HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ.2021.0809.Minutes I
4.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 9, 2021
1. CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
Chairman Gray called the meeting of August 9, 2021, to order at 6:15 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chairman Peter Gray; Vice Chairman Scott Schlossberg; Commissioner
Jessie Brunswig; Commissioner Clayton Corey; Commissioner Susan
Dempster; Commissioner Dan Kovacevic; Commissioner Roderick Watts,
Jr.
Staff Development Services Director John Wesley; Town Attorney Aaron
Present: Arnson; Senior Planner Farhad Tavassoli; Executive Assistant Paula
Woodward
3. CALL TO THE PUBLIC
4. CONSIDERATION OF approving the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning
Commission July 12, 2021.
MOVED BY Commissioner Clayton Corey, SECONDED BY Commissioner Dan
Kovacevic to approve the regular meeting minutes of the Planning and Zoning
Commission July 12, 2021.
Vote: 7 - 0- Unanimously
5. CONSIDERATION OF a requested Special Use Permit to allow residential uses on a 0.58
acre property in the Community Commercial (C-C) zoning district at 17134 E. Kingstree
Blvd., generally located at the northwest corner of Saguaro Blvd. and Kingstree Blvd.
Mr. Tavassoli gave a PowerPoint presentation that addressed:
Purpose
Location
Request
Review Standards
Staff Recommendation
Mr. Tavassoli said that this was a Special Use Permit request for 17134 E Kingstree
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 2 of 12
Blvd. The proposed project is a small mixed-use development for three buildings. Two
buildings would be eight live/work units for each building. The third building would
consist of ground floor offices and the upper floor would be four residential units. The
SUP request is to allow for a portion of the building to become residential units on the
second stories. The ground floor would be commercial units consisting of offices,
break room, conference room, retail and café. There would be a central courtyard
with landscaping and outdoor seating. Mr.Tavassoli said that according to the General
Plan 2020 this area is considered a Mixed Neighborhood with smaller lots and a mix of
non-residential area. The area was zoned and platted prior to incorporation of the
Town for commercial uses which is still the Town's desire to keep this a successful
commercial center. There is a common parking area with 174(8 ADA compliant)
parking stalls. The twelve residential units would require 23 parking spaces. Should the
Special Use Permit receive approval, staff would continue to work with the applicant
on details related to the site. Staff supports a recommendation for approval of the
Special Use Permit.
Chairman Gray opened the public hearing.
In response to Commissioner Dempster, Mr. Tavassoli explained that the existing
entrances would remain in the same location. The term "over parked" is used to
describe that there is ample parking. There is no shortage of parking.The location of
trash cans has not been decided at this time.
Commissioner Kovacevic stated that the parking is shared at this site. He expressed
concern that there are five unbuilt parcels that will have to share parking. He asked if
staff had calculated the parking availability.
Mr. Tavassoli replied that there is a site plan review component to this project. This is
processed administratively. During the review it would be on the applicant to
demonstrate that there is adequate parking. Staff may require a parking study or other
evidence that there would not be a parking issue.
Commissioner Watts commented that there is a lot of traffic on Saguaro and Kingstree
Blvd. He asked if a traffic study was available. Mr. Watts expressed concern regarding
the building height and closeness to the street curb.
Mr.Tavassoli said that a traffic study was not provided. When a property is subject to
rezone, especially if it involves more intense use, a traffic study or information may be
required. At this point staff would not be asking for a traffic study since the zoning is
established. Since this is a commercial zoning district, there is a zero setback.
In response to Commissioner Kovacevic, Mr.Tavassoli replied that the site plan is
approved administratively. It does not require the Planning and Zoning Commission's
approval.
Commissioner Kovacevic said he would like to see a parking plan submittal as if the five
commercial lots were built out and the vacant restaurant was operating.
Chairman Gray commented that the parking could become even more compounded if
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 3 of 12
the second story residences are decoupled. That situation would require even more
parking. Most of the units are two bedroom, assuming a two people minimum to each
unit also increases the need for more parking. He said although by right the building
has a zero setback, there are redenies involved surrounded by a residential area.
Commissioner Dempster pointed out that the proposed property is surrounded by
buildings that are second stories or as tall as a second story.
Mr. Tavassoli pointed out that the twenty-five feet is the maximum height allowed.
At Chairman Gray's request, Mr.Tavassoli read from the opposition letter( attached
hereto and made a part hereof) submitted by the Saguaro Ridge Villas Association: "As
to the proposed residential use for live-work situations, including the luxury
condominiums, what happens if some or none of the units are owner occupied? Does
the ordinance limit rentals (daily or weekly) in this zone?"
Mr. Tavassoli said that stipulations can be placed on this Special Use Permit that the
live/work units remain integrated.
Chairman Gray said that he does not suggest that situation in this case, but suggested
to review parking ratio and quantity of spaces more closely.
Commissioner Brunswig said that there seems to be a lot of SUP's submitted recently.
She asked if there is follow up after the SUP is approved.
Mr.Tavassoli replied that this SUP is coupled with a site plan review request. They are
two separate submittals.The site plan is reviewed administratively where the details
include architecture, parking and any other pertinent information.
The applicant Dan Kaufmann addressed the Commission. He said he has been in
Fountain Hills for twenty-eight years and has developed successful projects in Town
over the years. In response to the Commissioners questions and comments he said
that there are 2-3 dumpsters that would be used by all the tenants. The zoning for
this plat allows two-story buildings. There is a ten-foot landscape easement, it is not
considered a zero lot line. He gave a brief description of the project. The office area
will consist of 18 unit suites, conference room and a break room for coffee copies, etc.
and outdoor seating and a courtyard. There will be four two-bedroom luxury condos
above the offices with patio's front and rear. This will offer the condo tenant an office
below. He said this is more of a boutique setting. Offices could also be on the second
floor. Some examples of lower level businesses would be an art studio, nail salon,
bagel and pizza shops. He said that this will attract small entrepreneur businesses to
Fountain Hills. This project will create a vibrant livable town. The town needs to adapt
to a changing market. Covid has changed the way business is conducted. Live/work
offices cut down on commute time and promote productivity. He concluded by saying
that he appreciates any support the Commissioner can provide.
Commissioner Corey said he appreciates that there is a ten -foot landscape space. He
asked if Mr. Kaufmann had ever developed a similar project.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9, 2021 4 of 12
Mr. Kaufmann said he developed a project in Mesa which consisted of one hundred
fifty-three apartments and a similar one in Colorado.
In response to Vice Chairman Schlossberg, Mr. Kaufmann said he came up with the
design and elevations for this project. He said that he has received inquiries already
because people want new fresh spaces. He said that he has not decided to sell these
units or rent the units.
Ed Stizza, Fountain Hills resident, addressed the Commission. He said that the building
density for this project is too much for that property size, especially for a corner lot.
Tom Frank, Fountain Hills resident, said that he appreciates the project but is
concerned about the traffic and the amount of square footage crammed into the
property size.
Tim Hoogstead, Fountain Hills resident, said he moved to Fountain Hills from Kirkland
to Park Place. The majority of the parking places in the entire town are under parked.
The concept of office retail first floor and family living above has been around since the
turn of the century— it has proven successful.
Dan Damonski, owner of L'Ediifice, commercial building adjacent to the proposed
project, said that prior to the pandemic, he had eleven out of thirteen units rented or
occupied. He said that he loves Fountain Hills and would have loved to have had
something like this available to him when he was looking for a home. He said this
definitely needs to be developed and there is a problem if this lot remained vacant for
fifty years. He does not see any issues with parking, even when L'Ediifice is at eighty
percent occupancy, there is ample parking including the parking located at the
building's backside. He said he supports this project moving forward.
Lorraine Vlachos, Fountain Hills resident, said that she has been in the town for
twenty-two years. She referenced the vacant commercial buildings throughout town
and said that if we cannot keep the existing buildings full why would more need to be
built. She said that it should be known exactly what is going in the units before the
project is approved.
Ross Souzzi, Fountain Hills resident and business owner, said that this is a good
project. Dan Kaufmann is a man of integrity who will complete the project. He is not
going to leave it unfinished.
Aaron Brown, Fountain Hills resident, said that he cannot think of a similar area in
Fountain Hills where the residential parking is just in an open lot with no covering or a
structure.
Chairman Gray closed the public hearing.
In response to Chairman Gray, Mr. Kaufmann said that the price point will be reflected
in the market value. He said he agrees it needs to be affordable. Each unit will have
its own water meter. He said he would review the option of covered parking. He said
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 5 of 12
these units will be of a smaller scale in comparison to the vacant store fronts in the
Bashas' shopping center.
Commissioner Kovacevic expressed concern regarding the parking allocation once the
area is built out. He said he was not sure he could support the project without more
information.
Mr. Kaufmann said that he could work with staff on the parking.
Commissioner Watts said that he too has concerns regarding parking, traffic and the
architecture of the building. He said the building does not fit well with the
neighborhood.
Chairman Gray commented that it seems like this project wants to be something that
wants to be much bigger on a postage stamp and doesn't serve the Town's general
plan.
Commissioner Kovacevic asked if a motion could be made to include parking
calculations, with build out.
Chairman Gray said that the motion could be made to include required parking
calculations before the project is presented to council or to make a motion to continue
at a future date.
Commissioner Dempster said, who knows when the rest of the vacancies would be
filled. Parking cannot be figured out unless the businesses are known. The parking lot
is pretty much empty.The restaurant has been vacant for at least eight years. It would
be hard to calculate without having all the required information.
Mr.Tavassoli gave an example of possible uses and their parking requirements in the
CC zoning district. He said that a medical clinic would require one parking space per
fifty square feet. A residential use such as a two-bedroom condo would require two
spaces and for each unit a quarter for guest parking. In that respect for residential is
less impactful.
In response to Chairman Gray, Mr. Tavassoli said that in relation to the General Plan
this is a"neighborhood character area" that clearly states the town would encourage a
mixture of uses given the correct zoning.
MOVED BY Commissioner Susan Dempster, SECONDED BY Commissioner Jessie
Brunswig to forward a recommendation to the Town Council to approve a Special Use
Permit to allow residential uses in the Commercial zoning district at 17134 East Kingstree
Blvd.
Vote: 3 -4
NAY: Chairman Peter Gray
Vice Chairman Scott Schlossberg
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9, 2021 6 of 12
Commissioner Dan Kovacevic
Commissioner Roderick Watts, Jr.
6. REVIEW AND DISCUSS provisions of the Town's Sign Regulations (Chapter 6 of the
Zoning Ordinance) including but not limited to: A-frame, Post and Board, Yard, and
Residential Directional signs.
Mr. Wesley told the Commission the new sign ordinance was adopted by council in
May 2021. Staff worked to update the sign code to remove content to be in line with
the U. S. Supreme Court decision Reed V. Town of Gilbert.
One of the changes that council made to the code was to prohibit signs in the
right-of-way. This caused concern from the community. Council then asked Town staff
not to enforce the change until further research and discussion took place among staff,
the community, focus groups and feedback from the Commission. Tonight, is for
discussion purposes. The goal is to return in September for any specific changes and
then on to the Town Council. Mr. Wesley told the commission he met with staff
internally and with the business focus group and the realtor focus group.
Mr. Wesley said that it seems Council's main concern in regards to allowing signs in the
right-of-way are the aesthetics such as the number of signs and clutter it creates and
the issues that go with that. It can be distracting to drivers. Mr. Wesley said that
other comments were made regarding social media options and mapping options to
replace signs. He said determining the right-of-way has been a challenge. He said it is a
challenge not only for the public but also for staff. He reminded the Commission that
sign content cannot be regulated.
Mr. Wesley reviewed the possible sign code modifications options. He asked the
Commission for feedback regarding each sign type. The proposed changes to location
and A-frames are as follows:
Section 6.07 B. Sign Location, Prohibited Locations
2. Prohibited Locations
a. Within, on, or projecting over the right-of-way, including within center medians,
unless specifically provided for in this Sign Ordinance, or as allowed through
Town approval of a Special Event Permit.
Section 6.08 A. Sign Types
1. A-Frame and T-Frame Signs
d. Location. Shall not be used as an off-premisesite sign, except
resitierrtit-I-efireetierrerEtigrr or as provided below:
On property held in common by members of a property owner's association or
ii. on property owned by the business owner's landlord, but not within any designated
parking or loading area.
mir Along a public street subject to:As a Residential Directional Sign as provided in
Section 6.08 D.
iii. Within the Town Center Pedestrian area, may be located in the Town
right-of-way adjacent to the property provided:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 7 of 12
1. Shall not be located on the paved portion of any public street or sidewalk;
2. Shall not be located in any median;
3. Shall not be located within a designated parking or loading area; and,
4. Shall be at least three (3) feet from any curb
Section 6.08 A. Sign Types
1. A-Frame and T-Frame Signs
d. Location. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except as provided below:
On property held in common by members of a property owner's association or
on property owned by the business owner's landlord, but not within any designated
parking or loading area.
ii. As a Residential Directional Sign as provided in Section 6.08 D.
iii. Within the Town Center Pedestrian area, may be located in the Town
right-of-way adjacent to the property provided:
1. Shall not be located on the paved portion of any public street or sidewalk;
2. Shall not be located in any median;
3. Shall not be located within a designated parking or loading area; and,
4. Shall be at least three (3) feet from any curb
Section 6.02 Definitions
Town Center Pedestrian Area: The Town Center Pedestrian Area is designed as shown
in the figure attached.
Chairman Gray commented that last month the Commission discussed that the noise
ordinance could not be enforced with decibel meters, how in the world can sign
placement be enforced. He said he believes that this is lip service to address an
underlying issue of the perception or reality-the signs create clutter and the signs are
not taken down at night.
Mr. Wesley replied that sign code enforcement is a challenge.There are two code
compliance officers and one works on the weekends. They will continue to enforce
the sign ordinance the best possible way. The town manager has agreed to put more
resources toward enforcement if the Council desires. It is difficult for the average
citizen as well as enforcement to know where the curb is located in relation to the
right-of-way, it isn't always clear.
Chainman Gray suggested that the focus could be on the sign uniformity instead of
placement. He referenced the chalkboard type sign displaced on Saguaro Blvd.
Commissioner Dempster said that most of the public doesn't even know there is a sign
ordinance and how to comply with it. She asked if there was factual data stating that
there are a number of complaints and safety issues.
Mr. Wesley said that there are no reports or data available but it is considered a
distraction if signs are placed in the right- of-way.
Commissioner Corey said that he agrees with Chairman Gray. He said that this has
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 8 of 12
become such a complicated process. It is very difficult for businesses to comply. One
focus should be that the signs cannot remain displayed overnight. Another
controllable issue would be to address safety.
Vice Chairman Schlossberg commented that it is evident by public comments on social
media that the sign issue has been blown way out of proportion. It affects businesses
livelihood. It should be a simple and easy to follow ordinance.
Commissioner Dempster pointed out that it would be a huge negative impact to
businesses by not allowing directional signs in the ROW of major arterial streets such
as Fountain Hills Blvd., Palisades Blvd. and Shea Blvd.
Mr. Wesley said he wanted to complete the discussion regarding A-frame signs.
Chairman Gray suggested a fee for A-frame signs issued by the town.The signs should
be uniform similar to the chalk board A-frame sign recently displayed on Saguaro
Blvd.
The Commission concluded that they really do not have an issue with A-frame signs
allowed in the right-a-way.
Mr. Wesley went on to discuss the proposed change to Post and Board Signs as follows:
Section 6.08 A. Sign Types
12. Post and Board Signs
d. Location: Shall not be located within the public right-of way.
i. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except on property held in common by
members of a property owner's association or on property owned by the
business owner's landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading
area.
ii. Shall not be located within the public right-of way. However, in commercial and
industrial zoning districts where buildings are built to the property line or in any
zoning district where topography limits visibility behind the right-of-way, an
encroachment permit may be requested to allow sign placement within the
right-of-way provided all portions of the sign structure and sign face are at least
three (3)feet from the edge of pavement and at least three (3) feet from any
public sidewalk.
12. Post and Board Signs
d. Location:
i. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except on property held in common by
members of a property owner's association or on property owned by the
business owner's landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading
area.
ii. Shall not be located within the public right-of way. However, in commercial and
industrial zoning districts where buildings are built to the property line or in any
zoning district where topography limits visibility behind the right-of-way, an
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 9 of 12
encroachment permit may be requested to allow sign placement within the
right-of-way provided all portions of the sign structure and sign face are at least
three (3) feet from the edge of pavement and at least three (3) feet from any
public sidewalk.
Chairman Gray said that since the post and board sign act as a mailbox and should
have a little more leeway. He said he liked the idea of the encroachment permit to
ensure that underground utilities are protected and not harmed.
In response to Commissioner Watts, Mr. Wesley replied that the right-of-way and
easement are not synonymous. The right-of-way remains under the Town's control.
The easement is owned by the property owner but used by the utilities. The Town is
launching an electronic software permitting system in October 2021.
In response to Chairman Gray, Commissioner Dempster said that most of the post and
board signs are placed on private property. She said that determining where the
right-of-way is located is not an easy process.
Staff pointed out that in the past A-frame sign permits were issued by the Town for five
dollars. The sign holder would receive a sticker to place on their sign to show
compliance. It was a challenge to maintain with the limited staff on hand.
Mr. Wesley reviewed the proposed yard sign changes:
Section 6.08 A. Sign Types
17. Yard Signs
d. Location:
i. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except on property held in common by
members of a property owner's association or on property owned by the
business owner's landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading
area.
ii. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way, except when used as a
Residential Directional Sign as provided in Section 6.08 D.
17. Yard Signs
d. Location:
i. Shall not be used as an off-site sign, except on property held in common by
members of a property owner's association or on property owned by the business
owner's landlord, but not within any designated parking or loading area.
ii. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way, except when used as a
Residential Directional Sign as provided in Section 6.08 D.
In response to Commissioner Corey, Mr. Wesley said that since the sign is not allowed
in the right-of-way they are allowed to remain displayed overnight.
Chairman Gray referenced the original recommendation that mirrored the code
regarding so many feet from the curb.
Mr. Wesley provided some options that he said could be mixed and matched:
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9, 2021 10 of 12
Option 1 (currently approved ordinance)
3. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way.
Option 2 (continues to not allow these signs in ROW on major arterials)
3. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way associated with Shea,
Palisades, Saguaro or Fountain Hills Boulevards and shall not be located within the
public right of way of any other street except between the hours of 7:00 am and 5:00
pm on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. When located in the right-of-way, shall be
placed at least three (3) feet from the curb or edge of pavement and at least three (3)
feet from any sidewalk.
Option 3 (Requires specific, larger setback from major arterials)
3. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way, except as follows.:
With the exception of Shea Boulevard, between the hours of 7:00 am to 5:00
pm on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays may be placed:
a. Within the right-of-way for Palisades, Saguaro and Fountain Hills Boulevards
at least ten (10) feet from the curb and three (3) feet from any sidewalk
b. For any other street, shall be placed at least three (3) feet from the curb or
edge of pavement and at least three (3) feet from any sidewalk.
Option 4 (allows such signs in any ROW, except Shea during the given time frame)
3. Shall not be located within the public right-of-way of Shea Boulevard at any
time, but are within the public right of way of any other street between the hours of
7:00 am and 5:00 pm on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. When located in the
right-of-way, shall be placed at least three(3) feet from the curb or edge of pavement
and at least three (3) feet from any sidewalk.
The Commission agreed that moving forward option four was the best choice. It was
suggested that the timeframe should read "sunup to sunset."
In response to Commissioner Watts Mr. Wesley said that as the code was reviewed
some details came up regarding special event signs. Special event sign approval would
be reviewed during the special event application process.
Commissioner Watts suggested that adding details regarding special event signs would
benefit the ordinance.
Chairman Gray said he would like to see signs not allowed within 200 feet of the major
intersections. He also referenced Sonoma, California using wayfinding signs for
businesses instead of mismatched individual signs.
Commissioner Brunswig shared a comment that was passed on to her by a business
owner. She told Commissioner Brunswig that everyone wants to draw people to town,
to shop and attend events. Signs are important part of making that happen.
No one from the public asked to speak.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9, 2021 11 of 12
7. COMMISSION DISCUSSION/REQUEST FOR RESEARCH to staff.
None
8. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS from Development Services Director.
None
9. REPORT from Development Services Director.
Mr. Wesley said there will be a meeting in September to discuss the sign ordinance
and one new text amendment. The Town will be launching the new on-line permitting
system October 1, 2021.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting of the Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission held
August 9, 2021, adjourned at 8:41 p.m.
PLANNI G AND ZONING COMMISSION
airman Peter
ATTESTED AND PREPARED BY:
-Pcivkai tivvit)/J
Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular
Meeting held by the Planning and Zoning Commission Fountain Hills in the Town Hall Council Chambers
on the August 9, 2021. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 19th day of August, 2021.
\-eati&A., tei 'VS
Paula Woodward, Executive Assistant
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of August 9,2021 12 of 12