'll just say it that way. And bring some of those things back. Is there anything else in particular that you'd want to hear about that I didn't include? KOVACEVIC: I think the parking requirements. Okay. WESLEY: For the for the large lots. KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? COREY: Yeah. And what about incorporating the south side? WESLEY: Okay. COREY: And I don't know if it's possible, but if we want to bring businesses here, should we have pizza or something? We bring some food in here? WESLEY: Okay. Thank you, Commissioners. KOVACEVIC: Item six. Holding public hearing consideration. Possible action or provide direction. Overview of wireless communication ordinances, resolutions and associated documents, and town council direction for review and possible modification. WESLEY: Okay. Chair, Commissioners. Next item. So wireless communication ordinance. We had fun reviewing this a year ago and let's do it again. So at a recent town council meeting January 21st -- is that what it was? I forget. By motion of the council they directed send back to planning and zoning the review of existing ordinances, resolutions and documents associated with the provision of wireless communication services, to revise these regulations and to release the consultant report for planning, zoning and for the public. So that's what we are beginning this evening, is that review of all the documents and ordinances related to wireless provisions to see what, if any, amendments, adjustments ought to be made in those. And take it back to the council once you've had a chance to do that. So here is a list of the existing documents that relate to this topic. They have been provided to you in your packet. They're available to the public also. In discussions with the Chair on this item. The plan CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 59 that we have put together for moving this moving this forward. Starts tonight with a review of the draft Campanile ordinance. Compared to the most recently adopted Chapter 17 of the zoning ordinance dealing with wireless facilities. In the future, as we have after we finish reviewing the Campanile(indiscernible) ordinance, we'll go back and look at what the P&Z Commission was considering last July, the last time you discussed it, and some of the items that were considered and discussed here that didn't make it into the ordinance as it went to the town council. With those two reviews, we can then make any revisions that this commission would like to see made to Chapter 17. After that, we can look at the small cell and the wireless in the right of way ordinance for possible amendments and consideration, if it should be rolled into Chapter 17. And then after that we'll look at 63, which is the utility service antennas in the right of way. So that's the plan moving forward. I'm sure we can get this all done this year, probably. Okay. So again, after we get draft ordinance, it'll need to go through the legal review. Then we'll hold the public hearings. One of the concerns I've heard is, you know, we might schedule a public hearing and then get timed out like you did last time, of getting something ready for council. We're not under the same kind of time restrictions that we were last time. Plus, we'll wait to hold any public hearings until after we really get to an ordinance that you're feeling good about. And so we won't have that issue. Don't expect that issue. And then we'll send all those to town council. So again, that's the plan for moving this forward. Any comments or questions about what you've been asked to do or what the approach is going to be? Hearing none. I included in your packet. A review of the Campanelli draft ordinance to what was adopted this evening to help us go through that. What I have done is and have available for us to look at on the screen this evening is the draft Campanelli Ordinance, with some highlights that illustrate what's already been included in the existing ordinance to help you see what's not included. So you can begin to pick out and give us direction about those things that you would like to include into the ordinance, or at least have consideration given to how that might be used. And so in here, as we go CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 59 through this, there will be some places where I have comments such as this introductory provision here was in the introduction language to the actual ordinance itself. And there are areas that are kind of grayed out a little bit because they were included in the ordinance that was adopted. And so anything you see just in the regular print here are items that were not included in the ordinance as it was adopted by town council, and are things you may then want to consider as you look through them for somehow including. COREY: Sorry. Excuse me. It doesn't look like this is what was given to us. WESLEY: No, you do not. Right, you did not get it this way. And you got kind of a similar but reverse picture in your packet. It's just I use that to create this. So Chair thought is we can go through these section by section. And Paula, did we get any speaker cards on this? WOODWARD: One speaker card. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Maybe we want to hear the speaker first before we go into this, so that if they have comments on the existing ordinance and what they'd like to change, maybe we can we'll have it covered. WOODWARD: Lori Troller. TROLLER: Good evening, Commission. Just looks all different, which is great. Lori Troller, resident. And I might need an extra minute, might. So I think the strategy of moving forward, John -- which John just told us, it's really important to strategize how you're going to go about this, because this is going to take a lot of time, like you said, probably a year. So going at this at the very start is really important. And I'm happy to see that he's starting with Campanelli's document. So I have gone through our current Chapter 17 and this, this ordinance. You have to understand, I've read over thirty ordinances across the Country, and I've read over one hundred law cases. That is more, almost more paramount to understand how the lawsuits go in and where we need our strengths and make sure we don't go there and write our stuff so it's bulletproof. I've got that experience. So does Campanelli so when he wrote this. That's something you got to consider. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 59 So when -- I feel like we're almost starting in the wrong spot. If we're starting with Chapter 17. I've mentioned this before about starting with an ordinance versus the chapters. Chapters are what you get. Chapters are a child of an ordinance. You -- if we didn't have any ordinance, you'd start out with an ordinance that'd get codified into the chapters. So right now, to go in and change the chapters, that's one thing. If it's a little change, it's another thing about what we're doing because we're going to there's going to be substantial changes to this. So if you start with the ordinance, you'll be able to hit both commercial or sorry, both cellular and broadband, and you'll get it done in one shot. And then it just gets codified out to the two things that you'd be editing right now. So I kind of think the approach is needs to be considered. I took a look at this is John's code. I didn't get very far because it took three hours just to get through several pages, because I wanted to hand -- or write something that I thought, okay, I'll just make a few edits to Chapter 17. Let's try and go the route that you guys are going, despite what I just said. The -- I don't know, there's a lot of red on there. All of those corrections would be had if you started with Campanelli's document, which is kind of I'm glad this is where you're starting. So personally, I would say start with Campanelli's document and then let's take what's in 17 are distances. All those are real particulars and put those into what he's got. If I can just quickly. There's two other ordinances that are excellent, Ithaca and Copake out of New York. They're phenomenal. They're known in the safe tech industry as some of the best, strongest ordinances. They're phenomenal. I'd love to see consideration of those. And something I'd also like to see included in the In the materials that you guys are reviewing are circuit nine appeals. So the circuit nine Court of Appeals, it overrides anything that was decided in the circuit nine, which is Oregon, California, and all the other states that are part of that would override any state law we have. So he has provided the State law in the packet. But what you don't have and what you don't have visibility to is all the court cases that have been won that will overwrite what we can do in the State. There's a lot of strength we can take out of the circuit 9. That brings Campanelli back in. That's where his knowledge is. And so you guys know CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 59 you got time in the bank with him. He's sitting there. He's at least got two hours left to advise you guys. So and then there's one other case. There's a Chevron case in 2024. It was in October. It's extremely important because what's been happening over the last decade is the FCC comes out with their interpretation of the law, and everybody has been writing law according to that. Well, they just had the handcuffs put on them. That is not their place. It never has been their place in the Chevron case finally put them in handcuffs. So a lot of this stuff that it seems like the FCC, oh, it's protected under FCC. It's not. That's new law as of October. So those are huge considerations that Campanelli would know and would be able to tell you. Okay. You have your state law, but you have the 9th circuit of appeals and you have the Chevron case. Both of those tremendously changed this space in the last four months. So within the four months you guys have had it, we have a lot more strength we can bring in. So don't just look at the federal law and the State law. You got to look at those other two things. So -- and again, the Copake and Ithaca, they're out in New York. So that's the Second Court of Appeals. It's not ours. We're not part of that. So I'm not saying that everything that is in that those ordinances can apply. But again, if you bring Campanelli in, he'll bill to say, no, that's not in your bill to know that way sooner than any of us do in research. So that's my advice. KOVACEVIC: All right. Thank you. TROLLER: Thank you. WESLEY: So Chair, Commissioners again, the idea is we can look through here and see are there things that are in the ordinance that you'd like to see, either written as they are, or at least the concepts and ideas that you feel like would be helpful to have in our ordinance as we as we move forward. So this first section is just the basic I guess I should do it this way, is just the basic introduction piece and setting the framework for the ordinance. So I know you've had a little bit of time to read this, but probably maybe not enough time to absorb it as much as you want. But in these introductory pieces here on the purpose and intent. So this first section is very similar to what we have in our ordinance written slightly differently. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 59 GRAY: Why? In 1701 do we get to reference health, safety and general welfare? But we don't get to do that with anything in 16? Just in that first sentence, there seems like trigger language for this topic? WESLEY: Right. So I guess I really couldn't say why it wasn't included in 16 when it was done. But particularly anytime you talk zoning, that's a usually a pretty basic part of zoning. And so it's understandable why it's here. GRAY: I mean, I like it, I just -- we always we've always been told, coach that that those words are kind of off limits in this -- with this topic. WESLEY: So as far as basing a decision on the perceived health impacts, yes, that's specific from the radiation. That specific is off limits. But there are other things that affect the general health and welfare in terms of fall zones or whatever. GRAY: Okay. WESLEY: So this language in here in terms of the basic purpose statement, these four tests were included in the adopted ordinance. Then you get on into some of these philosophical reasons, legal justifications for having such an ordinance. Is this language that you would like to see or don't know at this point, or? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: John, just a question about. It's on page reference, page 33 of -- WESLEY: Of the packet material? CORRIGAN: Correct. Yeah. What I have is -- indicates page 33 local zoning determinations. WESLEY: Let's see here. CORRIGAN: And my reference is Part A, Section II. WESLEY: Let me see here. So I'm going to have to probably get to it a slightly different way. And so I'm trying to understand here. CORRIGAN: 17-10. Okay. So. WESLEY: And seventeen six. Page thirty-three on here. Seventeen. Ten. Must have missed it back the other way. 17-10, okay. Factual determinations. CORRIGAN: So if we go on to page thirty-three. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 59 WESLEY: These numbers may be a little different. Okay. I'm on page 33. CORRIGAN: Okay. And then in my documents it shows part II. So page 33 local zoning determinations. WESLEY: Okay. So that's down here. CORRIGAN: Different page on that one. Okay. So and is this in the new refined document on 17? I mean, that was an essential issue I heard time and time again from the public comments was the effect on real estate value. WESLEY: So we don't have that specifically? No. Our comparable is in 17.05 C where we have the different review criteria. And so you can compare against that section. But that specific one I don't believe is in there. But I'd have to read it again to see. CORRIGAN: Yeah. One of the one of the major concerns I heard in the past was the impact that now this is in regard to 16, but it may also apply to 17. The, you know, devaluation of property values due to location or co-location of towers. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I think what we'd like to do is go through the document and we'll get here, but if we can -- CORRIGAN: I'm jumping ahead. Okay. yeah, I get it. KOVACEVIC: Okay. CORRIGAN: Yeah, I hear you. KOVACEVIC: You've jumped ahead. All right. So any comments on 17.01, the purpose and legislative intent? Okay. Hearing none. Let's go on to 17.2 WESLEY: 1702 is definitions. There are a lot of definitions in here that weren't included in the current ordinance. And I would say this is a section we would come back to as we finalize an ordinance. Because you want definitions that go with your ordinance. And if we do use a lot more of this ordinance and you'll need maybe more of these definitions, and if you don't then you won't necessarily need the definition. So chair, I think we come back to this particular section. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Yeah. And I think we need to incorporate a lot more definite definitions as we get into the topics that we're going to be discussing -- adding. WESLEY: So then we get into the section on application types. So this divides it out into CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 59 four different types of applications. I'll just hit them here briefly. Type one is the co- location of small cell wireless. Two is co-location that aren't small cell wireless. And then it's new small cell wireless, then all other new towers. In the organization of the ordinance for our purposes, we divided it into two basic types. Those that can be reviewed administratively and those that are required to go to a public hearing. We, again, because small cell wireless in the in the right of way is a different piece of the code currently it's not discussed specifically. And so again, we have a similar but different approach. There were some challenges that that I had with this one in terms of what was covered and what was not covered here. And how it was laid out. I think this anticipated there would, would be a lot of existing light poles in town that would be used for small cell wireless, and so they would be co-located in most cases. But that's not the case here. And so the -- any regulation for new small cell wireless in the right of way is basically not existent in this particular code. So we need to if we go with more of this approach, there's a lot of gaps, I think in this that we would need to fill in. KOVACEVIC: The one point with this section and the way Campanella drafted the ordinance, just about everything is a special use permit. WESLEY: Correct. KOVACEVIC: And the way that our ordinance is written, most it's mostly administrative, unless there are exceptions. WESLEY: I think most of it certainly anything new, just about anything new is going to be public review under the current ordinance. Because so much of our land is residential, you have to be at least 300 feet from residential the way it's currently written in order to not be public with a new tower. Anything that's existing and being modified. A lot of those could be done administratively, but follows the same criteria. That's in here, though, for deciding what's administrative and what's not, or if it's exceeding what was specifically approved in the previous step would be back for a minute modification of the Sep. So I think there's more currently on our ordinance that would be public review than maybe what you're expecting. But certainly let's see, I CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 59 guess if we look here at the type two applications again, that's very similar to what we have in our ordinance. Anything here that's meeting these criteria as a co-location on an existing tower would be administrative. And that's the same as our adopted ordinance because we use the same criteria. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. In the commercial zoning and industrial zoning districts, there are administrative and. But then in a residential district, it's a special use permit. WESLEY: Right. Even for the modifications. Other thoughts or comments about this approach? GRAY: I don't see any measurable advantage of doing this versus what we're already doing. WESLEY: Ready to move on, Chair? KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. So next section is on shot clocks. And we did use quite a bit of this in Section 1705(B) of the code. Again, it's structured differently because we have -- don't have the four different application types, but it's the same language was used. The same time frames. And also with the provisions on shot clock tolling. Most of this was used. From there we get into the application requirements. So again we can read through. We didn't really use any direct wording from this section, but most of the items were covered in one way or another. And so you can see where you can find the references to the different sections. This ordinance is drafted, relies on this idea of getting a notice address and doing things through mail. We don't typically do it that way. We do get contact information, and we use emails for most notifications. We do require that we have sign off by a property owner if they're not the applicant. This goes into more detail on what we have in our code about that authorization. KOVACEVIC: I do think we ought to get the proof of authorization and then some level of detail, the redacted document. I think that should be added. WESLEY: Okay. We do require drawn scale depictions and site plans as part of an application requirement. We do require engineers report certifications. We don't currently require an environmental assessment form.` CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 59 KOVACEVIC: What would the environmental assessment form typically include? Would that include expected RF emissions? WESLEY: Chair, I'm not exactly sure what all would be in that. My limited experience with these has been in terms of historic preservation impacts. GRAY: It seems odd that that -- and this just being a generic draft that that references a deck which is obviously an Arizona body. So was this the tailored version or was this the template? WESLEY: This is the draft ordinance that he sent to us. GRAY: Okay. WESLEY: Any other comments questions there? GRAY: I think we should seek the understanding of why that written. WESLEY: Visual impact analysis is next. We do have some similar provisions in the code. It's not quite as quite as detailed as this, and certainly not broken down in the same way because of the -- the types of applications here. GRAY: John, I don't know if we if we want to talk about potential enhancements or flagging sections, but back a couple in the scale drawing section, I thought that a part of that should be a fall zone ring on that drawing. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: And I think the environmental assessment is probably to do like gen set noise study. A backup generator for a -- for a system, but it's the only I could think of. Okay. WESLEY: Any other comments through here? Okay. Alternative site analysis. So again we have similar requirements in the code. The section is listed. This is again probably a little more extensive than what we have in the code, but it's similar. FCC compliance report. You have similar requirements. This has more detail behind it than what we have. Ours is a more simple statement that they provide such a report. Our current ordinance does not require that they submit a copy of their FCC license. KOVACEVIC: I think we should get that. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: Is there a specific template under Section 11 that -- and my version of report is CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 59 different than your version of a report, for example? GRAY: Is there a is there a an FCC template that that that's to be rooted in. In Number 11? WESLEY: I don't know. GRAY: For a set of criteria that either. I guess the fourth paragraph does have a little bit of criteria. WESLEY: So it sounds like you may want to see this added language, because again, our current ordinance just says you shall submit an FCC report. So at least this gives you more of what we're looking for. KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Effective prohibition of claims. This is not anything we have in our ordinance. KOVACEVIC: I think that this would be important. I mean, it seems there's a strong emphasis in the ordinance on effective prohibition and defining it. And what if the carrier is going to claim effective prohibition, what they what they have to do to prove it. And I really think that we ought to include his language, because I think it's just for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. That could be added in. The estimated cost of removal. We don't have that in our current ordinance. KOVACEVIC: And I've looked at a number of ordinances. We had eight sample ordinances the last time that we did the review. And then I have looked at Ithaca and Copake ordinances. And there -- it's there should be an estimate of cost and there should be a bond put up to for removal that should be renewed. The cost estimate should be updated every three years and the bond adjusted accordingly. WESLEY: Okay. Property owner, consent, liability, acknowledgment. And that's not in our current ordinance. Other than just the basic acknowledgment that they submit an application. That's something that should be added. KOVACEVIC: I think -- I think so. I think that if the if something happens to the carrier and there's liability, the property owner should be, should have that liability. WESLEY: Okay. 17.07 Design Standards. So as noted here small cell wireless in the right CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 59 of way in our current ordinances has its own set of design guidelines. Otherwise, small cell wireless would be treated as any other tower and are governed by the design guidelines established in 17.33. GRAY: I think 1707 is one that we want to carve-out and talk about at length in a future session. WESLEY: Okay. GRAY: I think design standards is one area that we can influence. WESLEY: So you get to part two -- GRAY: Sorry, John. Let's add to that. Design and engineering standards. We can look at look at utilities associated with towers and how they're treated. WESLEY: So then we get into other telecommunication towers. And so these would be very similar to what we have again in 17.3A3 And there are some specific pieces of this that we did include in the current ordinance. And we do have standards for screening in the adopted ordinance. They didn't use this language, use different language. And we have lighting language in the current ordinance. It's very similar. Just didn't use this exactly. We did not use, however, anything about access or parking in the adopted ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Do we want to require office off street parking for -- these things. If these things are going to be 300 feet away from anything, you know, if they're in a residential neighborhood, they're 300 feet away from anything. Shouldn't a shouldn't there be parking provided off street for when the maintenance people come and -- WESLEY: And yes, as far as we're concerned, that's something that would be part of a site plan. It's obviously a requirement without it being in the code, but if you feel more comfortable putting something specific in the code, we can certainly do that. KOVACEVIC: A number of the codes have that. WESLEY: Yeah. KOVACEVIC: They do require it. WESLEY: Okay. We can put that on the list of things to include. Fencing. We do have requirement for fencing. And then we get into this section on initial town council CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 59 review which is something we don't do here. It would be, I guess just some thoughts about this. One is, in reading through this particular ordinance, it doesn't really seem to anticipate the P&Z Commission being part of the review process. It only talks about town council. And is that the way we want to structure this so it doesn't come through PNC? KOVACEVIC: No. WESLEY: And second is we do have to be careful of the time frames. As stated previously with the review, because time frame is from application to they get their building permit. It's not just through approval of an SP, which by itself can take a lot of that -- that time. And so as we think about adding things to a process where we get an initial council review before we then go on with other parts of the review, is that really necessary? So that's just throwing that out there for your thoughts as you look at whether or not to include something like that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner, I think it should go through our process, whatever, you know, whatever it is that we shouldn't. If -- if there's not an initial council review for anything else, there shouldn't be for this. WESLEY: Then we get into public hearings and notices as we wrote our ordinance and what I would still recommend if we're otherwise keeping things pretty much the same if we're requiring the SUP. The Sup process already describes all the notice requirements, and we start putting notice requirements here. Notice requirements there. You have to make sure that the same you change one, you change the other. Just to me it just makes it more confusing. The Code references special use permit and we follow those notice requirements or having to restate them. Now, this does get into some more specific statements that maybe you think are important as far as very clearly up front saying what the hearing is about, as opposed to, you know, this isn't quite as bold maybe in the notices we send out typically. Any thoughts on adjusting the notice requirements? For a factual termination be written by town council. So we don't have the specific type of statements. For the most part, we did pull in this piece on the coverage maps. When we get down here to factual CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 59 determinations, this would be similar, although different, with what we have in 1705. See, as far as the review and approval criteria, that's what this is getting at. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: John, can we back up a little bit, just maybe a page or two back on what I show is 31? It refers to evidentiary standards part B and part C. That seems to be, at least to me, it seems, a needed factor in verifying the need for additional towers et cetera. That drive by balloon test and the claims of the applicant that they need or may need another tower. I think that should be in there if it's not already. WESLEY: Okay. Yes. Commissioner Corrigan, what's highlighted here? And see, we did use. But the rest of it we did not use. And so, we'll look at adding more of this in it sounds like. KOVACEVIC: The balloon test is an esthetic. It doesn't assess need. It just shows what the height of the tower would be by flying a balloon at that height. And you can see where how high -- the tower would be. CORRIGAN: Okay. And then how about C. Is that the -- KOVACEVIC: And C is in the ordinance. CORRIGAN: Oh C is there? WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. All right. WESLEY: Any thoughts on these factual determinations? GRAY: So are those synonymous with accommodation? Is that -- is that what's used as a -- WESLEY: To me it's the same as the review and approval criteria. These are the -- you have to find that they have met these criteria before you can approve it. GRAY: I think as long as we have approval criteria, that's one and the same. Unless, John, I mean this is another one where it's factual determination is that language that the industry understands versus approval -- I'm just asking. I have no idea. WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Gray, it's been a little while since I've read through some of those other sample ordinances that we've talked about before. I don't recall it CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 59 jumping out to me as the terminology that was used regularly elsewhere, but it may be. That it could be, again, looking at this language here in terms of the TC, a determinations that may be language in the TCA and may help relate back to thereby using the same term here. CORRIGAN: Chair? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: This is the one I brought up earlier and the III. It's in compliance. And in regard to the real estate values, I think that if it's not there now, I think it should be. KOVACEVIC: Yeah, I would agree with that. WESLEY: Okay. Any of these others in here that you would want to see added again, we have similar things on several of them. But you know, particularly this one and two. Probably there's somewhat of four that's in there. I'd have to look at it again and check that wording. But Currently don't have anything about the historic properties. We do have some requirements about ridge lines. KOVACEVIC: Well, these are -- the this is the criteria that would be used to approve or not approve. Right. And it I mean it's it all is pertinent. GRAY: The whole section. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. GRAY: Future consideration. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Yeah. WESLEY: Okay. So more a closer comparison of this language to our existing criteria? KOVACEVIC: Yes. WESLEY: Okay. And then other TCA determinations. So again, this is nothing that we have in the current ordinance. KOVACEVIC: I this is so much of the Campanelli ordinance. I think it needs to be okay. It just seems to me it's there for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. And so we'll look at doing that. And then retention of consultants. We do have a couple of provisions in the adopted ordinance that allow us to hire consultants as needed. Again, this is a little more extensive description and listing of CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 59 how that would could play out and how it works than what we have in the current ordinance. Include those things? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. I think let's move on. WESLEY: Okay. Then we get into setback requirements again for small cell wireless. Or other basic again in Chapter 17, we don't really make the distinction. These distances here are in some ways less than what we currently have. In other ways, they're a little bit more extensive than what we currently have. So going forward, I guess we could look at these a little closer and whatever's more restrictive. Or I think the Commission, as you were talking before, had even more restrictive than these. And what you're talking about in terms of 500 foot separations versus the 300 foot that's listed here. So I think that's something to kind of put on the side. And we'll look at as we pull all the different pieces together. GRAY: Agree. And I think that we should consider pivoting away from these distances and start talking about fall zones related to property lines, possibly. WESLEY: Where we already have that in the code. It has to fall on their property. That's already in the code. I think that's what I think maybe. GRAY: In 17 we do, but not in 16, right? WESLEY: Right. Yeah. Because in sixteen it's in the right of way. We can address that when we get to there. GRAY: But I think that's where a lot of this becomes applicable for -- for me anyway. WESLEY: And then height requirements against a little bit of a mixed bag in terms of this compared to our adopted ordinance. In our ordinance is you meet the -- whatever the height, maximum height is of the District. You can do that if you meet other criteria by right. If you exceed that height, then you need a special use permit. But it doesn't put a maximum on what that height could ultimately be. It's whatever you could get approved through the special use permit. Here they do put some maximum heights on, but the can be kind of tall in some of these areas, such hundred feet. And then we have this section on use restrictions and variances, which I found rather confusing to use because we don't do use variances. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 45 of 59 Maybe he didn't really mean variance when he used the word variance. We allowed -- basically, we allow you to apply for putting a tower most places. And it can either happen by right or through a special use permit. It doesn't take a variance. So again we don't we didn't use any of this. So if you're doing a variance that's something's going to go to the Board of Adjustment and put another layer in there that again didn't seem helpful. Okay. Thoughts on that piece. Environmental impacts. We don't have a similar provision in the adopted ordinance. So I'm guessing you'd like to see us. Include that piece? KOVACEVIC: I -- yeah, I think so. WESLEY: Historic site impacts. We don't have any currently. There's an effort to get the tower designated. Not he tower, the fountain designated. You're not going to get any towers close to that anyway because of the park and whatever's around it. Why? We have historic sites. In the future, we might. So again, this could be included if you want, but it wasn't included because we don't -- don't have them. And it's they're generally reviewed anyway as part of any, any new tower. Any thoughts or questions on including this piece? KOVACEVIC: Without any historic sites, I don't think we need to hang in there, guys. We're almost through. WESLEY: Getting there faster than we thought. So then pretty much the rest of this are all things that that we don't have in the current code, and could be added if you'd like. KOVACEVIC: What about the 11th hour submission? I mean, is that something that -- it seems like we should -- why would they have put that in there? WESLEY: I guess they've experienced challenges in some places where things come in last minute. And then how do you handle it? What authority do you have to -- to say no or to say yes when they do come in late? KOVACEVIC: So I think we -- we probably need that again for defensive purposes. WESLEY: Okay. And then 19 we didn't do this exactly. But there's some portions of this section on the excessive RF radiation that we did use. CORRIGAN: Sure. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 46 of 59 WESLEY: The initial certification piece. KOVACEVIC: And Commissioner, we have Commissioner. CORRIGAN: I think that should probably be something we should consider putting in there. We hear a lot about it. I haven't seen any proof of that. But radiation is a concern for a lot of people, so it really should be I think it should be in the document. KOVACEVIC: I believe we have the right to have it annually tested at the carrier's expense. Correct? WESLEY: Yes. Yes, sir. These two sections were included in the ordinance. So the random RF testing is in the adopted ordinance, and I do believe it allows for annual. So the main piece we didn't include was this introductory provision. And then the bond requirements. So we have something similar but not exactly this. We have similar language on the abandonment of facilities. And then this balancing. General provisions we did not use. So I rushed through that maybe too fast of these last ones, these general provisions. KOVACEVIC: Yeah I agree. I think that there again, for defensive purposes, I think that that -- that's good to include. WESLEY: I think we discussed the bond requirements earlier. So I think that was something that I heard that you'd want to include. Okay. What else? So we -- I will we will email this out to you so you can see it in this version to, in addition to what you had in the staff report of how to look at what's there versus what's in our code, if you want to try to match them up going forward. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: First, I'll just say that seemed easy. It's interesting that it was a year in the making, but it didn't. I didn't see anything in there that said, oh my goodness. So that's good. I'm glad we got here. Makes it a lot easier for us to talk through this not thinking there's something still behind the curtain. Question I had that's not addressed here. That we talked about in the past is in, in definitions, and we specifically definitions of, of utilities. And I believe it's I don't couldn't tell you where, but I think it's been referenced before that we have language on the books that effectively says utilities in this town CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 47 of 59 have to be buried. Right. At some point in this process, I'd like to tackle that piece head on. Because I think that's how we start to tease out the difference between broadband utilization as a utility versus, you know, everything gets rolled into this 5(G) telecommunications small cell and it all gets really blurry. But I think if we can if we can talk through definitions of, of what's a utility versus what's a communication we might be able to do something with that. So maybe not. Maybe yes, maybe no. But I think at some point we should talk about that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: John, is it possible that we could somehow, you know, acquire a map of all, you know, like a footprint or a map of all available underground utilities, you know, SRP, Cox, What is the Southwest Gas? Verizon, all of those things that are now underground. I think it might be helpful if we could visibly see that on a map or a plot, how those are circuitous out throughout the town. So we get a better feel, I think, of where we are now versus where we can go give us some parameters there. And then just a second thought off of that, I've heard I just want to clarify this kind of clear the air. I've heard some concerns or thoughts about the SRP, you know, Saguaro Cactus and those locations. How many are there? you know, what are the exact locations of those? Maybe consistent with that, we could see to get a better feel for where we are. Maybe we could get that also, you know, as a, as some sort of a layout or plot or map. I think that would help us all visualize. I'm a very visual person. For me, it's seeing is believing and understanding that maybe you indicated that there were specifications engineering drawings of components that are required, which is in here which is great. Maybe we can look at the same thing with the Saguaro Cactus and understand those a little bit better. I have no idea what the what they are other than they're SRP monitoring or emitting stations. That's all I know. So I think we need a little more information on that. That's it. KOVACEVIC: Okay. I have three points that weren't addressed in here that I've seen in other ordinances. And I'd like to see them included in ours. The first permit. The permit should indemnify the town, period, end of story. If -- if the town approves us a CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 48 of 59 tower and gets sued for its approval that tower, the permit should defend it. They should defend the town. And that is in a number of the ordinances. Number two, insurance requirements. In general, it's a million occurrence. Three million aggregate, 25,000 deductible, five million umbrella. The there's specifications if it's a claims made form. If you look at the Ithaca ordinance, their insurance requirements are very explicit and very good. And with the State land property up, we may want to require -- have a have something in the ordinance that says any new development over 50 acres or some number of acres should provide for a tower location. So I think those should be in the ordinance as well. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: I'm wondering if the language should be that they would reimburse all of our legal expenses rather than them representing us. I wouldn't want. -- KOVACEVIC: Probably. Probably. But they should hold. We should be held harmless. SVEUM: Right? There you go. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: So any other comments? Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I just -- I think procedurally, most of us this is a this is still a lot. Right? It's complex. There's a ton going on here. I think we've gotten better and better, but we spent a year getting to where we are. So I think that we need to be smart about taking this in bite sized chunks as we work through it. And then I think we need to the piece that I still don't quite have my head wrapped around is the value of separating 16 from 17. Now versus looking at that kind of in the that was always my thought once we once we finally understood that piece. I've always thought that 16 and 17 they're on paper separately, but they're so intertwined. And so either we're going to say, hey, 17, we're going to work on 17, and then we're going to lift all that language and we're going to drop it in on 16 or I think we need to talk about them in a little more intermingled fashion. WESLEY: Yes, chair. Commissioner, I believe that's the plan as we move forward, is that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 49 of 59 we will get to that point and see. Do they remain separate or are they better to put together? KOVACEVIC: So do we -- we don't need any kind of a motion or anything that you haven't. I hope we've given you enough to chew on for the next month or two. Okay. So we can close this one. WESLEY: Close this one. KOVACEVIC: Yeah, we have one more. Yeah. The general plan is incorrect. Yeah, they went ahead for daylight savings time. Okay. Let's move on to item number 7. Consideration of possible action. Annual report on the implementation of the Fountain Hills General Plan 2020. Farhad? TAVASSOLI: Oh. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the commission. Well, it's that time of year. Year again. Where I come up before you and go over some of the progress made in terms of implementation of the general plan. And this is always in regards to the previous calendar year. So what I'll be presenting to you is the progress report for the 2024 calendar year. And since there are at least a couple new members here on the commission today I always like to start off with a just a bit of a review of the general plan. You know, how we came to -- how we came to be. And before I get into some of the implementation activities, some of the more notable implementation activities. So the purpose of this annual report is to is to adhere to the State statutes, which requires a governing body to receive an annual report on the implementation of the general plan. Now that government governing body is the Town Council. But we always -- like to filter it through the planning and Zoning Commission. And the action that we're looking for at the conclusion of my presentation is whether or not the Commission would like to forward this to the -- the town council. It's not an approval or denial, per se. But -- but more than anything else we'd like to garner some discussion. So the report that you have before you there are there's an introductory section. There are there are four additional sections. So it discusses the adoption of the 2020 general plan. And it goes on to discuss eight general plan elements that are within three CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 50 of 59 overarching principles. Those three overarching principles are thriving neighborhoods, thriving environment, and thriving economy. And I have in section two of the report that I provided to you it discusses those three overarching principles. The subheadings for those principles are underlined. And each of those below each of those overarching principles are the elements that pertain to each. So I won't go over them one by one unless you have -- if you have any questions within any one of them, I'll be more than happy to answer them. And then within each of those sections, I discuss some of the implementation progress made as they pertain to each of those principles and elements. So again, the general plan was approved back in May of 2020 by the town council and then subsequently ratified in November of 2020 by the Fountain Hills voters. The plan is organized in such a way. As I mentioned, the is organized according to the three overarching principles neighborhoods, environment and economy prefixed by the word thriving and identifies various character areas. What are those character areas? Well, a few of them are we're sitting in one now, the town center. It also goes over some different sections segments of the town, such as the Shay corridor and also specific points such as the two gateways on either side of Shay. You got the eastern gateway and the, the one over further or rather the western gateway and then further east, but the just past the 87 State route eighty-seven intersection. It also finally at the -- the report establishes amendment procedures and the requirements for an annual and the requirement for the annual report, which is the reason I'm before you. So at the end of the general plan, I specified the pages here, and I and I know most of you, if not all of you, don't have the general plan right in front of you. But I'll just go over to the next slide here, because this slide more or less explains what I'm about to show you. But at the end of the general plan is the implementation strategy. And so it kind of in a in a table format, discusses each of those overarching principles and those elements. And goes over, I apologize for flipping through pages here, but it -- okay. So the implementation strategy at the end of the general plan covers each of the elements of the plan. It provides steps to achieve goals and CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 51 of 59 implementation -- how to implement the policy. So just as an example here, I took this page out of the implementation strategy. You know, if you look down here one of the, one of the goals and I believe this is under the yeah, this is under the thriving environment principle. One of the goals is to evaluate flood control measures as part of the site review process through the design review process, just to pick one out of many in this section. And it says here the lead agency to address that is the development Services Department, the anticipated time frame. Well there are four or five anticipated time frames, but there are some that are contiguous, like contiguous like the one that I just read to you. It's an ongoing goal. It does mention potential funding sources. I don't quite have the footnote explanations in front of me, but it also discusses some of the other departments or entities that may be involved as well. But this is just an example of an ongoing goal that we basically aspire achieve in our day- to-day activities when we're reviewing plans or you know, including rezones subdivision plats and so on. An example of a long range goal. You can see right before that, working with Arizona State Land Department in preparation of a feasible land use and circulation plan. Continues a little bit more detail there, but that's basically the how the implementation strategy is broken down. I mentioned there were four or five anticipated time frames for each of those elements of the implementation strategy, beginning with ongoing immediate short range, mid-range and long range, which is intended to be achieved within ten years. So the annual report requirements we would be every year we'd come to you and report to you the amendments that have been processed during the previous calendar year. Well, there have been none and there have been none for quite some time. More on that a little bit. We also would be we're also here to report to you the progress and status of any implementation activities. And I've highlighted a few review some of the policy issues that have come up during our in putting together this review and recommendations for amendment -- amendments. So as you can see in that ten page report, I go over quite a bit. Of some of the more notable implementation activities that CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 52 of 59 have taken place, and I've highlighted them here. Probably one of the most notable is the downtown strategy that was approved just after the summer break in September. One of the steps implementation steps will John presented one of those steps before you earlier in the his earlier presentation that's specifically addresses, for example, the overarching principle of great places. And you can find that under that subheading in the general plan. The pump out pump house pilot art project. I brought that up last year. It's been continued. It's been popular. I've mentioned that in the report as well highlighted it here. The sidewalk infill project continues. Last year, we added about a little over a mile of new segments of sidewalk. And with the sidewalk infill project continues to this date. Three new trails have been completed. We have received over $130,000 in grants that were awarded to the town. About $60,000 was of that was awarded by the salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation. And about $70,000 was awarded by the Arizona Office of Tourism. We didn't receive any grant funding from the Fort McDowell-Yavapai Nation this time. The downtown parking study has been completed, although that has yet to be presented by our Public Works Department. Hopefully in the near future. The grand opening of the fitness park at Desert Vista Park occurred, I believe it was late last spring. There are efforts continue to add the found to the National Register of Historic Places. It is a process. I believe we've gone through the necessary process with the -- the State Historic Preservation Office here in Arizona. So that is you know, there's progress. Certainly progress has been made at the -- the State level. So what remains I guess you know, another laborious task for our historic preservation Commission. And the villages of Four Peaks. The PAD was approved, which addresses the thriving neighborhoods principal, you know, a divisive, controversial PAD case approved last year, but still worthwhile to report, at least. I mentioned the ongoing time frames. Again, there are a few that I guess you could say have not addressed specifically as of yet and kind of have fallen outside the time frame that I've discussed here, beginning with some of the more immediate actions one of which is to consider employing a part CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 53 of 59 time grant writer. We find you know, various departments have delegated grant writing proposals to various folks within the Department. And you know, they have risen up to -- when called upon to apply for grants wherever available. But town just doesn't find it feasible to hire a part time grant writer. At least not at this point. And also to establish a general plan monitoring system to coordinate with the capital improvements plan to see whether or not -- to see that both are consistent. You know, whatever public works activities that we're implementing, we'd like to note that in that they're consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the -- of the general plan. And so we initially thought that we would have an ad hoc committee to look into this, but since our new finance director came on board early last year, we have a capital improvements review Committee. And that involves pretty much every department here in town, including myself representing planning and zoning and just, you know, I the goal for me is to monitor some of the public works activities and make sure that we're also crossing off some or you know, crossing out some boxes and making sure that we're meeting the goals and objectives of the general plan. There are some short-term actions that you know, could spend a little bit more time on to see how we can if there are any creative ways that we can address or implement them such as developing -- developing and or implementing an investment plan that responds to the economic development plans priorities and that prioritizes infrastructure improvements. The commission can also -- rather we could also consider commissioning a cost benefit study to identify gaps between actual subdivision regulations and infrastructure specifications to determine the cost of meeting such specifications. Now, here's worthwhile noting that. The one area here in town that many of you are aware of, that is the has the most potential of large scale development is the State land piece on the northeast side of town. Otherwise there are a few rather modestly sized larger parcels within town that have the potential for being subdivided further into single family lots. But when we're talking about commissioning a cost benefit study I think as we get closer or as we know more about the State land piece and what the CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 54 of 59 status is right now, there are no auctions scheduled. And we haven't gotten any word about when that might, you know, might that might occur. But I think once we have a better idea of what kind of potential that state land piece brings forth, and we might consider commissioning such a study. And also a couple other ones. We and I talked about this a little bit last year as well. One of the implementation strategies is to amend the zoning ordinance to include, at a minimum, safe by design concepts and also similarly low impact development which is, I guess, more of a civil engineering parlance from their professional organization where they look at different ways of managing water resources or managing storm water. Well, we do that on a day-to-day basis. So you know, as far as amending the zoning ordinance to include a safe by design by that name or low impact development, I think it, you know, may not be may not be practical or feasible at this point when it's already being in some form or another. Implemented as part of our day-to-day review tasks. And finally work with the Arizona State Land Department to prepare a feasibility study for state trust land based on the results of cost recovery study. We did -- we did have one inquiry in the past year where there was some interest in the State land piece up in the northeast part of town. Which at least in my five years here, haven't gotten any inquiries until then. And so is that an indication that we might be hearing something soon about the State land piece? Perhaps. But you know, nothing formal has been submitted. And like I said, there's no rumblings from the State Land Department that that that piece is going to be in the auction as one of one of their auctions anytime soon. So again just looking for to as far as this being an action item, just looking to you know, get any input and then if the commission is satisfied we can go ahead and forward this over to the town council to fulfill the State requirement. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners. Any questions? Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Just a suggestion on the Arizona Land Department property. There's -- there's the graduate program at Arizona State University in real estate development. They do three presentations a year, and they do various real properties throughout many of Prescott, all the way down to Mesa. There's been things south of Phoenix. I would CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 55 of 59 certainly, and I can connect you if you'd like to talk with the program director there. This could be something that they could bring up, perhaps as a project for the third presentation they'll do a year from now, probably in May of 2026. They do an excellent job. And it would be something that you could get a good idea of what could be done with the property. And of course, they work several times with the State Land Department. And so if you're interested, you can make that introduction. TAVASSOLI: Okay. Thank you. I'll note that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: That state trust land is about what is it, 1300 or 1900 1300 or 1900 acres. TAVASSOLI: Just under 1300. CORRIGAN: And then. Gosh, I like that. That's a fantastic idea. That's a great opportunity. Expose the availability of that. My second question is grant writers, are they -- they're contractors who work on commission or percentage or how does that work? Because we're farming out, you know, I mean, it's a great idea. So what is it? What's the general thing, ten percent or. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman Commissioner Corrigan? Well, without having a job description or because I don't think our human resources has a job description created for grant writer, but I think it really -- it really differs from one jurisdiction to another as far as how they're compensated. But yeah, it, you know, if the human resources department would like to formulate a job description, it certainly would address how they'd be compensated and what kind of qualifications would. CORRIGAN: Yeah. Gosh, it's certainly an opportunity for the methodology of replacing the sales tax option. We've got a long way to go. If they could write a lot of grants and do the infill for what was missing, what will be missing in the future, that'd be terrific. I it sounds interesting. TAVASSOLI: That's it. KOVACEVIC: Any other comments? Paula, do we -- COREY: Oh. I'm sorry. I had it on, but I think I hit the wrong button. KOVACEVIC: Vice Chair Corey? CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 56 of 59 COREY: I was like, why isn't he calling me? Every time you say Corrigan, it sounds like sounds like Corey. I'm trying to get used to that. Just two things I thought last year at this time when we reviewed this status, we were looking at the monitoring system -- the general plan monitoring system, like getting something going. So none of that, none of that happened this year? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey. No, we -- if by monitoring system, you mean like a, like a formal, ad hoc you know, group, that's I guess you know, specifically I guess goes for what the general plan describes as what. -- COREY: I just remember we had this item last year, and I thought we -- TAVASSOLI: Were. No, no, I think I think the, you know, the closest we've come to that, as I, as I mentioned earlier is a Public works review committee where we take a look at the cost of projects and perhaps, you know, identify ways in which we could share costs, either through an intergovernmental agreement or through some other method. But -- COREY: Okay. Can we get the file? I know in the PowerPoint, we had a teaser of all of the items. Where is that master file? Is that something that we can get? TAVASSOLI: The master file? COREY: That shows all of the -- TAVASSOLI: Implementation strategies or -- COREY: Yeah, it's in the -- it was in the general plan, which is online, but I can -- I can I mean, don't. COREY: Don't worry about it. If it's in there, I can get it. Yeah. TAVASSOLI: Okay. Yeah. It's towards the end of the -- the general plan for that one. And that was one page that I showed you earlier out of I believe it's like 15 or 20 pages all together. COREY: And then just one more thing. So you mentioned that we could implement Safe by design and low impact development. But you said when you're talking with builders, you incorporate that in? Can you just give us an example of what, you know, give us an example of what that would be? TAVASSOLI: Yeah, yeah. Well, for example the stormwater for pollution and prevention CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 57 of 59 plan, for example, that's just good practice among the civil engineering field. Where, you know, the -- as part of the construction document set, for example, for a single family home, they would need to demonstrate you know, how during construction, the stormwater is going to be managed to, I guess, mitigate, like, debris and erosion and sedimentation during that process because after all the, you know, soil is not compacted. You know, there's construction vehicles on the property. So these are all environmental considerations. COREY: Okay. So you think that's pretty much covered, then? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. COREY: Okay. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray. GRAY: Farhad, I'm just going off of memory. But it seems like this year's reports truncated quite a bit compared to last year's. I think last year had a lot of economic development criteria layered in. Does that does that go -- is there -- well, I guess is that is that a true statement? I suppose that it looks like we're just we're narrowing in on what, what development services has governance over versus kind of the more macro picture. And I think that's fine. And just an observation. My question was going to be, you know, State land, State land. We always talk about the State land. Is that a target for economic development, to find suitors, to marry up with the State land Department? Because you, know, State Land Department isn't going to just say, hey, we're going to hold an auction for 1300 acres on the northeast side of Fountain Hill. Somebody has to go solicit that -- that auction. So is that an objective of -- of economic development? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Gray, I -- well, I -- yeah, I guess, Amanda left, I don't know if I could speak for her, but there have been no discussions between either -- - at least I can just speak for myself, between myself and the economic -- economic development department. But that's certainly something that might be worthwhile. GRAY: Yeah, it just feels like. I mean, you you've got goals in here, but you're constrained by that entity not materializing. And that entity doesn't materialize unless economic development is actively seeking them out to marry them up with state land CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 58 of 59 and development services. So -- KOVACEVIC: Anybody else? Paula, do we have any speaker cards? WOODWARD: No. Chair. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Can I have a motion to send this on to town council? CORRIGAN: So moved. KOVACEVIC: Second. COREY: Second. KOVACEVIC: All in favor? IN UNISON: Aye. KOVACEVIC: Opposed? WOODWARD: Six, zero. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Item 8. Commission discussion. Request for research to staff. Anybody have anything for John? Commissioner, Vice Chair Corey? COREY: Well, I'm looking at our website here, and I see that we have a vacant seat. Is that new? Did we lose someone? WESLEY: Yes, Chair. Vice Chair. I guess we thought we mentioned that earlier, but Commissioner DePaul (ph.) resigned last week, so I'll be looking for an additional member. COREY: Okay. Well, we'll miss him. And I looked quickly to see if I could find this list in all the documents. I can't find it. Could you send that to me? Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Anything else for John? Director Wesley, anything for us. WESLEY: Chair. So just to finish up where we were discussing earlier. So your April meeting will be April 21st. At this point, it looks like we'll have two items for discussion. Both continuances from tonight. Farhad can bring something. You can move it on, I bring it. You got to talk about it longer. So we'll come back and we'll talk about the downtown overlay district, continue that continued that public hearing and also a next installment on the wireless ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Then anybody want to make a motion to adjourn? COREY: Motion to adjourn. CITY OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MARCH 10, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 59 of 59 KOVACEVIC: All right. We're done.