Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout250512 PZC Summary Minutes & Verbatim TranscriptTOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNNING & ZONING COMMISSION May 12, 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 (arrived at 6:14 PM); Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward. Planning and Zoning Commission May 12, 2025 1 of 1 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION May 12, 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 May 12, 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 (arrived at 6:14 p.m.); Commission Nick Proctor; Commissioner Scott Schlossberg and Commissioner Phil Sveum Staff Present: Development Services Director John Wesley, Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli, and Executive Assistant Paula Woodward 3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC The following resident addressed the Commission: Betsy LeVoie 4. CONSIDERATION AND DIRECTION: Provide staff with direction on updating the Town's Sign Regulations contained in Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance. The followings resident addressed the Commission: Lori Troller Discussion only 5. REVIEW AND PROVIDE COMMENTS ON: Initial draft revisions to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas. The following residents addressed the Commission: Lori Troller Discussion only 6. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff. 7. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director. 8. REPORT from Development Services Director. 9. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Kovacevic adjourned the Regular meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held on May 12, 2025, at 7:43 p.m. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 1 of 44 Post-Production File Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 12, 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. * * * * * TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 2 of 44 KOVACEVIC: All right. Let's call to order the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting of May 12th, 2025. Everybody rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. ALL: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Thank you. So Paula, can we take the roll? WOODWARD: Chairman KOVACEVIC? KOVACEVIC: Here. WOODWARD: Vice Chair Corey? COREY: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Gray? Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Here. WOODWARD: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: Here. KOVACEVIC: Okay. We have a Call to the Public. Paula, do we have any speaker cards? WOODWARD: We do, Chair. One speaker, Betsy LaVoie. LAVOIE: Good evening, Chair, Vice Chair, Commissioners, staff. Betsy LaVoie with the Chamber of Commerce. I am speaking to an agenda item that was on your last agenda, so I know you cannot reply or speak to it, but I just wanted to provide the information. On April 8th, we had sent out a letter from the TAMA, The Avenue Merchants Association, to the Planning & Zoning commissioners as well as SPAC and different staff members, and we understand that it was not received by all, so I wanted to provide it for you today as well as a new letter of support from the Board of Directors of the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce, and it's the initiatives that The Avenue Merchants TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 3 of 44 Association spent countless hours to put together and had 37 wet signatures of businesses who participated in that. So I do believe it brings with it a lot of weight of what the business community would like to see happen, so it's just for your reference as you're looking at all the downtown strategies in the new plan. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: Are there any other speaker cards? WOODWARD: No, Chair. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Okay. Let's move on to agenda item 4, Consideration and Direction on updating the Town's Sign Regulations contained in Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance. TAVASSOLI: All right. Thank you. And good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I'm here to discuss with you this evening some potential amendments that were discussed at the January meeting - Town Council meeting regarding Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance, which addresses sign regulations. And again, we're not -- we -- John and I are not looking for any recommendations for approval. This is for discussion purposes and, you know, us trying to figure out how to move forward given these deal points that were discussed in January. So a little bit of background. As some of you have been involved back in November 2021, there were some significant amendments made to the sign ordinance that reflected the Reed v. Town of Gilbert decision regarding content neutrality. That was followed by some more revisions, not as big in scale. But back in October '23, there were some proposed revisions that came before Council that were subsequently approved. And then in January, as I said earlier, Council directed staff to review and revise the sign ordinance, but before revising -- going through any particular legislative revisions to the sign ordinance, we're coming before you. And on February 18th, after staff, I guess, was -- didn't receive a whole lot of direction, we came before the Council again and got some more specific direction on how they would like to see the Zoning Ordinance or the -- Chapter 6, in particular, revised to address current needs. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 4 of 44 So I'm going to talk about five different kinds of signs that were discussed at the January Council meeting, and I'll begin with A-frame signs. And so currently, Chapter 6 allows one sign for each business -- each commercial business, two if there are two public entrances to that -- to that business. A maximum of six square feet is allowed for one sign, but in the situation where you are allowed to put up two, the maximum is nine square feet cumulative for both signs. And they are to only be displayed only between sunrise and sunset. At the Council discussion on January -- I believe it was January 25th, if I'm not mistaken, a councilmember proposed the idea of allowing businesses up to four A-frame signs without any restrictions on display times and increase the square footage limit to eight square feet. Now, I'm not sure if that was in reference to the six square feet allowed for one sign or a cumulative nine square feet for two signs, but that was an idea thrown out by one of the councilmembers. And Mr. Chairman, we discussed this before the meeting, whether or not we'd like to discuss each of these signs as I go along before going on to banner signs and the other subsequent sign types. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Does anybody have any comments on A-frame signs? We're going to review each sign type as we go rather than do it all at once. Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: So my thought was -- COREY: The right button. KOVACEVIC: There you go. CORRIGAN: Thanks, Clayton. WOODWARD: No. No. COREY: No. CORRIGAN: Am I -- yeah? (Indiscernible). COREY: It should light up red when you hit it. KOVACEVIC: The button -- PROCTOR: Turn the blue one on. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 5 of 44 KOVACEVIC: The button -- WOODWARD: There you go. PROCTOR: Technology. CORRIGAN: Yeah, you would think. Count to two. My thought was I like the idea of increasing the sign size and the number. I thought that was -- I was there during the Council meeting. I thought Councilmember Earle made a pretty formulative discussion in regard to a need for keeping merchants up to, you know, four signs, and, I think, it was eight square feet is what she proposed. I think it's a reasonable expectation. We have more and more businesses, that is, downtown businesses, you know, coming and going, mostly going, and I think this would help with some retention there by exposing what they do, more about their business in a nutshell. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: Yeah. The number of signs, I'm okay with that. The leaving them up all night, I -- so that -- I'm totally against that. I don't think that -- I mean, it doesn't take much effort to erect them and then take them down in the evening. So I think that's my thoughts on that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Thank you. I agree with Scott's comments. I think that it's not too much effort to take them down. And I feel that if we don't ask them to take them down, then there could be too many left up over time, and it will just start to get cluttered. I mean, overall, my concern with the number of signs is the clutter, but I think we almost need to -- I mean, we want to help the businesses and let them have signs up that will help attract customers to their business, but I am concerned when there's -- let's just say there's, you know, business after business after business, and they're allowed to put four signs up. When there are too many signs, you might not see any of the signs. So I am concerned if we have too many, it might defeat the purpose, but I also hope that we can, you know, kind of just give the business the benefit of the doubt. They should know how many signs - they should know what's going to attract a customer to coming into their TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 6 of 44 store. But around the time frames, I think there's no reason for them to be kept up all night, and I think, if they have that requirement of taking them in and putting them back out, they might not want to put all four -- you know, four signs up every time. So that's my comment. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Well, I'm all in favor of business people promoting their business and their product, but can you imagine -- on both sides, once the last parcel is developed by the Sheas, there could be 80 to 100 signs along -- on each side of the Avenue. I think it's over-the-top clutter. And if that's -- I think if that's what a business wants to do, I agree. I think the message gets lost, and it will not look very attractive. But if that's the wishes of the Council and the businesses, I guess that's up to them. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: I believe the current ordinance is very reasonable as long as it complies with Reed v. Gilbert, which it does. My question is, has there been any complaints from merchants that the current ordinance is unreasonable and affecting their bottom line? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Proctor, although I haven't personally received any complaints, I believe there have been some complaints coming into different members of Town staff, particularly the business community downtown. PROCTOR: Is it -- is it targeted at any aspect? The number? The location? TAVASSOLI: You know what? I'm -- Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, I'm not sure. I haven't documented the complaints, but I -- PROCTOR: Well, my point is if we haven't had a groundswell of complaints from merchants that this ordinance is unreasonable to them, you know, I'm scratching my head why we're bothering changing what appears to be pretty damn good. That's all I have. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Thank you. Before we move on to a different -- oh, there's a bug up here -- to a different sign, which one was proposed to use an SUP for -- as an option? Was that TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 7 of 44 A-frame? Yeah. Okay. So SUP for signs. So to -- PROCTOR: Nick. COREY: - Nick's comment here, I agree with that. I think we could potentially use the SUP as a better alternative if there is a problem or if a business finds that two isn't enough for them because I'm also not sure where this came from. You know, we've revisited the sign ordinance many times, and if, like, one or two businesses comes and says, hey, can you change this, then I feel like we all get -- you know, huddle back together and try to make big changes, but in this case, if it was one or two businesses that said, we would like to have more based on our unique circumstances, then maybe an SUP would be a better alternative. So thank you. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. And I want to echo that sentiment. We just did this sign ordinance about 18 months ago -- 18 to 20 months ago, and it was not -- it went to Council. It wasn't -- they approved something that we had that -- they really didn't change it all that much. There may have been some minor changes. But I just -- my biggest concern is we increase the number of A-frame signs, and if every business in the village put up four A-frame signs, it would look like a flea market, and we just don't want that. So I'm inclined not to increase the number of signs to four, and, you know, I'll certainly -- I'm all ears to the commissioners if they want to talk about a number -- another number, but I would not be supportive of four A-frame signs. And Commissioner Gray, we're talking about A-frame signs. We just started the sign ordinance discussion, and we're going sign type by sign type. So if you have any thoughts on A-frame signs, now's the time. GRAY: I think my thoughts pretty much echo what you had just overlaid. Sorry, Commissioner Corey, I didn't quite get to hear yours. But I think the signage - the macro view on signage for me is we're trying to be everything to everyone every time, and it's just not -- it's just not appropriate for an ordinance to - you know, to be so open-ended that way. So, I agree. One A-frame is probably more than enough. I really don't think we should entertain the suggestion of four, no restrictions, et cetera. I just - I just think TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 8 of 44 that's inappropriate for a municipality like ours. KOVACEVIC: All right. Do you -- does that give you the feedback you're looking for? TAVASSOLI: Yeah, absolutely. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Then we can move on to the next one. TAVASSOLI: Okay. And so the next one was a discussion about banner signs. So currently, any business can apply for a banner permit. That permit will be valid for 30 days. There is an option to reapply up to four times, so it would be a total of 150 days that the applicant can keep the sign up, although they would have to reapply and pay a $50 fee each time for the renewal. It's allowed for new businesses for up to one year, new businesses, and a temporary use permit -- there is a mechanism for that to allow additional time through a temporary use permit. And at the Council discussion, the idea was to extend the 90-day -- extend to 90 days the maximum for the initial permit instead of the 30 days, and an option to extend -- and this was from a different councilmember, but an option to extend for a total of 364 days total. So essentially, allowing it up to 90 days and then throwing out the option to keep it up for just less than a year altogether. Any discussion on that? KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Yeah. Chair, I think the 90 days, as I recall, was based on an assumption that there might be supply chain interruptions for signs and that type of thing, and extending it from 30 to 90, I don't think, is too unreasonable. There might be some compromise in there. Someone else may suggest 60. But I think 30 is a little too short for a banner sign. So, I think we should give the businesses some leeway to offer a reasonable compromise between -- somewhere between 30 and 90, my thoughts. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: Again, I think, as written, our ordinance on this is spot on. And what's nice about the current ordinance, it allows a temporary use permit for additional time. So if a business wants additional time, they can apply for it, and we don't need to put more time in the ordinance. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 9 of 44 KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: Just going back to, you know, how we arrived at the language the first time around, I think a lot of it was really derived from, you know, UV degradation of banner materials, temporary banners in particular. And the reason that we wanted the reapply to occur was that also allowed for some standard of care and upkeep with those, so it gave us almost an automatic -- not an automatic inspection, but an automatic opportunity to say, yes, you may -- you may reup, but we're going to require that that media be replaced because those things are -- you know, they're notorious for, you know, wind tear and UV degradation. And so I agree with the Commissioner. I think the way we had it written was probably more than generous. I think it should probably be left alone. KOVACEVIC: Commissioners? COREY: Agreed. KOVACEVIC: Okay. My -- the only other comment I have, jumping ahead to railing signs, I think railing signs are basically banner signs. Would there be a -- TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, I believe the idea behind railing signs, I think it would -- the idea was to put it up and keep it up on a permanent basis. Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Let's move on, then, to yard signs. TAVASSOLI: Yes, yard signs. Quite simply, the current Zoning Ordinance allows two yard signs per residential property. At Council discussion, the idea was discussed to allow a four-sign maximum during election season and a two-sign maximum at all other times. That was the extent of that discussion. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: What’s our obligation to -- other than election signs, what's our obligation to allow for wire-frame residential property yard signs? None, right? Just if we allow it, we have to allow unrestricted content on it? TAVASSOLI: Correct. GRAY: I personally don't like the idea of being able to advertise in single-family districts or multi-family districts on wireframes year-round. The political season is the political TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 10 of 44 season. You know, we're not going to get around that. If we were going to propose a modification here, I would propose something to the effect of elimination of the wire frame yard signs except for political season. I just don't see the -- I don't see what -- what's the added value to the Town of Fountain Hills and to the residents, the homeowners of Fountain Hills seeing roof by A, B, C, yard by X, Y, Z. I don't see the value to that. KOVACEVIC: But if you did that, would you, then, be restricting for sale signs? GRAY: No, because I think we have those carved out separately as a post -- TAVASSOLI: Post and board sign. GRAY: Post and board, yeah. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Well, there are other signs, though, that are wire. I've seen them for the high school kids that might be on a team. You know, might be a garage sale you want to put up a wire sign, temporary. So I guess I'm not bothered by those. I think even a business that is putting a new roof on someone's home, I don't know that it's offensive. Probably not the best looking, but at least there are not four of them. There's only one or two. So I think it's -- you know, going back to what it was currently is fine. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Thank you, Chair. I would have to agree with Commissioner Sveum's comment. And I can think there's also other types of signs. Some people have signs kind of hanging on a little bar that has, like, a quote or a comment or something, and I don't know if that would be -- we would be restricting those, but a lot of people like to hang those things up as well. And to his comments around, you know, you're getting a new roof or a paint job or something, they like to advertise, with your neighbors, who's doing that work. I think that's okay. Again, on this one, I think the current ordinance with two per property, you know, it gives homeowners flexibility to have something out there, but I think four would definitely be making, you know, a back road look like Shea in a way, and then I don't know that everybody would want that, so -- TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 11 of 44 KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Yeah, I certainly think that the four-sign maximum during election season is appropriate, being that we had so many candidates running the last council election and maybe as many this time. But the other thing is that there's always signs that -- there's a freedom of speech concept, I think, that is an undertone there, whether it's, you know, please respectfully clean up after your dog or whatever it might be or, you know, just, yeah, support the Falcons, whatever -- I don't know. Whatever it might be. Or you know, anything, really. That's just kind of freedom of expression. I don't think two signs is too much, you know, the normal of the year other than election time, which it would be four. Four is reasonable. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray, you got something else? GRAY: Yeah. Just -- so I'll rephrase it a little bit. I guess what I was looking for is the way we have it written, you can put out your roofing by A, B, C, 365 days a year. It can stay out indefinitely now. I think that we should consider putting a -- whatever it needs to be, a 30, 45, 60-day limit on -- or tie it to an active permit or something for those types of services. Just put some limiter on it to where, you know, it's just not an artificial billboard opportunity because, I think, to Commissioner Corrigan's free speech, you know, that that's how we got into this the first time around was, you know, talking about, you know, unrestricted language, you know, and once you say you can have a sign, you can say anything you want whenever you want on that sign. So you know, I think some restrictor is maybe appropriate if we want to modify something. KOVACEVIC: So is this helpful to what you're looking for? I mean, we're not necessarily reaching a recommendation or a consensus, but we're giving you ideas. TAVASSOLI: Yeah, Chairman. KOVACEVIC: Is this helpful? Is this what you're looking for? TAVASSOLI: Yeah. I mean, you know, following this meeting, we're going to go back and review the verbatim transcript, and kind of -- staff will deliberate and figure out what's the best course of action moving forward. If there's a desire -- if we gather that there's a desire to come before you again with a text amendment proposal, we'll do that prior TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 12 of 44 to going before Town Council and propose a formal text amendment at one of our upcoming Commission meetings. But yeah, we'll go back and review what's said here at the dais and deliberate and see how to come before you next time regarding this topic. KOVACEVIC: Okay. I think that's it for yard signs. We can move on to railings. TAVASSOLI: Yes, railing signs, as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman. There's no provisions currently regarding railing signs. Now, I should mention that photo that you see here, that is not -- that's photoshopped, actually. That was actually -- I received that during an inquiry a few months ago from a business owner proposing to put up a railing sign, and consequently, this person was told that there were no provisions in the Zoning Ordinance that would allow that, but at the Council discussion, there was -- apparently, there was some comments received regarding a desire for rail signs by a number of businesses to increase visibility, and so it was, basically, suggested to include a provision to allow rail signs, either on a permanent or temporary basis. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Is there a way to look at this as advertising the business versus advertising Bud Light or certain products, or -- this is -- this could be a can of worms, I think. TAVASSOLI: Yeah, content neutrality. SVEUM: What’s that? TAVASSOLI: There’s that provision of content neutrality, so I don't know whether or not that -- you know, certainly for a permanent sign, yeah, like you said, it might raise some challenges and some questions, but -- KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: I think this is a great example, though, that you shared with us. What would be their option for advertising their business, given that they're kind of tucked inside the plaza there? TAVASSOLI: Their option -- well, they would have been allowed a banner sign for up to one year after opening. I'm trying to remember -- yeah, other than that, the A-frame signs COREY: So there are businesses like this that are going to have that challenge of -- I TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 13 of 44 mean, I know Social Thrift is kind of tucked away on the side, and unless they have some way of facing a sign towards customers, that's going to be a challenge. They could put a sticker on the door. They can't really put a sign above because that's, like, you know, residential upstairs there. So in that type of an example, that might be the best place for them to put a sign. I'm sure it's not going to be consistent with the look of the rest of the commercial property, but I think there are going to be instances where that's the only choice that they have. SVEUM: But on the parking lot side, on the front side, they've got signage above the stores. COREY: They do. That's true. SVEUM: That’s just more professional than this. COREY: So if I could just add to that, then -- thank you. So there's no sign above. Is that the area that the businesses in the front would typically have their sign? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey, so I believe this was sent before the business actually opened, long before the business actually opened. So again, this was just a illustrative example of what the (indiscernible). COREY: What I'm saying is you see above the doors, above the archway -- TAVASSOLI: Oh. COREY: -- that area that's right on top -- TAVASSOLI: Sure. COREY: -- is that designated for that business to put a sign? TAVASSOLI: Oh, yes, yes. Yes. COREY: So if that's the case, why don't they choose to put a sign there? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Indiscernible). COREY: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Very expensive. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: Just two thoughts. I think the path that Commissioner Corey just took there is exactly why the more we open this up, the more we try to be all things to all people. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 14 of 44 And I don't know Social Thrift or any of these other businesses necessarily, but they make a -- SCHLOSSBERG: (Indiscernible). GRAY: Well, that's true, right? But I'll also say the other side of that is they make a conscious decision at the rent rate that -- the market that prevails for that suite, and that's kind of what comes with it. At one point, we talked about, you know, trying to promote the businesses that are way back on -- I forget. What is it? Like, Technology Drive and then kind of the -- you know, you could put a sign, you know, half a mile away from your business, way back there, and I always thought, well, but you made a choice to put your business way back there. If you want street frontage, you're going to have to pay five bucks more a square foot for that. You know, Scott, you made a choice where you put your agency. I'm sure that that's, you know, at least in part, part of that decision. And so I just think -- I think we have to keep that lens to it. And then I just want to say, on these rail signs, I think we should drop it, and the reason is we're too close to encroaching on building signage and, you know, all of the -- you know, the square footage restrictions and the aesthetic restrictions that we have to kind of keep our building facades -- not decluttered but not cluttered. I'm not sure what the right words are there. And I just think this is -- you know, this is dangerously close to that. So I think that's kind of airing to Commissioner Sveum's thought as well. Thanks. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Other thoughts on this. I think that where they have a second-story building, and there is railing, we should really give them the option of doing that. And when I say that, I'm saying that you have an option of either a sign above the business or on the railing, maybe not both. And I think you could -- maybe not the content. You could make it business identification. That's not unreasonable. All you're saying is that -- you're identifying the business, number one. Number two, give them the option of a building mount attached TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 15 of 44 to the building or railing. And we can certainly, based on the square footage, limit the sign size based on the appropriate square footage. So I think those are, again, reasonable options. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: Building owners that have this much money invested in their property should be insisting on consistent signage because if you look, again, on the front of this building facing the parking lot, all of the -- all of the signs are above the doors. They're on that -- maybe you could point to that on the -- above the curvature. That's where the signs are on the front of that building. And they should be insisting on it be continuous around the corner as well. Otherwise, you have such a hodgepodge. I mean, aesthetically, it's not very pleasing. My opinion. But they should -- they should insist on consistent signage. And if they can't afford it, perhaps they can't afford that space, to Peter's point. KOVACEVIC: And I'd like to piggyback onto that. Most centers do have standardized sign criteria, and I'd be surprised if the shopping center owner would particularly allow or want to allow signage on the railings because it isn't aesthetically pleasing at all, and again, it's just a -- you know, a clutter and a -- I think it devalues the experience. Commissioner Corey? COREY: I understand, and I agree, to a certain extent, on your thoughts, Commissioners, and Chair. The exception might be an alcove where a business has a back-set, and you see this in a lot of properties, two-story properties in particular, here in Fountain Hills where you don't have a front-facing to parking, for example, but you're back in an alcove. So that would be the option, mounted on the -- above the, you know, entrance of the building or property or on the railing if you're in an alcove situation. I don't know how you can restrict that. I think maybe an either/or option, one or the other. I don't think -- again, I don't think it's unreasonable if you're back in an alcove, and we have them here in town, to offer that option of a rail sign. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Sveum? SVEUM: I think just -- it goes back to the building owner and how they want to maintain TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 16 of 44 their property. And the image that the Town has is beautification and vistas, and that should be maintained, but again, it's not something that maybe the building owner does enforce, even if it's in their architectural restrictions for their tenants, but -- I mean, I'm probably making a bigger deal out of this than should be, but I just think it's important to do these properly so that aesthetically, it is -- it provides the general theme of the community. KOVACEVIC: Okay? TAVASSOLI: Okay? KOVACEVIC: All right. Let's -- TAVASSOLI: All right. KOVACEVIC: -- move on. TAVASSOLI: Okay. On to the next slide. So any one of these -- any one of these sign types that I've discussed thus far. One of the councilmembers said that we might throw out the option of allowing folks to apply for a special use permit if they wanted an extra few square feet of A-frame signage or a number -- quantity of signage, so on, and that could be applied to any sign type, so -- KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? COREY: Thank you for bringing that up. Yes, and I wrote that down in three different places here as we were talking about this because I could see an SUP being particularly useful with A-frame, banner, and railing. And I think one of the things I like to consider is, like, we -- I think we should give the benefit -- give the businesses the benefit of the doubt. They want to have a nice-looking sign. They want to have the image that is going to show off their products or services the best way to their customer, so I think they're going to, you know, have a nice banner sign or do it the right way because they don't, also, want to be seen as that business that just has a tarp thrown over the railing with somebody that painted on their sign, you know? They want to show an image. So I think I would like to try to give them the benefit of the doubt and, I think, sticking to the provisions that we already have, but being flexible enough to offer them these SUPs TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 17 of 44 if they're in a unique situation and they need to make a change. I think if we just give it a blanket for everybody, it could be a little too chaotic and a little too -- I think we've all said cluttery at times today, but I think that there's definitely use cases for, like Mr. Corrigan said, you know, when the railing sign is maybe the best bet on that -- you know, in that location or if they're positioned in a unique spot where they need to host an additional A-frame to attract their customers. And hopefully, that's not something that would be too burdensome on you guys if they came to you and requested these kind of things. I don't know what the volume is like today on this, and would that be, you know, a problem. I can't imagine it would be. I don't think there's going to be too many people that are going to be jumping at the bit the next day after we approve this and getting changes, you know? TAVASSOLI: Right. Well, I don't see that to be the case for railing signs, but potentially A-frame signs. And this is just my personal take on it. But yeah, it could mean a few more items on Commission's agenda if -- KOVACEVIC: Okay. Commissioner Gray? TAVASSOLI: Sorry. GRAY: Yeah. So I don't mean to be the contrarian to Commissioner Corey tonight, but I feel like I am here. I don't think we should have special use permits for this level of signage in this town. This is -- this is the second tier of signage after you've dealt with monuments after you've dealt with building-level signs and all of those standards. That's where a special use permit is legitimately deployed as a tool here. We did it for Target, I think, with mixed -- probably a mixed bag of support on that one, but that's the most recent example. If we take our SUP process and start applying it to throw-away, temporary-level branding, wayfinding, announcement signage, we've lost the plot, in my opinion. And I do not think that this tool should be applied to this level of signage. It has to be a permanent installation for a special use permit to be in play. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: Yeah, I generally like special use permits. I think it would allow some TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 18 of 44 flexibility. But I agree with Commissioner Gray on this. This will open the Pandora's box to the clutter from which the commissioners have spoken. Once you get a special use permit for one, it's going to expand and more and more and more. We did it for this guy, got to do it for that. For this instance, I agree with Commissioner Gray. I'm not in favor of opening that Pandora's box. And plus, my -- just a question. Who would authorize an SUP? Would that be staff? Would that be Planning & Zoning or the Council? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, it would come before the Planning & Zoning Commission for a recommendation -- PROCTOR: Bring it back here. TAVASSOLI: -- before it goes to Town Council. PROCTOR: Yeah. No, I'm not in favor of opening this can of worms. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Do -- oh, Commissioner Corey? COREY: Sorry. Just hit it right before you talked. Have there been a lot of complaints on businesses or -- not complying with our current sign ordinance? And I say that because if we don't bother with the SUP -- and you're right. If they all come to us, we might not want to deal with that, but if we -- if we kind of just give them the benefit of the doubt and trust that they are doing the right thing for their business, which maybe they have been right now, have they been -- have there been complaints that they have too many signs or that they have a banner and they shouldn't or something? TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey, usually -- and I -- and I may be wrong, and ultimately, the Code Enforcement division might know better, but I don't think -- I don't think there is a pattern of businesses complaining of one another's signage. There are, of course, occasions where Code Enforcement officers would be patrolling, and they might see one too many signs, some -- you know, some egregious examples out there, perhaps, or one -- a sign placed in the right-of-way. But I don't know if John has any experience with hearing about complaints from other businesses, but yeah, in my five years here, I don't know of any complaints. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 19 of 44 COREY: Okay. So then, in closing, perhaps this came back to us because there were just a couple of businesses, maybe, that said, you know, we would like to make a change, and then here we are again. So if that's the case, then, you know, be more inclined with keeping it the way that it is and finding out who those businesses were that wanted a change and see if there's some way that we can help them. KOVACEVIC: So, I hope this is helpful. I don't know that we gave you any decisive direction. TAVASSOLI: Well, certainly, there's a lot of -- KOVACEVIC: But - TAVASSOLI: -- lot of opinions -- KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Yeah. TAVASSOLI: -- various opinions on it, so -- and again, you know, the next step may be to, you know, continue the discussion. I'm not sure, but we'll have to deliberate and see what's the best course of action. KOVACEVIC: Okay. TAVASSOLI: Maybe the next step would be -- would just be a text amendment, you know, to some extent, whether it's -- I don't think it'll be too comprehensive from what I'm gathering, but -- KOVACEVIC: Okay. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. All right. And then finally -- and this wasn't discussed at the Council meeting. Staff kind of found this as an opportunity to discuss a -- discuss an inquiry that we came across from a local business owner. And I'll go ahead and name names. In this case, it was Spooner Physical Therapy where the desire was -- and by the way, for those of you not familiar, this is just north of us off of La Montana, just north of Palisades. The desire was, from this business owner, to put two signs -- well, other than the sign facing the parking lot, which is allowed because, after all, this is street frontage, the other desire was to put two signs on either side of the business here so that it would be visible for traffic going both directions on La Montana. As the current Zoning Ordinance reads, two wall signs are allowed, but they would have TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 20 of 44 to be -- unless they're corner buildings, in which case -- in this case, it's not, two signs would have -- the two signs would have to face the street frontages. So in this case, there are two street frontages. And it would also allow for one freestanding sign along the street frontage and one projecting sign. Now, we thought it might be a good idea to offer some options. We, staff. You know, perhaps to allow, in this case, some signs -- some additional wall signs in lieu of freestanding signs or projection signs. So just -- and this example might be too case- specific because, I think, the way the streets are configured here, it's kind of an anomaly here in town, but just throwing that out there. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Schlossberg? SCHLOSSBERG: Yeah. Well, I -- personal opinion on wall signs, I am vehemently against -- I think they are very unattractive. There's a few on the Avenue of the Fountains that, I think, degradate the entire Avenue of the Fountains, and I think -- as you're looking up the Avenue. So the wall signs, as far as I'm concerned, I am -- I'm not for those. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, if I may ask for clarification? Are you referring to the -- like, when I'm referring to wall signs, I mean on the building wall. Is that -- okay. Got you. Got it. Okay. Thanks. KOVACEVIC: Any other -- I think I missed Commissioner Sveum and Commissioner Proctor on the last -- they had further comment. PROCTOR: Go ahead. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? SVEUM: Oh, my question wasn't on these specific signs, but -- KOVACEVIC: Can you speak into the mic, though, please? SVEUM: Oh, I'm sorry. I wanted to ask about -- some of my real estate friends are interested in open house signage, and the -- and I realize there's some -- obviously, some public right-of-way that needs to be not part of -- or that they're off limits, so to speak, right, where they're removed? But I think that it -- sometimes it's not real clear on where they can place TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 21 of 44 them and staying within the guidelines. And it seems -- I'm not sure. I mean, they're up for maybe three or four hours on one day a week. It doesn't seem to be an exorbitant amount of time. But has there been any discussion about that with maybe -- I'm not saying loosely in the guidelines, but looking at these things and realistically figuring out what might be a better way to do this. I mean, Scottsdale obviously allows them along Shea as soon as you -- you know, for open houses. They're small tent signs, obviously. Something that might be a little bit more friendly and being able to place them, again, for very temporary purposes, that it does help the citizens that are trying to sell their home. TAVASSOLI: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Sveum, you're talking particularly about open house signs (indiscernible)? SVEUM: Exactly. The small tent signs that are put -- TAVASSOLI: Yeah. SVEUM: -- on medians or on the corner. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Well, yeah, I'm not exactly sure what the provisions are for that. I think there's some allowance to have them at, like -- SVEUM: That - TAVASSOLI: -- off-site at street corners, but -- SVEUM: Yeah. TAVASSOLI: But yeah, we can review that. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I think it's somewhere between five and seven is what we bumped that number up to, so you can -- you can -- you can have a pretty significant number of way-finding signs to an open house for that -- for that temporary duration. That was a big -- I think, probably just before you came on the Commission, actually, it was a big deliberation point. Commissioner Dempster was still here for that. COREY: That’s how long we've been doing this. GRAY: Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 22 of 44 GRAY: How many times we've done it. COREY: Right. SVEUM: Well, it was 2023, right? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. COREY: Since COVID stopped, we've been doing this. SVEUM: Geez. I think it's -- and they're just obviously at certain areas that -- is there a specific area along Shea that signs are not allowed at all? TAVASSOLI: Yeah, I believe there's no signs on the -- WESLEY: Chair, Commissioners, in terms of Shea Boulevard, we allow A-frame signs in the commercial areas along -- within the right-of-way, but we don't allow any yard signs anywhere along Shea. SVEUM: Okay. This would be, for instance, at Balera, the condo, and the entry there where I know a specific instance where a couple of the real estate open house signs were removed, and they were placed very close to the Balera identification sign. So I assume that the agents didn't know exactly where the property line was. WESLEY: Property line was. Probably. SVEUM: And it's hard for people that have -- might have some interest in looking at them to be able to find the property if there's no directional signs. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: Yeah, just a couple comments on the wall signs. I believe the current ordinance to wall signs allowed, one freestanding, one projecting, is more than enough. I agree with Commissioner Schlossberg. We don't need to be tacking up more wall signs. On a separate but related -- just on the matter of process, it appears to me, as the new guy, that there is very little appetite from the Commission to tinker with this existing ordinance. Would it be advantageous for us to give a clear signal to the pass to Council that we recommend no changes and make a motion to do that? Or just buck it back to you, and you bring it back to us, and we can continue the ping-pong match. I'm just looking at a matter of expedience. Put this thing to rest, and you can communicate that TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 23 of 44 to Council. Just a matter of process. I'm not sure how we do it here. TAVASSOLI: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I think that all those options, I think, should be made available, yeah. PROCTOR: Well, Mr. Chair, if there's no objection, I'll make a motion that we recommend that the -- that there be no changes to the current sign ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Well, before we do that, do we have a -- we have a speaker card, Paula? WOODWARD: We do, Chair. We have a one-speaker card. Lori Troller. TROLLER: So, I was looking -- trying to find it on my phone. Railings are a safety thing, right? And there's got to be OSHA standards. And I wouldn't think you're allowed to hang anything off a safety thing. That's probably OSHA-related. I will share an experience that always brings tears to my eyes. When my guys were little, we were in a situation like this, and my son, who was two, three at the time, stumbled. And in that situation, he was on the other side of the rail. He thought he had a good stop to put his hand up. His hand went between the rails. He thought he was going to stop, and he didn't, and then his face met the rail. So before things -- like, I don't know how well that's a fixture or anything like that. I'm just saying it's a safety issue. I'm sure OSHA's got some things about this. I just -- don't lose sight of the OSHA stuff on railings. That's my only comment. Thanks. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. That'll close comments. So you wanted to make a motion to -- PROCTOR: I'll make the motion that we recommend that no changes be made to the existing sign ordinance. KOVACEVIC: Okay. I'm looking for a second. COREY: Could we -- yeah. Oh, we - second. I wrote no change, no change, no change as we were going through this. However, I do want to make sure that if businesses have a legitimate concern or challenge with the current ordinance and they need to -- and we need to find a way to make something tweak or work for them, I don't want to just close the door on them. I want to let them come in and talk with us about their situation and see if there's something that we can do. And I don't know how we want to word that in the -- TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 24 of 44 KOVACEVIC: Okay. WESLEY: Chair, if you don't mind, Commissioners, weren't anticipating this direction this evening, and so we're maybe at a little bit of a loss. Certainly, wasn't an advertised public hearing. The report says we weren't anticipating any motions tonight. There could be some that were thinking, okay, this is the first kind of opportunity to talk about it, but they expected to come at a future meeting. So we might not really have given everybody a full chance, kind of Vice Chair's comment, to really speak or give their input. So my suggestion is go ahead and let us continue to work it from our end, see what other inputs we might have, and schedule it for one more meeting that is really advertised as a time that action will be taken, and we can go from there, I think, maybe a little bit better. Appreciate, Commissioner, your desire to eliminate work that we maybe don't need to do or whatever, but I think, procedurally, that maybe is going to be a better way. And we'll talk again at the end of the meeting whether that's going to be a July or an August meeting. Oh, my time's up. COREY: Time’s up. TAVASSOLI: Sit down, John. KOVACEVIC: I was trying to stop it, but it wouldn't stop. PROCTOR: Mr. Chair, if I may, I will withdraw that motion given Mr. Wesley's comment. KOVACEVIC: We had a motion, and then we had a second. Can we do that? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Indiscernible). KOVACEVIC: Okay. He withdrew it. COREY: I withdraw my second to that. KOVACEVIC: Okay. TAVASSOLI: Okay? Well, that concludes my presentation. I'm not sure if there's any additional discussion. No? Okay. All right. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Agenda item 5, Review and Provide Comments on initial draft revisions to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17, Wireless Communications, Towers, and Antennas. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 25 of 44 Director Wesley? WESLEY: Commissioners, I'm back. Had a busy month. So appreciate the discussion we've had at the last couple of meetings with regard to the wireless communication ordinance, Chapter 17 of the Zoning Ordinance. It's just the start, however. I have taken the comments received, went back and relistened to the meetings and tried to pull out from those the changes that I understood the Commissioners were looking for, both based on your previous discussion and what came from Mr. Campanelli's draft ordinance. I don't know that I got them all. Maybe I got some I shouldn't have gotten. But I've put them in an ordinance for some discussion this evening and feedback. This is, again, early in the process. The idea is that this evening, we'll breeze through it, hopefully, fairly quickly, and you can say yeah, yeah, yeah, or no, hearing this, this, or we thought we -- you know, this is a little bit differently than what I had. We'll take those notes. Then the idea is we're going to set this part aside for now, and then starting next month, we'll go to the small cell and the right-of-way piece and begin that discussion and see what changes, if any, are looked at there, and then we'll come back after we know that piece and see how they're working together if they should be combined or not, and then how we continue to refine from there. So this is far from being a finished piece, but it's the first attempt to get feedback on how I did and hearing what you had to say before. So that is -- again, I just got the ordinance as we sent it to you to go through, and again, hopefully, fairly quickly. We'll stop as much as we need to, and you can let me know if you're seeing things here as you've reviewed it that I might have missed or not gotten quite correct. Chair, anything else before I get started on where we're at? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. Who is going to review the ordinance once we come up with a recommendation? WESLEY: Chair, once we have a final ordinance, obviously, a Town attorney will be charged with reviewing it. They do all ordinances. If it's anybody beyond that, that'll be up to the Town Council to bring any outside services on to provide review beyond that. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 26 of 44 KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: On that topic, Chair Kovacevic, I -- maybe we should, as a commission, once we've done all the work -- thank you, John, for what you've done to date. Once we've done all the work on Chapter 17 and Chapter 16 and we're closer to kind of a target date, I'd like to make a suggestion that we recommend -- send a recommendation, rather, to Town Council that they consider rehiring an attorney who specializes in cellular and broadband communication. Whether it's a Campanelli or a McCulloch, whoever that attorney might be, bring them in so that we're certain that what we have as a completed document for an ordinance really falls within the legal standards of what we should be looking at. So just a thought on that because you brought it up, and I think it's an important point, and I think maybe we should make that suggestion -- not recommendation, maybe, but suggestion to Town Council that they bring that attorney back in. That's it. KOVACEVIC: All right. Thank you. WESLEY: Okay? KOVACEVIC: Yeah. WESLEY: So again, as we go through here, I mentioned in a memo to you all the changes are through the strike-through, which were done with the red, but to help understand, maybe, where the different changes came from, if they're highlighted in the yellow, as these are, these were changes that came based on Commission discussion and direction. And so we talked about these before, just a little bit stronger words here in some of these introductory statements. And if you need me to stop anyplace, just let me know. Otherwise, going through here, all this stays the same. Anything that's here that has a blue highlight, just something I noticed as I was going that I thought a little change was needed for some consistency here and some language, so just a couple things in blue that were just from me. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Yeah, Chair. I just have a question, John, if you would. My copy is a little TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 27 of 44 hard to read. It appears that everything is deleted on my end from the document that I have. So wireless facility on number 4 remains; is that correct? WESLEY: Yes. Yes. CORRIGAN: Okay. WESLEY: I substituted the word cell tower for wireless facility. CORRIGAN: Yeah, I just have -- on my copy, it's difficult reading it. WESLEY: Okay. CORRIGAN: Maybe it's easier, you know, on the computer, but here, it's completely blacked out, so -- WESLEY: Okay. And then, we get down to the definition section. So, Mr. Campanelli had a lot more definitions than what we have in our current ordinance, so again, I just pulled all those over. And I'll comment here, a few places in his wording, I would make changes that I could see were pretty obvious, such as adding in here Chapter 17 or -- again, there'll be a few things that I didn't necessarily track or point out at this point, but I felt free to make some of those little changes. Otherwise, I did, as much as possible, just bring in exactly his language. I pointed out in the staff report that we need to come back and look at some things, such as we currently have a definition of antenna. His had a different definition of antenna. So I put them both in here for now until we look at it and decide maybe there's a third definition that we really want. But we'll also use this as a point -- a time to point out that in Mr. Campanelli's ordinance, his was really focused on personal wireless service, that portion of the total wireless communication type of activities that can go in, whereas our Chapter 17 has been and still is that broader use. And so there'll be some places where you may want to come back -- for instance, if we use this definition of antenna, we may want to change personal wireless services to something broader. Again, I didn't make any of those changes now. It'll be something we can discuss in the future. But I just wanted to point those out as we go forward and continue reviewing the ordinance and looking at the pieces. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 28 of 44 This definition of camouflage, this was something that's in the current ordinance, but I recognized, when we went back through it this time, that it's a definition stuck down in a regulation, and definitions ought to be in definitions, so I'm proposing that we bring it up here. Again, a couple other places in here where there's some repeats. For instance, FAA is in both places. A height. We have two definitions of a height. So again, we'll have to look at those. And down here, tower, I believe, is the last one where we had a definition, and the other one has a definition, so we're looking, at some point, to decide which one is more appropriate. Any comments, questions on any of the definitions? Anything missing there? Then we get into -- KOVACEVIC: Let's hold on. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: We’ve got some comments. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Proctor? PROCTOR: I'm -- good work on this. I did read it at home. It's good for insomnia. But excellent work. I did catch a phrase -- COREY: That wasn't a compliment. PROCTOR: That was a compliment. I did catch a phrase -- a sports phrase, shot clock. Is that appropriate? Is that a -- generally put that in ordinances, a shot clock, or just -- WESLEY: Yes. PROCTOR: Is it -- WESLEY: In this case, it is, Commissioner. It is used in the industry, and you'll see it further down in the ordinance where we talk about the time frames -- PROCTOR: Okay. WESLEY: -- that we have to operate under. PROCTOR: Okay. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 29 of 44 CORRIGAN: You answered my question. KOVACEVIC: Okay. WESLEY: All right. We get into 17.03, which are the basic requirements associated with making an application. So here, one of the things that the Commissioners talked about last time is wanting to get the equipment underground, in a vault, and so I looked at ways to do that. And we'll see several places in here where I've made that attempt to say that that's the standard, but if, for whatever reason, the Council then doesn't approve it that way, here are standards associated with it being above grade. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: John, I'd echo what the other commissioners had said. I think this is -- I think this is pretty well tailored. I love the enhancements around effective prohibition that are further up several pages here. The question I have is just, you know, over time, ability to maintain this. There's a lot of specific federal and state code references in this thing. Are we going to be able to keep up with that, or do we need to find a simpler way to tie back so that it stands the test of time a little better? Otherwise, I'm afraid we're going to be in this thing regularly. WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner, that's one of the things in the back of my mind as we go forward looking at the code and how specific it does get. And I can't remember, with some of these things and how clearly, they're written, that it's this version or the latest, so then we don't have to come back and change it. That would be some of the type of language that we would look for that would help keep us from having to amend our code to stay consistent. So going on down, lighting. Again, there is the comment from the Commissioners about making sure it was dark sky compliant, so that was added. Then, back to the underground, trying to cover that piece. KOVACEVIC: John? WESLEY: Yes? KOVACEVIC: Yeah, we -- GRAY: Just there on 11 -- I think this was the section. I just would like to be a little TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 30 of 44 stronger there in requiring baffling, and I think this is a spot where -- I know we don't want to get into noise meters for reactive complaints, but I think -- up front, I think demonstrating a design meets a certain dB at a certain distance is probably appropriate for that section rather than being a little open-ended. WESLEY: Okay. We can look at that. Then added in the requirement for the parking. What I heard from the Commission last time was 120 percent instead of 100 percent setback. This phrase gets moved a little bit later in the code about the separation distance. And again, what I heard you were looking for as the standard is you've got to be 500 feet away from residential. With Council approval, you can even go down to 300, but never less than 300, that you got to have your justification for why it's going to be anything less than 500 and sell the Council on that. Then on these separation distances, what I gathered from the discussion last time was, yes, you may want to increase them, but you wanted to wait until after we had the small cell discussion, so I left these alone for now. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Commissioner Gray? GRAY: I just -- 100 percent, I think that we need to put a big asterisk on this table so that we don't inadvertently put ourselves into a small cell scenario. WESLEY: Okay. Little bit more about the underground vault and how I work that in here. And the application type. So, the main change down here is that previously, we were allowing some new towers to be approved administratively if it met certain criteria, but based on the Commission discussion, it sounded like you want all new towers to go through a review process, so that's removed, and so they're all covered down here under Public Review. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: John, going back to -- I guess it's page 22, the Section 17.04, Application Types. WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: Can you explain to me -- it says administrative. Now, maybe you can explain the process a little more in detail. When an applicant comes in and makes a request, is TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 31 of 44 that always kind of an administrative application without review by P&Z and Council, or is that just the first step? WESLEY: So Chair, Commissioner Corrigan, the applicant would look at what -- at the ordinance and what the criteria are, and they should be able, from this, to determine whether it would be an administrative review or a public review. But regardless, it would come into us, and we would look at it based on the criteria, and if they got it wrong, then we would correct it. But if it is something that meets the criteria here for administrative review, basically it's a minor modification to an existing tower, then we would handle that as staff. It wouldn't come to the Commission or Council. CORRIGAN: Yeah, the reason for my question is there's so much to this, you know. And gosh, I think this is 55 pages long, and I'm just wondering if something might possibly get by that should be maybe in more public review by either Planning & Zoning and/or Council. WESLEY: Chair Commissioner, certainly, mistakes can happen. I can't say that they never would. But we have pretty clear criteria to use to make that determination. CORRIGAN: Okay. But as it's written right now, it's pretty much administrative only. WESLEY: For modifications to existing towers. Any new tower is automatically -- CORRIGAN: Yeah. WESLEY: -- going to go through a review process -- CORRIGAN: Okay. WESLEY: -- and any changes that exceed these limits would come through P&Z and Council. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. WESLEY: So then, again, we get down here. So then that actual submittal, review, and processing, this is a section -- I kind of wonder if it shouldn't be broken out and down to maybe a couple of sections. It's gotten pretty lengthy and detailed. But we'll -- we can see that as we go forward. And so again, in terms of the requirements that come in with an application, added to those things in Mr. Campanelli's ordinance that the Commission pointed out would be a benefit. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 32 of 44 You know, there are -- there are some things that I wonder about in here as I read it, if they really belong in an ordinance or if they belong in a supporting document, but they're in here as they came from him, and so we got them in here now. And also, this reference here to the 66-page report that's in Appendix 1, we never got that appendix originally that I'm aware of, and trying to do some looking to see if I can find a 66-page report. I find reports, but none of them at 66 pages yet. So that's something we'll have to keep following up on. KOVACEVIC: All right. We have a question from Commissioner Corrigan. CORRIGAN: John, I noticed in -- on page 27, about midway through, it says the Town is additionally aware that the -- in August 2020 and so on, driven by concern of propagation maps created by the FCC and so on and so forth. What they're looking for is a -- kind of a drive test review, and there's been a lot of discussion, both in public comments and, I think, past P&Z meetings and in Council, about a possible other substitute for that; that is, a dropped call log as opposed to -- I would call it a vendor or provider review in the referenced procedure there where they're talking about, you know, they're self-monitored. And those are my words. But I'm thinking I'm hearing a -- I have heard a lot of discussion about a dropped call log rather than the monitoring by what I call drive-by, lack of a better word. That's it. WESLEY: Yes, Chair and Commissioner Corrigan, understand that. Top of page 30 is the dropped call log option, too, that we can use. Any other comments on any of these items? So here again, this whole section on shot clocks and tolling, about how long we have to review an application. This is also originally from Campanelli, so it would have just been included originally. GRAY: I just thought I saw -- I didn't read it the first time through. Okay. It's struck. I was looking at the shot clock. Administrative applications which do not involve new towers. Okay. WESLEY: Let’s see. What are -- what else do we got here? So we get down to the review, and again, here's where we added a lot from Mr. Campanelli on the review TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 33 of 44 criteria that would -- to be used by staff, P&Z, and the Town Council. Maybe I'll use this as an opportunity to mention this again, too, as we come back to this. There are these shot clocks and time frames and something we'll have to look closely at if we're going through staff, P&Z, and Council. I think we can get it done in the time frames, but it's going to be a little bit of a challenge sometimes because I also believe they need to have their building permit within the time frame that's listed. So again, that might be a challenge. When Mr. Campanelli wrote it, he seemed to write it going straight to Council and not coming through P&Z. KOVACEVIC: Are there -- are there state requirements for the time frames? WESLEY: No. They're federal. KOVACEVIC: Federal requirements for the time frames? WESLEY: I believe so. KOVACEVIC: But we're within those? WESLEY: Yes. Yeah, that's what -- that's what we're using. KOVACEVIC: That's what you're using? WESLEY: Yes. KOVACEVIC: But it'll be a challenge to meet the federal -- WESLEY: I’m just a little bit concerned, just the process -- KOVACEVIC: Yeah. WESLEY: -- of advertising and coming through this many bodies. Just might make it challenging. KOVACEVIC: Special meetings. WESLEY: Maybe. KOVACEVIC: Yeah. WESLEY: Yeah. And if everything meets the typical, it'll be fine. It's -- but again, the whole shot clock thing gives us some opportunities to extend the shot clock so we can work with all that. Anyway, so now we're in the section on different determinations used to make the decisions, and so the factual determination is just based on the actual application zoning TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 34 of 44 requirements. KOVACEVIC: We have -- Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: The - on page 38, John, toward the bottom, I'm assuming that -- it's the second to the last paragraph. And I'm assuming that's a Campanelli statement -- WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: -- about scintilla of evidence? WESLEY: Um-hum. CORRIGAN: Okay. WESLEY: Yeah. CORRIGAN: That wasn't -- I mean, those -- everything in red is from Campanelli? WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: Okay. Thank you. WESLEY: So again, going through based on our zoning requirements and their compliance with those and then based on TCA requirements. Maybe, again, another question that we'd want to ask to see where the Commission is. Mr. Campanelli's ordinance was pretty strong on sending written notice, First Class mail, to applicants. That's not something we do for any other type of application. If we think there's a need to do that here, there's some wording changes. I left all that out based on our current procedures. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: Is there a -- and I guess this is what we don't know, I'm assuming. I don't know what the legal ramifications are for written versus electronic communication. And I know when warrants and things like that are done by the sheriff's department or, in the future, by a constable or, you know, whatever it might be, a lot of those, the court requires written documents, and they have to be hand-served, especially where there's an appearance for a call, and you have to be -- you know, you're demanded by the court to appear, that kind of thing. And I don't know -- I don't know if any of us know what -- the legal ramifications of sending electronic versus written. I don't know whether we should do both, just -- but TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 35 of 44 maybe, again, not to beat a dead horse, but bringing the Campanelli -- or some attorney back in at some point and saying, hey, this is what we think we have, please review it and see if we've missed something along the way. Those are my thoughts. KOVACEVIC: Thank you. WESLEY: Okay. Any other -- KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corey? WESLEY: Yeah. COREY: I was just going to ask, what was the -- what's the alternate way of communicating it? If they're not sending it via snail mail, what's the typical process? WESLEY: It’s all through emails. COREY: It’s all through emails. Okay. WESLEY: And, yeah, through documentation on their case file. COREY: And they're recommending that we also do mail, typical post mail? WESLEY: So as this ordinance came from Mr. Campanelli, it was all based on basically paper copies and using regular mail. There's -- I guess there wasn't a knowledge of our electronic system that we use. COREY: Okay. It seems a little archaic to me to do it that way. I'd say stick with email, if we can. Just my comments. WESLEY: There’s a piece cut out here because as we added the new stuff in, it was duplication, and we ended up using a larger section elsewhere. Added in an environmental impacts piece. And then we get down to the final pieces here on maintenance. Added in the annual testing that the Commission discussed. And then, again, some other pieces based on the Commission discussion. That gets us to the -- oh, so no. Okay. And then retention of consultants was another one from Mr. Campanelli that we hadn't included the first time, and it was added here on the end. KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Corrigan? CORRIGAN: John, on page 49, second paragraph, annual testing. WESLEY: Yes. CORRIGAN: Does it say in here somewhere that that's at the -- at the cost of the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 36 of 44 provider, or -- WESLEY: Yeah, that's the intent of the language. The owner or operator shall provide. CORRIGAN: At his own -- or at their own -- at their own cost, or -- WESLEY: I mean, that wording, I guess, could be strengthened a little bit to make sure that's clear, but that's the way that I read it. CORRIGAN: Yeah, I -- because I just don't -- I'm looking for clarification, but I don't see it here where, I mean, the provider -- service provider should probably -- they should bear the cost of that annual testing. I don't -- anyway -- KOVACEVIC: Commissioner Gray? GRAY: So to Commissioner Corrigan's point, they all do it, but they all do it in-house, and I think what you might want to consider is requiring that to be independent third party provided -- well, independent third party. The second you say that independent third party is contracted by the provider, however, you've lost the value of the independent third party. So I think -- I think the max value -- I think it's a very important paragraph in here, and I think that the max value of that to the Town is that that report is done independently and it's done accurately, and I think if there's a cost to be incurred for that, and there will be, but it'll be nominal, I think we should be okay as a municipality absorbing that. Otherwise, it's just a rubber stamp report. WESLEY: Chair, Commissioner Gray, I understood, but I will also remind you that we do have this other random testing that the Town can request at any time through a third party, so if we had any reason to suspect or be concerned that their annual report was not fully complete, we can do this random report, test. GRAY: But I would say, even with that one, the second that's contracted by the provider -- WESLEY: So, the Town may retain -- GRAY: Town may retain. Okay. Thank you. WESLEY: Let’s see. I guess maybe I'll pause here real quick. I don't remember where I pulled this specific language from. I just kept, you know, dollar amounts and such that TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 37 of 44 were in wherever I pulled it from. We may have other amounts that we'd want to -- want to use or expand upon. KOVACEVIC: Yeah, I have -- I can -- I was looking at Ithaca's insurance requirements. They require an umbrella policy of not less than 5,000,000. They require not just general liability but pollution liability insurance with the same GL limits and deductible not to exceed 25,000; and they require the town officers and employees to be included as additional insureds; and they require the insurance carrier provide 30 days advance written notice of cancellation. WESLEY: Okay. I'm sure we can go look at that just along that line. Okay. So -- and that gets us back to attention to consultants, and I think that is the last piece. So again, my attempt was going back and listening to what I was hearing the Commission was interested in, and, hopefully, I captured those things. Appreciate the comments that were made and questions. If there's anything that you feel like I missed or didn't get quite right, let me know now, or you could follow up in an email, and we can keep track of that for when we come back to it. KOVACEVIC: Anybody? I have a list. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: On page 3 on the Campanelli ordinance, there was a paragraph that stated, to achieve the objectives stated herein, the Town seeks to employ the, quote, "general authority," unquote, preserved -- that seemed to me like that was there for legal purposes, and we don't have it in ours in this one. But it was on -- it was on page 3 of the Campanelli - WESLEY: Right. KOVACEVIC: -- document. WESLEY: Right. KOVACEVIC: And I think we should find room for it. WESLEY: That would probably go -- okay. Got it. Yeah. Very good. Here. KOVACEVIC: We touched last time on 17.16, historical sites, and we don't have any historical sites, but we're talking about, I guess, the fountain becoming a historical site. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 38 of 44 Do we need to preemptively include that? WESLEY: Chair, we sure could, but what I thought I heard with the meeting last week was the decision that, no, we didn't need to. That's why -- KOVACEVIC: Oh. WESLEY: -- I didn't include any of it, but if I was wrong, I'd be glad to go back and edit it. KOVACEVIC: And does anybody -- I mean, we have the language in the -- if we're going to have an historical site, we might as well put it in, I'm thinking. Does anybody else? CORRIGAN: I would agree with that, Chair. KOVACEVIC: To the contrary? CORRIGAN: Just in agreement with that. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Campanelli, Section 17.18, eleventh-hour submissions. The -- I don't think you protected yourself there against the -- WESLEY: Where’s that? KOVACEVIC: -- eleventh-hour submissions. WESLEY: That was an oversight. KOVACEVIC: Okay. WESLEY: That’s not (indiscernible). KOVACEVIC: Yeah, you want to put that in, I think. 17.19, prohibition against illegally excessive emissions in RF radiation testing. That language wasn't there. I think it's partially covered elsewhere. But I think you should revisit -- WESLEY: Okay. Sure. KOVACEVIC: -- and get that language in there. In our -- in your rewrite, 17.05(a)(10), we require an estimate for the cost of removing the facility, but we don't have, in 17.06 (e) or (f), where we're requiring a bond to pay for the cost of the removal. I didn't see that anywhere in there. WESLEY: Yeah. KOVACEVIC: Okay? Just a housekeeping thing. Where there's a definition, if it appears in the body of the document, isn't it supposed to be capitalized? So like, notice of TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 39 of 44 incompleteness as a defined term, I think it should be capitalized within the document. And you know, there's a number of things like that where the -- where a defined term is not capitalized. So just to clean that up was my comment. New developments over -- of a certain size, X acres, I'm guessing that probably belongs in a subdivision ordinance, but how do we get it there when we know, in the course of rewriting this, that we want a new development to have a tower -- I mean, a 50-acre, 100-acre development to have a tower location? I think that's -- WESLEY: Yes. Chair -- KOVACEVIC: That’s my comment. WESLEY: Right. Yes, we'll need to keep track of that one at some point as we're nearing the end of this. I think it is most appropriate in the subdivision ordinance, so that could maybe be in the Zoning Ordinance, that we would look at where that would go and include that as part of the amendments we'd take forward to Council. KOVACEVIC: Okay. And I'll ask the Commissioners, do you want to require balloon tests -- balloon tests where they, for a week, fly a balloon at the height of the tower so that people have an idea what -- how high this thing's going to be? SVEUM: Chair, I'd like to see it only because I think the visual impact of that height via a balloon would have a more pressing or affirming visual imprint. If it was a balloon that you would know everywhere where that's visible, what have you, it's a good way to do it, so I'd approve that. KOVACEVIC: So, we can -- I think we can include the balloon test language in Campanelli. And last thing, we require an inventory of existing sites in 17.05(a)(3). Campanelli had a concept of an alternative site analysis. I don't think they're exactly the same thing, and I -- so I think that we may want to have an alternative site analysis, too. WESLEY: Okay. KOVACEVIC: And that's my comments. WESLEY: Okay. Thank you. KOVACEVIC: So, we're not looking for a motion or anything tonight? TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 40 of 44 WESLEY: No. No. Just that input, and we'll take it from there as far as what we come back with. KOVACEVIC: Okay. Oh, do we have any speaker cards? WOODWARD: We do, Chair. We have one speaker card. Lori Troller. TROLLER: Thank you. Lori Troller, resident. I'm just going to keep adding like Dan was. Can I have some extra time to address the shot clock question? Yeah, there -- that is shot clocks. For you sports fans, this is not a shock -- it's not that kind of shot clock. What the shot clocks do is define when the application is submitted to the Town, a timer starts, and there are several timers, and they call each grouping of every timer a shot clock. So there's, like, four major shot clocks. So we receive an application. We got to get it back to them in the first shot clock. Second shot clock is once they're approved, then the designs have to be worked on or whatever. There's all -- there's, like, four classifications of work that needs to happen, and they all have to happen so that the tower goes up in 180 days, done. And it doesn't allow the telecom to drag their feet. It doesn't allow the Town to drag their feet. So it just -- when an application goes in, the tower's up in 180 days, and that's what those shot clocks define. That's the definition of shot clocks for anybody else. I have a whole bunch of changes. I know John was speaking about definitions. I actually had 53 additional terms I would add to this, and they're all used in the document. Noise. I just want to point out on the noise thing, some of these towers can require generators, so if the power goes out -- I mean, that's really not an issue here in Fountain Hills, but just don't lose sight of the fact that some of these can have generators going. So you live next to one of these things, and these generators power up, there's your noise. So it's a -- it's a noise factor folks aren't thinking -- folks are thinking, you know, the towers are running, they're quiet. Just think of, you know, in those strange situations where there might be additional information. Okay. I would include the verbiage for historical site. It never hurts to put it in there if we don't have it yet. And that is coming. So they are talking about the fountain and TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 41 of 44 making that a historical site, so I highly suggest you include that. All you have to say is that historical sites are considered. That's not much of a line. So additions to -- like, I always speak about Copec and Ithaca. These are some of the things I would add. And I'll highlight the ones that Dan's already mentioned. I would add an entire section that is monitoring and evaluation. There's an enormous section on that. Copec. It's written beautifully. Cut and paste, lift it in. Insurance. Copec has excellent insurance. For those of you that don't understand, the game that telecoms play is -- so let's say it's AT&T. AT&T comes in, and they want to build a tower. No problem. We're going to hold them to have insurance. The only insurance that can be bought in the industry is that by the Telcom company itself. The Town can't buy it. Residents can't buy it. So the only people who can actually buy it is the telecoms. So what they do is they create LLCs. So they'll say, here's an LL -- AT&T LLC 1 through 1,000. LLC 1, 2, 3, 4. So then when we ask for insurance, we get insurance through company AT&T 59 LLC. Then, that LLC, all it does is carry insurance. That's its only purpose. There's no employees, nothing like that. Then, when we make a claim, they bankrupt that LLC, close it out, and they never pay the claim. They will never pay a claim. It is a shell game. They play it all the time. And we can't get insurance as a town, and residents, you can't get a rider on your house because you have a tower in your yard, so that damage is all yours. They're scot-free. So when I say Copec has got excellent -- and Dan mentioned this -- excellent verbiage, check out Copec's because you can't -- they'll -- they get around that. That's not going to happen with -- if you take Copec's. The shot clocks. Copec also gets really particular when they identify the persons on the application. There is another shell game that they play with that, the verbiage and Copec on that is really good. They just do a shell game. I'm not going to get into that anymore. The visual impact, the verbiage for that is in Copec. There's also verbiage that -- oh, and I don't know which one this is from, Copec or Ithaca. I can get back to you on that. But there is FAA legal and technical compliance. They should -- we should require they TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 42 of 44 provide that written out; otherwise, they don't have to. If we don't require it, then they don't have to prove that they are FAA compliant, so let's get that one in there. And like I said, I'm not sure which that one is. The NEPA review, both Ithaca and Copec have verbiage in there. That's not at all in Mr. Campanelli's. Copec has excellent and extensive stuff on the NEPA review, what would cause that. I've got, like, eight more. Okay. Allowable minimum coverage. That's also in -- that's referring to insurance, so you can tack that on there. Evidence of need. So AT&T comes in, says, I got to put up five towers. And Peter had mentioned this in a previous meeting. Copec has excellent verbiage on how to prove you have a need. Again, the need is can everyone make a 911 call. You can't lose sight of that in both these. Gaming is not a need. And you're going to address that on the 16, not the 17. The definition of a significant gap. I talked about this before. That's in Ithaca. They have great verbiage for that. Cost of the removal of the tower. Dan mentioned that. That's also Ithaca. They have got great verbiage. Monitoring evaluation of -- and compliance, Copec. So now, these things are up. What do they do once they're up? What are we holding them to? What are the standards? Copec is great on that. Then there's, in the design standards, the separation. We're going to talk about that real shortly. That's the other item you have. Copec is good on that. And they also have great information on fall zones. And then I just wanted to explain, real quickly, there's -- in this -- the way Campanelli has this divided out, he has it divided out into four types. There's either co-location or new towers. So they're either -- they either qualify as a small wireless facility, or they don't. So it's a co-located small wireless facility or a new small wireless facility, or it's a co-location of something that doesn't meet small wireless facility and something that's new that doesn't follow small wireless facility. The other thing I wanted to mention is John included a map. And I think this is -- the next discussion point is about setbacks. And he had the map. It was the second attachment on the agenda item. This only shows the red dots for cell towers. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 43 of 44 Unfortunately, my eyeglasses, when I drive through Fountain Hills, don't filter out all the other towers, and I can only see cell towers. I wish it did. You got to understand the strength we have, both state and federally, is aesthetics and public safety. You -- we have a very wide allowance there. So when we're talking about when you drive through Fountain Hills -- and these are only the cell towers. I understand he's making the point, but I still think it's really important that when these maps come out, that they indicate where all the antennas are because that's public safety. Even the SRP. The SRP towers, that's a whole nother subject. Those are very concerning for different reasons I won't get into. But whenever we're talking about, you know, setbacks and stuff like that, I would have liked to have seen this exact map with these -- the cell towers in red but still the markings where everything else is because overall, aesthetically, that's what we're looking at. Thank you for the extra time. Oh, my gosh, thank you. KOVACEVIC: Thank you, Lori. Okay. Anything else for cell towers? All right. We'll wrap that up and move on to Commission Discussion/Request for Research to Staff. Summary of Commission Requests from Development Services Director. WESLEY: My summary is you didn't have any. Okay. KOVACEVIC: Do you have a report for us? WESLEY: So looking ahead again to the summer, the next couple of months. So next month -- you continued your discussion of the downtown overlay to next month, so we'll have that, and I'll also prepare a stark discussion with regard to the small cell wireless in the right-of-way, so we can kick that off. And I don't believe -- we didn't have any other public applications, correct? Right. And at this point, I don't believe we have anything for July as far as a public application, and so we could -- and again, we don't have to decide this for sure until next month -- look at taking July off and then plan on coming back in August picking up with the wireless ordinance, discussing signs again. And I think we may have Mr. Ejim's application back for you at that point up on Pueblo and Fountain Hills Boulevard. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MAY 12, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Page 44 of 44 Special use permits for some residential. Yeah. So again, we don't have to decide for sure tonight, but that's kind of the plan that I'm looking at a little bit to you as the Commission. Do you want to have that break, or do you want to, once we get started with small cells, keep right on going through July? And we can decide that for sure next month. But any questions for me on what we're looking at for a schedule the next couple of months? GRAY: I’m - KOVACEVIC: Commissioner - GRAY: I’m out in July, so -- KOVACEVIC: Okay. GRAY: -- I'm in full support of that. KOVACEVIC: Okay. WESLEY: We’re done. KOVACEVIC: That’s it? Motion to adjourn. GRAY: Second. Aye. KOVACEVIC: All in favor, say aye. ALL: Aye. KOVACEVIC: Opposed? Unanimous. We're adjourned.