Planning Commission Bifurcates Over Plat 106 Infill: Pragmatism vs. Master Planning in Disputed Corner Development

I'd like to call to order the regular meeting of the planning and zoning commission, Monday, August 11th, 2025. If we could all rise for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Okay. Uh, John, we have an a guest with us tonight. If you'd like to introduce her and uh Yes.

Uh, just briefly, I told her she's got about an hour of presentation she can make here when I'm done. Okay. Uh, we have an intern working with us this summer, Bella Garmin. She's a a local uh Fountain Hills uh native who's currently going to school at the University of Oregon. Go Ducks. And uh here during our summer break and uh had the opportunity to bring her in. She's helping us with several different uh projects while she's here.

She doesn't start back till September, so we've got her for a couple more weeks to work on some things for us, but we appreciate having her. Welcome, Bella. Okay, Paula, would you like to take the role please? Chairman Kovacic here. Vice Chair Corey here. Commissioner Sum Commissioner Slashberg here. Commissioner Gray here. Commissioner Corrian here. Commissioner Proctor here. Agenda item number three, the call to the public. Do we have any speaker cards? No.

Chairman, would you like to read the statement of participation? I think we just have that posted and everybody can read it on their own. Okay. Then let's move on to the regular agenda. consideration and possible action approving the regular meeting minutes of the planning and zoning commission June 9th, 2025. Do I have a motion? I'll move to approve. Second. Okay. All in favor? I opposed. 70. Agenda item 5B, public hearing, consideration, and possible action.

special use permit to allow 11 residential units on 11 non-ontiguous parcels in a commercial subdivision flat generally located north of El PBLO Boulevard between Fountain Hills Boulevard and Ivory Drive in the C-C community commercial zoning district. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. Hope you're all having a nice summer, staying cool. Um the the subject property for this site should be familiar uh to most of you.

I think we've only had one uh new commissioner since then. But um just to begin with some background, uh this the subject property here for this special use permit case for 11 residential units is um at the corner of El PBLO Boulevard and North Fountain Hills Boulevard. Um the entire site is zoned community commercial so neighborhood uh related commercial uses. Um it is uh it was platted in 1974 and um it's as you all very well know it's seen minimal development since then.

There were three recent uh SUP approvals. Um and some of it is uh is is cut out from the uh the aerial image here, but um there is a mixeduse uh residential commercial or office type of development at the corner of Ivory and El PBLO Boulevard that is uh currently under construction. And there were were also some town homes uh or town home like developments approved for um the area here just north of the common parking area.

Now, the applicant for this case, the um the subject for this SUP case originally came before you, as most of you all know, back in January and presented um a single family residential and multifamily use concept under two different special use permit cases because uh the character for each proposal was um pretty They were pretty unique in their own right.

And so, um, this, uh, today is being presented before you as one special use permit case, although we're retaining, uh, just for administrative purposes the two, uh, case numbers. Now, that uh, special use permit case back in in in January was unanimously denied. Um the applicant has uh requested to come back before you with a significantly new uh uh proposal. Um might even say uh radically new.

Um but uh the in order to do that before coming to you uh the the applicant went before the plan or the rather the town council to uh request that it be uh reverted back to the planning and zoning commission for consideration of a new and significantly modified proposal. You've seen this slide before. I've already talked about uh the uh slow pace of development for plat 106. I've also uh discussed the uh uh project currently under construction here by Mr. Gerszac.

Now, this new request is coming before you as a special use permit request to allow 11 uh new residential uh units on 11 non-ontiguous parcels. Although you could say there are three groups of three or four groups of contiguous parcels, but altogether it's uh spread out throughout plat uh 106. Uh so 11 non-ontiguous parcels in a commercial subdivision, plat 106, generally located at the corner that I just mentioned.

Now uh one thing I want to note here is you you may have found the plans that were included in your packets a little uh hard to read, especially after zooming in. I have uh opened up or bookmarked a PDF copy of the uh conceptual plan that the applicant is proposing in case you want to uh me to zoom in uh for any particular details. But uh as I mentioned uh here's the master uh master plan that the applicant has uh for his uh role in plat for plat 106. um 11 residential units altogether.

Uh nine of those units will retain the original idea of a cottage style type of residence, single family. Um they will uh be uh proposed for the parcels um here uh east of the alley. Uh, one unit is being proposed here to the uh, closer to El PBLO uh, followed by three units here and another three units uh, to the north and uh, as well as uh, two additional cottages west of the alley.

If you recall, this area here was the uh was proposed for the the the multif family uh residence uh in which in each of the parcels there would would uh what was proposed was two units on the first floor and one unit on the second floor.

Uh now two of the 11 units is uh will be designated for a new mixeduse component that the applicant has introduced uh in this latest proposal and that is on the far uh west side of the development where the applicant is proposing and again uh as I navigate here I'm talking about this area here where it's labeled mixeduse two separate parcels or excuse me, two separate twostory uh uh uh buildings attached where the applicant is proposing a a mixeduse concept where there would be uh commercial on the first floor.

Uh if you look here, uh the applicant is proposing commercial on the first floor and um immediately to the north, you'll see one of the cottages that it shares a wall. This is the only one that shares a wall with the mixeduse development here. And on the second floor uh will be the residential component. Uh each uh each half of this building uh the footprint is 1,250 square ft. So there'll be 1,250 square feet on the first floor.

Commercial commercial that would be consistent with the community commercial development things such or community commercial zone things such as uh offices, retail, eating establishments as albeit a rather small eating establishment, but it will be consistent with community commercial. And on the second floor, um there would be two residential components complete with kitchen bathroom facilities. the balance of it. As I said earlier, the applicant is proposing uh cottage style developments.

Uh some conceptual elevations representative of what they may look like um are provided here. They will feature a onecar garage. Uh and in front of that, the applicant is proposing a carport. So, it' be kind of a a tandem arrangement. And again, I can uh quickly switch over to the uh uh the PDF uh which features a more detailed view of the conceptual plan. Um this here uh is the uh uh I beg your pardon. Hold on just one second.

It says north elevation, but this is actually facing west towards uh Fountain Hills Boulevard and the even before that the common parking area. This is more or less what the um the mixeduse component of the development would look like.

The uh one thing I should note here uh in contrast to the previous proposal uh the applicant has provided some open space features or common areas if you will including a common area here immediately to or in the far northern part of the uh the scope of this project. There's a parcel here. It's approximately um 5,500 square feet and there will be three units here immediately to the uh over here to the west. Uh two of those units will be facing the alleyway.

Another will be facing the uh narrower alleyway to the north. But whereas in the previous proposal, the applicant had uh four uh at least four uh residential units side by side facing north, the applicant uh has included an open space common area here on the east side of this 5,500 ft lot. Uh down here in the uh middle portion, three units. And by the way, these cottages are are two stories.

the what he's proposing is two stories about 1,300 square feet, a little over uh also a dog park and uh trash enclosure uh for both uh refues and and and and recyclables and another cottage here by the uh the uh the pharmacy here. And in the previous proposal, the applicant did not include uh this parking feature here along the alleyway. That has since been added.

So, uh in in in reviewing this, um we we of course uh we refer to the general plan and uh identify what the character area is uh for this area in and around Plat 106. and it is within the neighborhood element of the uh the general plan which typically offers a broad range of of of housing types and um it's uh closer to higher typically closer to higher density areas.

Um uh as for uh well particularly for the more more high density types of developments but uh as you all well know the area around plat 106 is primarily single family residential. Um the charact as far as a character area this area can be uh characterized as a mixed neighborhood consisting of smaller lots with a mix of uh residential and non-residential units. And um the general plan encourages infill development in such areas to foster long-term viability.

So again, what criteria uh should the commission um refer to uh in reviewing a special use permit case of in this case a residential in a commercial area. uh it shouldn't be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, comfort and welfare welfare of persons and not detrimental or injurious um to uh improvements already in the area. The applicant uh started a citizen participation process about a year ago with the initial proposal.

Um since January, uh when we presented the original propos proposal before you, the applicant has met with the property owners association uh at least once uh at one of the following board meetings after the January commission meeting and has offered a new proposal and uh which included uh a a dialogue with some of the folks who were in opposition to the uh the project. Um it has been stated that the um the Plat 106 association is supportive uh of this project.

Um and uh we have not received any opposition since with exception to Mr. Gerszac uh who I mentioned earlier has developed um or has entitlements for those uh residential projects uh closer to ivory there. Citizen participation report has been provided and uh as I mentioned the letter of opposition that has also been provided and uh details some of the uh um uh talking points um by Mr. Gerszac. Um, so our sta staff recommendation is as follows.

Uh, we we believe the the use is consistent with the character type and believe it's a good infill opportunity. We also believe the modifications are a significant improvement to the previous proposal. Um, I don't want to um ignore, you know, some of the the challenges that still exist within plat 106.

Um but we believe the uh the applicant um you know maintaining the original thought of introducing residential um in within Plat 106 within a commercial area has um carefully reviewed some of the challenges with particularly with regard to accessibility and um you know issues such as maneuvering um and uh we believe it's a a good uh infill opportunity and therefore we're recommending uh approval based on this latest iteration.

Um, one thing I want to keep uh to to emphasize is that there are some details that will still need to be worked out should the commission and then ultimately the council approved this project and that will be uh addressed um at the site plan stage and uh John and I will be uh commit quite a bit of time in making sure those those uh those details are addressed and make sure that there's adequate uh accessibility and and and and clearance and so on.

So possible commission uh motions uh approve the SUP as requested uh by the applicant approve with some modifications or conditions. uh you may decide to deny the SUP request altogether or uh continue the case to a future PNZ meeting to allow minor modifications based on what the uh commission will discuss this evening and some of the feedback you might offer. With that, I'll conclude my presentation. Uh Mr. Wilson, the applicant is is is here as well to entertain any additional questions.

Thank you. Does anybody have questions for Far Hut or would you like to go right to the petitioner's presentation? And my my question is, John, uh for what what are the details that you and John will be looking at specifically besides access? Uh well, accessibility, making sure that the driveway widths, you know, are adequate. Um, we will be looking at the elevations a little bit more closely, make sure that there's architectural treatment.

Um, that would be aesthetically agreeable uh based on the design guidelines for chapter 19. And of course, uh, the applicant would need to make sure that they're agreeable to the plat committee. Um but uh also looking a little bit more closely at uh some of the uh amenities that were um being proposed with the common area. Make sure making sure that it has uh highest potential of being used and um as well as the the dog park that is being contemplated. Okay.

What about materials you normally provide? Well, normally we would be looking at materials and right paint colors um you know materials ephus um know whether or not be a veneer or commissioner Corgan. Thank you, chair. Uh for HUD, three uh concerns seem to be raised here from the staff and one of them I think you pointed out was the alleyway and the concerns about parking. That was I think that was number one in the analysis.

And then number two was the tandem garages appear to be too short considering that the required dimensions for a parking stall are 9 by19 and the garages appear to be shorter than that 38 ft total. And then I think the third concern that you raised as a staff um might uh might present some physical design constraints. And then I think you highlighted the fact that the garage door adjacent to the alleys um might be a concern. Right.

Let me um let me uh amend a little bit my description of the uh orientation of the uh garages and the carports. If I can manipulate this to my liking here. Um, so I've zoomed in here to part one of what you see on the master plan. This is the row of cottages over here by the uh um the dog park. The uh the at the north south alley is right here. And I've measured the dimensions here.

Um and if you uh take a look at the the the garage, just measuring between the garage door and the interior wall, it's almost 22 feet. And then uh what the applicant proposed here is more of a garage carport kind of combination. And altogether um this comes out to about uh well actually maybe even over 40 ft.

Um if you were to add the uh these two together and if you look at a typical typical uh parking stall they're each about uh well not about but their minimum required length is 20 ft and he has uh left um about three feet here um between what looks like here he's indicated a curb here it's about three feet and So, typically if if this were a garage, like a tandem garage in its entirety, not a not a garage carport combination, but a a tandem garage where the door were were situated here, right by the driveway, there would need to be a 6-foot clearance between the garage door and the driveway.

That's mainly to um address the visibility concerns. when one is backing up, they one should be able to look at the driveway and, you know, make sure there's no oncoming traffic. But in this case with a carport, um there is more visibility. You're not um obstructed by a wall to your right in this case backing out. So there is adequate visibility and and he's reduced it to uh at least conceptually here and this represented here three feet. Um now this driveway is labeled um 24 ft.

Typically uh a driveway um would need to be for two-way traffic would need to be 20 at least 26 ft. Now again that the the paragraph in there uh about the uh the um the waiver request um was referring to the the the clearance requirement for for a a um twocar garage tandem arrangement. And uh also um the zoning ordinance typically requires two covered parking spaces for um each uh for each home for each single family residential home.

Um in the beginning in in the infancy of this project, the applicant was only proposing one car garage, a onecar garage. And so a little bit of that paragraph is kind of residue left over from the original proposal. But um but yeah, there are some details based on what I just explained that need to be worked out with regards to the the width and um we expect to get that. Does that present an egress issue in that in that regard or is there just clearance visual clearance? Is that right? Right.

In in regard to the garage door and then the carport let's say this is the the garage with a garage door. Is it tandem? By tandem, do you mean that the carport then this is the par car in the garage? Yeah. And then it's a tandem situation with the car coming in in the carport behind that. Correct. So, does that present a fire or egress issue? Uh, I'm not sure if I can address that, but um that'd be something ideally for a building safety official or or one of the the the firefighters.

Um I don't believe there's anyone here, but um you know that's a that's a building code issue, fire code issue that uh we would need to address if if that comes up. But uh in my experience, I don't I don't think that would be a um an issue only because there are examples of tandem garages um not only throughout town here, but uh in other jurisdictions as well.

So, and then in regard to the other thing about the uh shared space, as I understand it, um from reading the letters and and the response from the community, um who actually owns that parcel that's designated, as you referred to, um 5,500 square ft. Um, is that the play area or is that just a Yeah, this area here. Um, I believe that is part of a common area. Um, let me go back to the aerial aial photograph here. Go back to my PowerPoint. All right. Yeah.

So th this area here is um is is common area. It's contiguous with the parking the parking lot right here. Okay. So then for HUD that's a shared space by everyone or just for this community. Oh. Um I believe the applicant had contemplated that being a shared space for the plat 106. Okay. Yeah. All right. Yeah. Thank you. Mhm. Um I have a couple questions. Are there is there a minimum garage side size by co in in the code? Yeah, the the the zoning code doesn't define a minimum garage size.

Um, but in other jurisdictions, uh, I believe I've seen 20 by 18, uh, at least in in in Goodyear. But, um, and that would be measured between the interior walls, but the zoning ordinance, our zoning ordinance doesn't address minimum garage size. Um, if memory serves me correct, we had Mr. Gerszac. Uh, we made we stipulated that he put in 20 foot driveways. Um, and and I don't I I think we it's only fair to do the same thing here. The the the the driveway should be 20 ft.

Um the mixed use is does petitioner have right to park in that west lot or is that is that part of plat 106? That is plat 106. That is a common parking area for plat 106. So yeah. So that yeah that parking lot where the cursor just was. Yeah. So okay. So, it's conceivable that somebody could park conveniently and use first floor space. Okay. Um, so it looked like there was first floor commercial, second floor residential. So, is that four units? Four units. Two of which were residential.

Well, the two I understand the two you there's two units to the east that are residential. Will there be residential units above the commercial? We're talking about this right here, the where my cursor is, right? Yeah. So that's there. Yeah. Two two units side by side. Um commercial on the first floor, residential on the second floor. So that's four units, isn't it? Well, yeah.

Maybe the uh Wilson can explain whether or not they're uh connected by a common stairway or or not, but um but the idea is kind of like a live a live work kind of um setup. Okay. Yeah. But I'll uh I'll defer that to to Wilson. Um, the drive part one drive. Is there an easement there or is that just common area? I know there's uh looks to be an electrical box somewhere in that area right here. So this here is not an easement.

This is a also a common um common commonly owned area where this driveway is being proposed. And is that electrical is that the electrical box? This is an existing electrical box right here. Correct. So that would be why you can't have your ingress and egress from the alley. You have to use the parking lot unless it's moved or unless you move the box. Yeah. It's an accessory to park chair. Yeah. Um that's I I think that's all I have for now. Commissioners, anything else for Farhead?

Uh, Commissioner Seo, do you, John, have any concerns about the other vacant land that it's adjacent to that the impact it's going to be on those parcels? And I mean, what's going to be the reaction of people living in those apartments and the parcel along um, El Po? because some commercial business wants to come in and build something that may not be as um as attractive. Are you eyeing this one? Yeah. This person here. Well, certainly need to certainly needs to be consistent.

Um I mean that's what we'd be looking for if there were to be any proposal coming in. We we need to make sure that there's not an adverse relationship between the two uses. Um, and because there, you know, it's a J because it's adjacent to a vacant parcel, there would need to be separation requirements with regards to, you know, fire rating and things like that.

But yeah, mainly from a youth standpoint, and this was the problem I had with it last time, right, when this came before us, right, is that it's just I think it's up to the applicant to accumulate property and create a development that is more cohesive. And I I understand that there's been changes made here, but I just that is that element is still missing. And I'm I'm just having a real problem getting beyond that.

that I I not sure it's going to be the most attractive or positive element to that neighborhood over time. Yeah. So, this is this is what the applicant is um envisioning for that mixeduse piece. That parcel you're talking about would be right here. So, I guess I'm also now concerned about having a dog park and who's going to maintain it? Is there an HOA? who's going to pay the fees to clean up that park as well as the other open space. They dedicating that to the town. I doubt it.

I I didn't see any of that in there. So, um you know, again, just loose ends on on in my mind that are I'm having a hard time um kind of grasping why we're recommending approval. Maybe the applicant can answer the questions about the HOA and or who's going to maintain the property, but I think it's legit. I mean, having a dog park right there uh right next to a unit may not be the most attractive thing as well. So, these are questions maybe he's going to have to answer. All right.

Can we hear from the applicant? Does he have a presentation? Um not if he has a presentation, but I'll like I said, I have his uh his site plan here. you would like. Let me know if you want me to master again. Thank you. My name is Wilson Egim with Design Group.

So, I'm the applicant for the development Um, as regards to your question about the commoner, I had since our last meeting, I had several meetings with everyone that came and listen to that concern and have also several meetings with the POA concerning these areas and we worked out something that fairly everyone is comfortable with the common area on the upper right. So that I can I have no uh it's controlled by the community. Okay. And I think that's this area right here.

Um we talked about acquiring it but it take 100% vote from the whole residence for them to allow it to go. So that is impossible. So they will maintain that but is open for the discretion. So what I did over there was uh create these three units over here in a way that they have open areas to interact and do things. And also if you notice on each individual unit I create a little 10 by 10 a 10 by 25 backyard. So that way they have a little play area.

Then the last time I came in January the alley was so narrow visibility was the issue. So what I've did what I did was took the extra lots gave it up so open up so they have 50 ft open area to resolve the visibility issue when somebody's going through that area. So now when we come on this side on the west side there are actually four lots.

I took two lots and reoriented it so that the businesses can face Fountain Hills because it be hard to have a business when no one even know you a business session. So so I could rear rearrange or rent this building so when you put up your sign people can see it. So the ground floor is commercial more like office, barber shop, you know, accounting office. Then above would be the uh units, you know, residential units. So that's two lots you're looking at there.

Then behind those are individual lots. Okay. So uh everything we've done so far was in collaboration to the community and individuals that came. We sat and they're happy with it. The reality is um we have other approval for John Zak for the um condo units and also for the town homes. There's no reason competing with them. So I'm creating a different product and it's interesting to me because uh when I found those lots I have two boys.

One is ICU nurse at Mayo Clinic right here and another one was also working with the O at um honors ship and they would drive well from surprise one and a half hour to come to work and falling asleep on the way. You know things are expensive for young people. So when I start looking and I found this I said well that' be a great place to bring in young couples. So my market target is young young couples.

So that way instead of driving and of course 5:00 you have the same problem from me of people trying to get here to work. But if there's something for them they can afford they could stay here in the community and work and it would solve a lot of problems. So that was what two three years ago I picked it up and began to find a way to work.

initial propose the initial pro um proposal was trying to bring in some elderly to make it a commercial and create some um market like barberh shop and therapy or crochet therapy for a business to survive there. It's a tough place for business to survive. Either you create the business or you have to find something that will enhance the community.

So when that idea didn't fly so I have to find again moving more to residential but it's something also that we bringing young families to the community and support the community and that is the market I'm reaching and without competing with what is already approved the last meeting I I was in that was complain that there's so much apartments and already going on but I'm not in that market I'm looking have some young families, college graduates, young married couples working here at the hospitals or doing business that can move in here and go to work without having to travel and I want to have to get to work.

So that is the inspiration. Now this is not a new concept in Las Vegas. I own a property just like that and I showed it to the staff during our meeting. So they they're small, they cozy, they're nice with a little backyard, you know, easy maintenance for a young person that is walking, wife is walking. So that is a lot of thought process and within the constraint we have, I did what I could, you know, to create what we see here, you know.

So every one of them I've met with them several times, listen to them and see, okay, how can we make it work? Commissioner Slobber. Yeah. Couple questions. So the last I think it was the last time might have been it was the second to the last time. But this was proposed to us I think it was in January as home for the aged as and now you're telling me that it's not home for the age, it's home for the young professional.

No, if you notice I have two proposal that's home for the age then have the same coues. So we have two S uh SP application. So what I did was the one for home for age that is where I to the mixed use but there's always been the other one. So yeah when I came in January I have two proposals.

So you're telling me the mixed juice is 55 plus and the rest of Yeah, that was that was the this 55 plus was what we're working towards and then my intention was if we have that approved was to bring in businesses that would support it. If you recall my presentation I said I will it will create some business because that area either you bring in the business you have the business have to have a market to survive. If there's no market, there's no way the business can survive.

So I'm either we create environment that bring in the the people that we support the business uh or we have to find something that could enhance the neighborhood. This will bring in the values support the neighborhood by bringing young young families. Okay. So that was why I took the SP out and I'm only focusing on one. So there is no more age restricted. This is all age restricted. No sir. And these are condos that you're selling as a onetime deal. They're not condos.

They are just single family units. According couriages, if you the individual lots, the individual lots. So, but John Kazak has condos that's already been approved and town homes that already been approved. Okay. So, what I'm bringing is a different product. Okay. So, people have varieties and have choice. Okay. But these are for sale. these things for sale and then there is going to be an HOA that's going to oversee these units. Well, we talk about that with the HOA.

What they told me is whatever I do I have to manage. Okay, I accept that. What it is I provided a dog park as a way to because there's no no there's none there. So, I'll maintain that. That's not a big issue for me. So the the trash enclosure that are presented so that we don't have to be, you know, dealing with what they have right now is more accessible for the residents and that way once they get it, okay, then we work out um the fee to pay for that. That's not a problem. Okay.

So, but each individual particularly takes care of their own lot because there's individual homes. The only thing that will be rental will be the the um mixes and that's only two units that will be above it. If somebody decided I want to buy the thing, then they own the whole thing outright. So, but I'm not surprised that we have some couples that say, "Hey, I want to live there and walk downstairs." You know, I'm a business owner and and and I love that, you know, have office downstairs.

And when I was in Washington State, that's what I did. My office was downstairs and I live upstairs. Commissioner Sam, I'm sorry. Are these for rent or are they for sale? The cottages? They're for sale, sir. Okay. So, you're going to sell four bedroomedroom two and a half bath cottages? Yes. To young couples or young? Yeah. Professionals? Professionals. So, you're you're assuming they've got a family. I assume that's because you got four bedrooms, right? That's well three bedroom with a den.

That's basically what it is. You know, three bedroom with a den. What's the price going to be? I don't know. The market forces will determine that because there's so much Yeah. What happened? I'm still going through the process. By the time I finish, there going to be market forces, but my whole intent is to get something affordable and the way we're going and I'll be able to achieve that. Commissioner Proctor, thank you.

Uh, first let me thank you for your interest in developing in Fountain Hills. Really appreciate your desire to develop here. Uh, and I'm particularly encouraged about you wanting to target younger folks to bring them into Fountain Hills. We need to lower our average age a bit here in Fountain Hills. So, thank you for that. Um, I do have I however have some concerns. Um, going off of uh Mr. Gerszach's descent here, um, I am a little concerned with the fragmentation of the development.

It seems that it's kind of placed all over with no consistency. And certainly the um although I haven't been over to that area lately um what appears to be some architectural inconsistencies with the existing kind of portfolio of architectural designs that your development is swaying from that a bit that there's no kind of within the same architectural family. Um that concerns me. your your term of cottage um raised an eyebrow with me as well.

Now cottage uh certainly means something different here in the United States than it does say in South Asia um or or Europe. Uh so the first thing I thought about a cottage was I I was thinking the these would be seasonal rentals that you'd be bringing in. Now, you can you can say they're for sale, but someone develop another person could could use it as a seasonal rental and we'll have transient people coming in and out of there. Uh, if that's if that's the design that that you're targeting.

Um, is this could you I I know you can't say thank you for that clarification. I didn't let me ask add one more thing before you answer. And um I I know you you can't pin a price down because the market market will dictate that and construction costs always seem to go up, but could you throw this into the broad rural work of affordable housing? Yes. The the let me answer the first one again. Thank you for clarification.

Uh that is the word courage that does not in any way reflect on my when I use that word.

I wasn't thinking about rental and thank you I'll change that so that will be saying the same thing so that is we are one word mean to different thing but they're not for rental they're not rent for rents now as far as the price the way I'm I'm managing the project I'm controlling it my whole target from the time I came general to provide a low and affordable housing that is what my goal is now the market when I mean market forces is there are market so much volatility in the market you know so every business exists to make profit but you cannot do something where you just lose out that was why I'm going to be honest with you the interest rate the material cost all of that comes in but when I mean affordable I'm looking at below what the market rate is so that way a young person or a couple or whoever wants it can get into it okay so that was what my vision is and that was what I've been pushing even when I did the when I tried the elderly home if you notice my plan again was to find something affordable that is a market I'm interested in and that is where I'm going you know so uh with respect to Mr.

John Gazerk the architecture is consistent. Material color is going to be concerned with the neighborhood. What where we differ is on product line. Okay. Uh these are not town homes. They're not condos. That's what he was doing. But when it comes to architecture and the style and all that will not be anything different. In fact, I discussed that with the staff.

We look at different design options and I said what do you think will more appealing and they help her to guide what I'm what the one we choose I come up with different schemes and this you know I say hey how this that and what do you think so they help us and together we'll come up with something will work and fit the neighborhood very well thank you sir commissioner Coran thank you chair uh Mr.

Wilson going back to Dick's reference to the John Gersick letter he mentioned some other things that I thought were interesting and that was the uh utility box number one in what I think what he referred to the common area that's one the second thing is um what is the distance between the church and your proposed structure what what's the would that be defined as a zero lot line what is the distance between those too. I couldn't see that on the okay on your uh your plan view. Okay. Thank you.

What you see here when when my initial proposal and initial meeting with the uh community the the the board they said for them to work or to see how we could work this out that I should work hard to purchase the lot 2A that I didn't own these two over here. Someone owned it. So I went into negotiation, you know, because if you could get that lot, then you we allow you to do what you can do here with this access with this commodator.

So I went in and we negotiated something and I was able to buy those lots. There two lots, but I use one now for the dog park, you know, so some committee can get something back. Then I only use one for the for the homes. So, but by so doing that allowed me to use the community area as access, okay, to get into those garages because parking was a problem. They don't have enough parking. And they said, "You have to provide your own parking.

So, if I'm going to provide those garage and and the carport, I have to have a way to get into that." So, that was why we end up using this space. But there's an existing utility box there. So what we could do is walk around it without having to move it or disrupt what is there already. So the way is designed the mutility bus stays but we have access to get into the garages. So those parking lot that they have right now is not over burden. Does that make sense?

Getting back to my question, what is the distance between the proposed structure and the church? Thank you. Now the distance I have 10 ft buffer. Okay. All them all of them are zero lot line. So I can get as close to the I can get uh I can share a common wall with the church based on the zoning. I can have a common wall with the church. A firewall. But what I did my buildings were 10 ft away from the church building. I'm sorry. So it's 10 ft. 10 ft. Okay.

And then on the not the plan view, but the elevation, I didn't see are there windows up against that wall that faces the church. I'm trying to visualize this now. Okay. Um I did not see that on the on the elevation view. So if I'm looking out and I'm a resident, I just bought this property. Sure. I'm looking out on the church. Are there windows that I look out of? What what do I see when I look out? are the number one are the windows and what am I seeing when I look out? Yeah. Okay.

On the on the ground floor, you will have the wall and you have that 10 ft play area. I'm a 10 by 25 ft. Again, I have the same thing right now in the house in Vegas and it's not a problem. But on the second floor, the window we have is for eress. No. In case of fire, without looking on the roof. Okay. So in case of fire, you can get out. So it does not encroach into any person privacy and that the u proposed height of your structure is 25 ft and the church is 25 ft.

No, the the the roof line the building height is 25 feet. Mhm. So the window on the second level then you're looking about um maybe about 14 ft off the ground, you know, to the bottom of the seal of the window. Okay. So you've got an egress access for a fire. Yes. And then you're up the distance between those two structures is 10 feet. So, I'm assuming that that's probably not adequate or maybe it is adequate for fire and rescue to to access that. Well, no, no.

The fire the fire truck they have to have 150 ft. They have to be able that boom truck go to 150 ft. So, they have access to any fire emergency they can get to it. The alley is there, the parking lot is there. But what happen is when they're 150 ft away from that truck, you have to provide fire sprinkler. But these units okay they already fire sprinkle because there zero lot lines.

So they already has know we already address with fire sprinkle system but as far as their truck able to reach in case of fire. Yes they can get to it easily. Thank you Commissioner Corey. Yes. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Uh I was going to call you Mr. Wilson, but it is Wilson Egypt. Kind of have a name like Clayton Corey. Uh well, I would tell you what my what my colleague said. I also agree. Thank you for coming to the community and trying to uh build a sense of community in that area.

Uh we appreciate it and having a variety of housing options I think is very important. I moved here 10 years ago and moved into a small condo at the time and that was affordable to me. Um, so that allowed me to, you know, make my way into the community and and now I live in a beautiful home and um I was happy that I had that opportunity to start in a condo. Um, and I also um see that you have similar successful communities in in other locations. So, that's that's also good to know.

And I appreciate the time that you spent with the planning and zoning department to make some modifications that were important to us. Um, adding the mixed use, the open space, the dog park. um added parking because that always comes up at our meetings and and went out and met with plat uh 106 folks as well um and have put a waste um solid waste container in the area too. Those were all things that were important to us. I think with the I love the dog park and the community areas.

I think that with 11 units, you might have to have some sort of a um governance, some sort of HOA. um so that you know the community can have some sort of a um you know teamwork in making sure that they're maintained and they're helpful to the community. So that might be something you have to look at. And I know that I've heard tonight maybe from a couple of my colleagues the consistency of the look and feel of the community is important to them.

And I know that's probably challenging because you've purchased is it 11 lots? 11. Yeah. So, I see that there are still a bunch available, but I imagine that's difficult to purchase 11 and try to purchase more so that you can maintain this consistency. I hope that in the future maybe as new developments come in or new developers come in, they can try to match what we're doing here. Um, but I think that's probably very difficult for um Mr.

Eim to continue to purchase other lots and and keep building that out. Um, so thank you for um looking at this area and I appreciate it. Appreciate it. Thank you, sir. Yep. I have a a couple questions for you. Um, what's the separation between the the buildings the that you're building the the homes? Yeah, the zero lot line you said are four feet between them. Yes. What what it is is the way I arrange them.

Um if you notice in some areas you're going to have about 8 ft because from the lot lines I'm going 4T. So that 8 ft building to building. Does that make sense? If you look at So there's 4T to the lot line, 8 ft. But that's right. So to open it up. Yeah. Now, now also the reason I do the carport also was to make sure it kind of open up visually, you know, when you look at the carport opening so that the garages are set towards the back, you know.

And why would you not attach them and and be able to provide more living space? Well, the the these ones are actually the one I had that I lived in that I love, you know, seeing they about 1,200 and these these units are about 13 to,500 square ft. So, they decent size. If you look at it, they look similar, but really in reality with the space is all laid out, right? Open space. They decent room. They decent size.

So these these ones are about between 15 to I mean 1,300 to about 15 1.5 square foot units. Okay. And there are power lines running right down the middle of right down the the east side of the alley. Are you going to do anything with those or is it part of your are you doing any site work? Are you going to bury those lines? No.

on which side you talking about under partner the if if you were to if you were to the the alley that runs north south between El PBLO and uh uh Glenn Brook there's power lines that run right down the east side of that alley overhead okay that there is a if talking about the alley right yes we have the there's a power line right there yeah so that that power line doesn't bother me.

But what like I told you start as a power pole there which I can move but what we did was we use that for parking space cuz one of the idea was one of bringing the um thrash enclosure more towards the front. I said we have to deal with the power pole which going to be hard to move. So, but if we move it to where close to the church where there's one now, the the car can the truck can come in, drive, pick up and continue and exit the other direction. So, the power line stays there.

So, those are really hard to move. Okay. Okay. I don't I don't have any other questions. Anybody else? So, we ask for speaker cards. Yes, chair. The first speaker is Eric Jackson. Hello. Hello. Uh Eric Jackson, resident of Fountain Hills since 1985 and the owner of that vacant lot down there that we were discussing that might have concerns of what goes there.

So, I guess those were my I mean, I'm actually kind of excited for the development and um bringing life to what I'm coining as Uptown Fountain Hills. So, stick with me on that one. We'll see if it goes. Um but my plan there wouldn't need an SU and I'm kind of still probably a handful of years out of developing it. Um but I just still want I want to make sure that it doesn't impact me.

So many things are getting moved to residential in this plat now that then my lot that's been owned flips to oh now this is a residential heavy lot and now I'm in the hot seat of trying to get approved for what my plan's been for and my family's plan been for years. So, that's been one.

And then kind of just I I guess we can talk more like the planning and setback zonings and things when the time comes of where openings will be for my lot and what those things will need to be for my opening going into I mean, I'm thinking kind of mixed use as well. Sorry, I'm not supposed to talk supposed to talk here, but I know where the questions are kind of going anyway. Um, but so that uh the dog park I think that's plus I think we should really avoid synthetic grass if we can do that.

I was the comment on uh next door that got deleted that doesn't like the next the synthetic grass we're putting into town already. Um let's what else did I Oh, for your mixed use I would recommend there's an FHA loan um that if you keep your commercial at 49% and your residential at 51% so make it a tiny bit smaller at the top your potential buyers will be able to get an FHA approved loan. So I would do that. Um, what else did I have in here?

As far as like the architecture, I mean, we're dealing with Adobe liquor architecture in this whole plat. So, I mean, we need to chill on that, I think, a little bit. Um, did I think I think that might have been all the things, but it's more of just my lot there and how that's going to align on I guess what my commercial accessibility is going to be on that lot. I mean, it's going to be a fast casual type restaurant was the plan.

And then four parking spots coming off the alley side for uh like a three unit above is kind of the plan on my space rooftop use though. Nobody does do that in these beautiful views. Nobody wants that. But that's all time I have for for me. So all right. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker Crystal Kavanagh. Well, I wasn't necessarily going to speak. Um, I don't have a lot of specific things to say. I did meet with Dr.

Egyp a few months ago because he's always concerned how some of us oppose certain things. And we did have concerns when it was the home for the aged and things of that nature. uh concierge grocery shopping and cleaning. It sounded like it could have led us down a rabbit hole we didn't want to go down. He assured us that he was dedicated to these single family homes and I think that's why they're not joined together so that they can be single family homes.

Um I think the concept isn't horrible, but I still have questions. I didn't necessarily say that I was for it, but I said that I wasn't going to oppose him. Let's put it like that. if it had all worked out and obviously all the codes are met and the parking etc. But one of my big concerns is are we even able to require things like an HOA because I'm a little worried sometimes about um unrelated adults living in these units or these single family homes for example.

Um, I know that in my HOA, and I think it might even be the town code, no more than four unrelated adults may live together. And so I just didn't know if we were going to put any type of meat in that. And if we could because you can't you could do two per bedroom and things of that nature. Makes me worry a little bit. And I just think it'd be some protection for the neighborhood if we could do some type of limitation.

And um obviously the open space thing was a concern too because without an HOA people are going to have their dogs, you know, they don't pick up after their dogs and it could be a problem. And so I just wondered if it's single family homes how they're going to do that without an HOA. It's not like it's a condo association. So I I do think there's still questions about this that I think have to be investigated a little bit further. Thanks. Next speaker is Rod Warrenburgg.

You did awesome by the way. I was just checking scratch and you pulled it out. Uh my name is Rod Warberg. I am the president of the track 106 PA and we have been working really closely with Egypt to try to pull this off. But I'm hearing things that I'm not sure are being conveyed clearly. And I think it's important that they are conveyed clearly. This section in here, which is listed as a driveway. This is um it is track 106 property.

And at the end of that is the a relatively large power box in my opinion, somewhat bigger than this. As you cross the street, you have another equivalent power box. And again, this would all be tracked 106 property uh right right through here. These are designed to be able to uh provide sidewalks for this area. We did meet with uh uh with uh Egypt and uh we told him that that we certainly will work with him along these lines.

Uh, also I want to point out up here on this top this uh I'm I'm concerned the way this is labeled as open space. This is going to be a pathway. It isn't going to be open space. It will be a pathway to connect parking lots. I don't know if this Yeah, this goes up further north. Once uh once Gerszach puts in the balance of his stuff, we will need to connect the parking lot over here to the other side and that will be the pathway to do that.

So, I I just don't want there to be an impression that somehow this is going to be grass and flowers and trees. It's it's going to be a sidewalk is is what it will end up being. And as this section just uh the church is built right to the sidewalk and and then uh there is a tiny bit of open space with some trees here. That sidewalk continues down the front of the church and ends abruptly right here. It will eventually be continued out the rest of the way. That is part of the the plan.

My concern with the talk of HOA is that we are a property owners association and the property owners association is not going to abdicate this property. We allow him to use it as uh per the layouts. But to create a an HOA inside a POA, I think just creates an incredible mess. And so I I think if we want to go down those road roads, we would have to consider we just have to consider other options. I just want to be sure it's clear to everybody what what uh what the POA is looking at.

And uh the lady that owns the uh liquor store here, she wanted to be sure everybody understood it's a liquor store. It's not a convenience store. So just throw that out, too. Thank you. Um can you hang on a second, sir, please? Uh, so will the homeowners of this of Mr. Egyp's project, should it go forward, will they pay dues to the POA? Well, this is this is part of what would have to be sorted out. I I can't understand uh all of Gerszach's properties.

Um those properties he will continue owning and he will continue to pay the POA dues because he's going to rent those. uh hearing that these are something that are going to be sold outright, I personally wouldn't buy a house that didn't have some sort of something around it.

And I I would be a little concerned about buying in a property owners association, which is really going to be geared toward business, not toward, you know, making sure somebody's cleaned up the dogs mess and stuff like that, right? That that the the POA isn't geared toward residential. It never was. We don't have the manpower, the overhead to do that. And the more residential that appears here, we're doing our best to make it work with all these property owners.

But but these are presenting some very unique challenges. And I'm not I'm not sure how to answer those questions. I don't know exactly what would happen in that point. Okay. Thank you. Any any other questions for plant 106? Last speaker is Lori Troller. Hello everyone. um what's being passed out. You'll you'll see that I took that off of um Google Earth and it's the intersection of Glenbrook and Fountain Hills Boulevard and you can kind of see the property.

I didn't realize exactly where the my little blue box at the bottom isn't exactly line up with what he drew there, but it's a proximity. So, number one, um I tell you these these locations are going to have the best sell service. is going to be outstanding because all of those little lines, those are all towers and those are only the ones I know of. I don't there's a question mark on the left hand side of the page. There's a church there. They can have antennas on the church.

I don't know if they do, but if you kind of got to wrap your head around this because, you know, we're t we keep talking about the wireless ordinance. So, if we're going to say you can't put a tower within 250 feet of residences, why would we allow a house to be built within that radius? So, that's kind of the premise. This is an idea.

I don't know quite know where it's going yet, but um I just if if if that were my son and he said, "Mom coming back to Fountain Hills." And I I'll say not in that spot, hun. You you are totally irradiated there. So from that standpoint, I I did rough measurements. So the closest line you can see there is 400 and some feet. Um it's actually going to be closer now. So I just I there's I don't know what we can do about this.

I just want it in your consideration and because I'm going to bring it back up again once I I wrap my head around it a little bit more, but there's over 38 antennas there. It's not just four poles. It's 38 antennas all radiating 247. So, it's in a bad spot. It's like buying land right next to the polluting factory. It It's not good. Um, if anything, I would do a NEPA review.

I'd have have the town come in and and bring in a professional meter reader there and let them read it for over 5 days and you'll see what's going on there. It's not good. So, um, okay. So, changing speeds there. No longer about sell. So, I don't know what the effect on the homes there. This the value of these are it's definitely going to degrade. I mean, the homes around there are pretty big. They they have some good property. So, I'm I'm kind of surprised the homeowners aren't here.

Um, and Phil, to your point, you know what? If in my neighborhood, we put a patch of grass at the bottom of the street and it's either you're mowing it or I'm mowing it. Not at 120. You're not going to find me doing it. So, I the whole grass thing, I think it's great. It's a wonderful idea. All these are wonderful ideas, but I don't know that they actually fit. So, um, and we actually have one of the best dog parks in the valley. Um, I would like to call these things what they really are.

Cottage is really cute. I don't um, is it a fire hazard? Are these things so close that I I don't know how this works out with fire? I didn't hear anybody say anything about that. Um, and regarding the commercial space, we've had an issue with the lot right adjacent to this. We had them promise that I don't know if we got an affidavit that that commercial spot that he's putting in is not rehab because it's in the proximity of the school.

So, I would like to make sure that goes in on this and um I have other stuff but buzzer went off. Thank you. Okay, we want to um we have further questions for uh Farad or the applicant. Commissioner Corey for Farhad just to address some of the things that we heard. And my first question is earlier you mentioned it went to town council and they kicked it back to us. Did that include any feedback or just for us to revisit it? Uh Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Corey.

Uh no, it was actually quite brief and um I made a few introductory remarks, but almost immediately a decision was made to revert it back. Okay. Thank you. Um we had a gentleman that spoke I can't remember his name was maybe it was Mr. Jackson when he talked about Uptown. I like that. And I just wanted to ask um so he has a property there he mentioned and he wants to make sure that putting residential here wouldn't negatively impact his business.

Sounds like he's okay with some sort of a residential project here. Just wants to make sure in the future that's not going to impact him. So just to clarify, his land um is whatever the use is by right would not change. He can still develop how he wants to in the future without making any changes if it's by right. Right. That's correct. Okay. Will remain community commercial. Okay. I'm sure we knew. Just wanted to clarify that. And then um so HOA was mentioned a few times tonight.

And then like I think Crystal and somebody else mentioned um the NPOA or the uh POA, it already exists, but we think that an HOA would be a good idea. So do we have any history there? any like examples where we've had to do this in the past? Are there any other developments where there is an overarching um HOA and then another one that fits within it? Um where the town was involved uh in Yeah.

Well, typically the I mean to the extent that you know the town has any sort of stake or any kind of um increased liability by an HOA not being formed um then we certainly would would like for example like landscaping if you know landscape areas um uh it needs to be made clear on the CCNRs for example uh that the town has no responsibility in maintaining maintaining it.

So it for example when a subdivision comes forth we want to make sure that's abundantly clear but um beyond that we typically don't get involved in uh requiring uh formation of an HOA. So it sounds like it's more of an something that the POA and the developer would have to work out. It's a detail that would probably have to be worked out somehow. Yeah. And then the last thing I wrote down here was um the open space. So somebody had mentioned open space would include a sidewalk.

So it looks like eventually along the church there, the sidewalk that is existing would eventually continue all the way up to the part two alley if I was hearing that correctly. Yeah, believe Mr. Warrenburgg was talking about this this common area where the So it's okay. Yeah. So, we heard from the applicant that it was going to be the common area and then we heard that it was going to be almost like a pathway, I think, with a sidewalk. So, just wanted to bring that back up.

Um, how would that impact the common area? What are the plans for the common area if it does become a a pathway? But also, I think if the pathway is just a sidewalk with a component of uh landscaping and trees, then it it would serve the community well. So, Okay. Thank you for Commissioner Gray. Thank you, Chair. Um, a couple thoughts, a couple different angles here. Uh, first, Mr. Eim, I also applaud your your product and your presentation and your pivot off of the original.

I think the product itself is probably fine. Um, my reservation isn't the product. Uh my reservation is plat 106 and I think we have to look at this you know for what it is and we have to look at it in the in the more macro picture. So it these are parcels that were purchased at a different time five, six, seven years ago, chasing a different business model. That didn't work out. And so here we are at the pivot.

And so this is us saying, we're going to let you out of that scenario and we're going to let you pivot to residential. Okay, that's fine. The general plan allows for that. My problem with all of this is 106. We've carved into it not once, not twice, maybe three times, three or four times now and done these conversions, but yet 106 continues to exist in its underlying condition.

And so if if we do this those four or five parcels that are directly I guess it would be plan north cardinal direction east of uh what I think we're calling lot three right the ones that are just south of the daycare or museum designator there to the left farhead this just south of that there you go yeah those parcels just as my example here are all but cut off from their underlying zoning in in use case, right? They they now back to a driveway essentially.

They're completely encircled by residences and the daycare and we just disenfranchised those those landholders. And I don't think that that's okay in the center. I know they're not here to object, but I don't think they need to be here to object to this. I think that when we set up the general plan and we said, "Oh, let's do infill. Let's do, you know, let's do these commercial conversions to residential." That's great. That was well intended, but it meant to be infill.

Here with this particular scenario in 106, we're basically saying, "Hey, we got this whole huge chunk of property, and I said this at the last meeting that should really be master planned, and we're just making Swiss cheese out of the thing." And for that reason, I I'm not in support of this tonight. And I I I say that again. I'll repeat my my opening there. I think the product is fine. I have no objection to the product. I have an objection to the placement of it in 106.

And I think the town needs to find a way to exert a heavier hand in what happens with 106 here because we can't keep doing this. This this is making a mess out of a marquee corner that eventually will be, you know, front and center if someone ever does pick up that state trust land. And I just I just cannot support support this for that reason. Thank you, Commissioner. Uh I I feel very much along the same lines as uh Commissioner Gray.

Um I am I think that the frag again the fragmentation of this is I think it's just poor planning um with the POA um with um block 206 or 106 um that underlining underlying alleyways that have to be maintained. There has to be reserve I assume for future maintenance and work and everything else that'll be done on there.

There has to be some sort of a mechanism to collect money from homeowners to maintain a dog park, maintain their their driveways, to maintain their if they've got some lawn, who's going to take care of all of that. I think there's just a lot of a lot of miscellaneous issues that maybe are not part of planning besides the fragmentation of this property that really bothers me. There just needs to be more thought put into this how it's all going to work out.

Now, with the introduction of the the lot along El PBLO of wanting to put a restaurant and units above, um, yeah, there's a right to be able to develop it in that way, but is that is that going to be a problem with established residential owners just to the north?

So I I just I just wish that it would be a way of of looking at of accumulating this these properties, figuring out something that is more centralized that works together that that will make sense not just today but a long time from now. And I I don't see this happening the way this is laid out and the way it's the way it's planned.

Um there's just there's just a lot of a lot of issues, not the least of which things that we've been finding out tonight that um I certainly wasn't aware of being on here only for a year. So I I would I think we need to either postpone it or just turn it down and come back with maybe a better plan. Um more people in more land owners involved and and try to consolidate this and do the do it the right way. It's not being done the right way. Chair, if it's okay, Mr.

Echin would like to make a comment or two at some point if you want to give him that opportunity. Sure. Right now's a good time. Okay. Commissioner Corgan, let me let's hear Commissioner Corgan first. Thank you, chair. First of all, Mr. Dum, my apologies for slaughtering your name, Mr. Wilson Egyp. Um, and it's a very attractive project. It really is. I have to say, aesthetically, very pleasing. Um, and you've done Yman's work on this.

However, I do agree that commercial space in our town is precious and we seem to be Um well we seem to be spotzoning that away over a period of time. My concern is is that number one and then the non-ontiguous plotting of these particular lots that's of concern and so given that and then the conflict between and the unknowns about the POA properties and owners association and the proposed uh HOA which is still kind of up in the air.

Those are my big concerns and I just don't see that as a favorable vote. I would have to vote no. Come on up. Thank you. Again, um when you look at the reality of what we're doing here is those lots are not together. They're on different spots. Understand the challenges of spot designations. But in this case, if you look at on the east of that, that's John Co residential development. It wasn't as if I'm introducing something that's not already happening there. So, so I'm not out of line.

So, and the small lots own by individuals. If you want something big, you have to get every one of them willing to sell.

the four lots you talked about sir on the lot I have contacted all of them for the last two years okay you can't force any person so if you I've been working on this now with the city for about 3 years and I have been backward pick up those are willing to cooperate with me but they're not all together those individual large so what I want to do is we're going to look at the reality what we're dealing with and make the best out of it.

I do believe that once they see it's been sitting there for so long. In fact, the first time I talked to that was the city planner before John Wesley become the plan. That was she said, "We'll do whatever you can. We want to develop it." That was as far back I've been working with this thing. Okay. But the question is I've talked and I talked I talked. You can't force me to sell. We're not willing to sell.

So my challenge then is what how can I best improve it to add value and I do believe it will add value. So the residential development is already taking place. Now I have one I did in uh Apache Junction. similar situation. What we did, it was a condo. We created a condo agreement single family homes and they said, "Well, I'm not I don't own the property, but he says, if you're going to put these condos there, um then because there was an overlay on it by mistake by the city.

So, the developer reached out to us. We got it removed. See, putting some condos there. But those condors we we did a condo agreement for those units so that it doesn't create a burden. The same situation when you create a situation like this you control what happened. The PA already told me you have to be responsible for what happened. I said no problem. We create an H and H basically is to make sure the fees are paid to the POA and the area that are provided for those guys. I take care of it.

That's a dog park. That's really the only thing I don't have to but I wanted to create something that give back to the community and when I use the word common area that was what that's what designated and that's what the P call it. It's a common area for the whole community. I don't own them. I don't take any responsibility for that. So that's when you see common area doesn't mean that it's for my own people. It's just the way it is in that community. So those if it doesn't happen what's next?

That's the question. You still going to be sitting just sitting there? No one going to How you going to do something with those small lots when they own by different people not willing to sell? So, I hope it doesn't. But it will sit there for another five years. I mean 50 years. Does he add value to the community to the city to any person? No. But today we could convert it where it has value. I have talked to those owners. They're not willing to sell. The one that willing to sell are bought it.

the 2A the P said we before we support what you do you need to find a way to get 2A give you those lands so then you can have a way to access the garages and after much negotiation and months and years they were able to sell but at a higher price but to make this work so now I provided parking so they don't have to be a burden to the existing parking so that is resolved Now I bought the extra place so that with this I can work with the POA. So our Ben back was to make this work.

But if it doesn't what are you going to do? They're not together. You can't combine them. You can't put anything big there. The individual lots. So they just sit there. So I said to you sir, look at the reality. When I say part one, that's this one right here. That's a pharmacy store. It's a multi-use. Someone is living above it. Over on this side is the one the condo, a commercial ground floor. Someone is living above it. And over here is town homes. They're all residential.

So what I'm doing then is creating another environment that is more enhanced solving the problem that anyone going to run into that try to develop that. Okay. solving all that probleming and giving bending backwards to make it work. So if we want to develop it, it's still going to take someone that going to do what we did except somebody going to come and b all these guys out, clean it out and do something big. But what are the chances of that happening? So that's what we're up against.

So if we face the reality, I think what we providing here, you know, maybe our best way to get that developed. But I'm willing to create like I've done before uh an HOA for this community to make sure that we are by the POA, make sure their fees and dues are paid and the maintenance is minimum. Okay, I don't own uh uh the driveway. All this driver is just there not that much space. Okay. The area don't own it. The city owns it. The common area which is over here, the POA owns it.

So when you're talking about maintenance is very minimum that I have to worry about. Okay. So the trash enclosure which is over here is will make sure that everything is paid. The same thing John Kazak is doing here. He's taking care of the trash enclosure. He's painted himself. And I'm sure he has the same has has a cond agreement for his people. So these are not it's already happening there. Okay.

John, what is the commission's responsibility um in the understanding the agreement between the petitioner and the POA? Uh chair, that's a good question. I'm glad you're uh giving that some thought and we can look at it I think a couple of ways.

Uh on the surface level all you're really being asked tonight is is this amount of residential and this configuration appropriate uh in this area given the general plan designation and a lot of details that go with that that aren't necessarily uh what you're being asked to consider. it's yes or no residential works here in this configuration.

But uh I I do believe with that being said that that there are some important issues related to that that have become a little bit clearer to me too as you have talked about it this evening. So I'm glad you you've raised that it's not just the dog park, it's the extra parking uh that's being added uh along the east side of that alley as well as the the dumpster location. Those are on individual lots at this point. Mr.

Egypt is saying he's going to own and maintain and is that really the best way for that to go forward? Uh should it be an HOA? Because someday, you know, Mr. Egyp is not going to be the owner of those lands and who inherits them at that point and how's that handled? It does impact uh the ongoing viability of this residential area. So I think it it's is uh within your your review to make sure you have at least some semblance of a a good answer to those questions.

the other details in terms of how this works with larger POA that maybe is a little bit more of a private issue that would come up and that we would have to make sure are addressed as we review site plans and and before we issue any building permits that there's clear agreements and and uh approvals from the POA because he is using their land to provide the driveway and if if they haven't signed off on it then we can't issue the permit.

So again, I think there's a little bit of a mixed bag there but it is good that you're looking at it. uh at least in some basic level to have a confidence before you would approve anything. And we're being asked to make a recommendation on a special use permit tonight. Is the special use permit plan specific? Yes, it is specific to this plan. So we if we say we allow residential the the configuration and the doesn't change can't change.

Well, so chair commissioners, so yes, so they'll have still have to go through their site plan review and so when they do that, we will refine it, but it wouldn't substantially change. No. And um like for instance, by part three um that were the lot lines were running north and south and now he's got to the west he's got the lot line running east to west. Does does he have to replplat? Correct. He'll have to replplat to do that as part of his process. And up at part two, he'll have to replplat.

Yes. Right now, that's one lot. So, yes, he would have to to plat that if he's plat he's going to sell them. Otherwise, they're just three units on that property. Yes. And do we look at that again or we're this is this is our look. We don't get to see you would plan again. Uh you would not see it again. The platting would all be done administratively and this site plan is done administratively. Okay. Commissioner Gray, John, I I two two questions for you.

Um, same question I think from back in January, but I again think 106 is in need of um some some what's the right word? Master planning. Master planning. I was going to use other adjectives. Um, what's the town's ability to to influence that? Uh, Chair, Commissioner Gray, it's limited. Uh, when Mr. Gerszac brought up some of his first proposals, uh, we had a meeting with, uh, Mr.

Warberger and a couple other, uh, representatives of that development and suggested that maybe that would be beneficial if some master planning could be done of this total site. Uh, because it is a complicated spot with the way the different lots that are are left fit into the overall picture. At that point, uh, they weren't sure that they could get the various owners together enough to come up with some type of master planning. There have been some changes.

Now, we have maybe consolidated more of the lots into fewer owners. So, it may be more possible now to pursue that that idea. We're certainly willing as a town to approach them again and see if there's some possibility. Yeah. I I just think there's there's a disjointedness here. I I wouldn't object to part one and part two. I object to part three. Um but there's just tremendous amounts of parking and pavement within this 106 that it it's no longer necessary. And so what are we doing here?

Um, would it be unprecedented to send it back with with that sort of directional guidance back to staff to foster that conversation again? So, chair commissioner, I believe one of uh Mr. Tavisi's options for your consideration tonight was continuence uh for further discussions with staff and the applicant. And so I don't think that would be unheard of. Uh probably would go to at least an October meeting, I think, to give us enough time to really look into things.

But that's certainly an option for the commission. And so but then we would need to provide you with direction as to what it was with, you know, where to take this. That would sure be helpful.

um and you know if the idea is get with the plat 106 and and explore with them the idea of uh some type of master planning and I see Barry would like to make a comment too if it's not too late chair not sure we ever officially closed the public hearing but um [Music] yeah it'd be helpful if there is some direction from the commission what we're trying to accomplish okay so commissioners when when we do get to the place where we're going to make a motion let's give staff some direction as to where we want to go.

And um yeah, let's take the the public uh or let's take the speaker, Barry McBride, uh chair, uh commissioner, um commissioners, appreciate the privilege of visiting with you. I just wanted to uh mention I do serve on the board of uh track 106 and wanted to assure you that as a board we take the properties management very seriously. Um if you look up and down Fountain Hills Boulevard that parking lot and the parking along Glenbrook uh I personally take care of that on behalf of the neighborhood.

I pay out of my pocket personally the the care for the parking lot, the trees on that side. I usually spend about 5,000 a year just out of pocket personally in addition to my dues. I feel that's a contribution to the community. We always really want to make sure that we operate track 106 as it was intended, which is a commercial facility. The parking would be sufficient if we had people with business intent to buy those properties. And Dr. Egyp is a fine gentleman.

We've enjoyed visiting with him, but it is a commercial development. And if those smaller properties were developed commercially, then that's why we have the property the parking as it as it is there. Uh so it's obviously up to you. I know Dr. Egyp has put so much work into trying to make something feasible, but it is a commercial PA, but I wanted to assure you we take very seriously truck 106 and its presence in the community.

Just wanted to make that statement so you know we're serious about that. Thank you so much. Thank you. Question, Commissioner Gray. Go ahead, Barry. If if in this scenario, let's play this out for a second. If the scenario is that we recommend approval, council follows suit and you convert these X number of parcels to residential. At that point, you're well overparked for commercial use of what's left and could be developed or could be, you know, redeveloped. What do you do then?

Well, that's a challenge. Um, certainly because when these would go residential and then the four lots that are just to the south of the museum, which is my property, uh, those businesses, if businesses were to purchase those, we're really not sure how that would fit. Um, so it's it's hard to say. And then another topic that was brought up and that would be the property owners that would buy these units. Um, to put up an HOA inside of a POE, we don't think that that would work.

That would be unprecedented. We don't know how that would work. Um, but as it relates to the common area, as it relates to the parking and the other common areas that are involved, u there would need to be maintenance to that.

And so ultimately somewhere down the road there would need to be some kind of a a process to where the owners would also be build maybe to the square footage of their lots as it is currently uh so that the HOA could continue the POA pardon me could continue to maintain the property appropriately to the town. Did I answer the question sir? I think so. I think you said we're cutting off the underlying Exactly. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, commissioners, we um we're going to need a motion.

We should discuss what motion. We've got to discuss where we're going from here. Um I'll start. I don't think we're I don't think I'm ready to make a recommendation without understanding how these units are going to fit into the POA. And I think I've heard the other commissioners say we'd like to see some sort of master plan for the undeveloped parts of this area before we make a recommendation.

Um, and then the other thing is if we do go to approve the plan, I would like to see 20 foot driveways uh in the carport. But, um, what next? I I see two paths. I I see three paths. Path one is we just reject it and say the underlying condition, the underlying um by right entitlement here should prevail. We've converted enough of this uh 106 to residential. We've we've met the intent of the general plan within this district.

I think we'd be well within our our right and jur certainly our juris jurisdiction to do that. Option two is chicken or the egg. Either a I agree with you. My version if I had a stake in it but I don't would be to repl plan the whole parcel. I think that's what any developer would do. If if that's the chicken, then the egg is you got to approve this to then force the rest of it to go through a master plan.

And if we go down that path, then I think you have to limit this to part one and part two and abandon the part three piece because part three is where you really start to infringe on the other parcels. part one and part two. I could make the argument those are just infills. You can still work around it. You can still master plan around it. You can deal you can deal with your parking couchs. You can deal with the hardcape.

You know, maybe there's some opportunity to be had um you know, in the grander scheme of things. Part three, once you've done that, those four parcels there are done. That's it's over with. Those that becomes that becomes native vegetation retention at best. Yeah, the one plan south of the daycare there. Commissioner Corey. All right. Thank you, Chair. I also support bringing this back in October or whatever that meeting is. Um, just a few notes that I mentioned here. Is it perfect?

It might not be perfect, but does it add value as I heard tonight? And I think yes, it does um over what we have there today and that area has been underutilized for a long time. So, it's uh I'm optimistic about this infill and what that could do for that part of the community. I think the residential configuration is appropriate. We're trying to make it work.

Um, we heard the concerns about owners not willing to sell and that creates a challenge and I mean how long would it take to, you know, try to convince them to sell so we can have one cohesive property that could be another 10 years or whatnot. Um, and the last thing I'll mention is this is mixed use. I love mixed use. I encourage mixed use. I think sometimes we think that oh it's the commercial is too close to the residential. people aren't going to like it.

Um, but I think people do like it more and more um when they can leave their home and go and walk to something. It creates the sense of community, walkability. Um, I really like seeing those things uh commercial and residential closer together. It makes our lives not so car dependent where you have to get in and drive to downtown. Maybe you could stay uptown and get some things done.

Um, so I do think that there's some things that we need to look at and and tweak and the HOA within the POA is certainly one of them. I wouldn't want to reject this because I think it's great for the community and I hope that we can find a way to make it work. Thanks. Anybody else? Can we get a motion? Does anybody want to make a motion? All right, then I'll do that.

Before you do that, because I know what you're going to say here, John, are we We can make this motion, but are all the stakeholders going to participate in that? I mean, to me, we're making a motion in the wind here. Uh, Chair, Commissioner Gray, uh, that's exactly right. We don't know. We'll just have to go out and try and see what kind of response we get from talking to Dr.

Eim and the other property owners, see if we can get a core together that feels like they can represent the group and and see what master plan options are. And may come back in a couple months and say, "Sorry, we couldn't do it or we've gotten so far and we need some more time or or whatever." But won't hurt to try. Okay. But yeah, and I' I'd at least like to accomplish knowing what the homeowners are how the homeowners are going to work and fit within the POA.

Well, that being said, oh yeah, sorry, Commissioner Z. I'm I'm not in I'm not in favor of this obviously as you've heard. Um, if you want to give them an opportunity to try to work out these issues between now and the next meeting or in October, fine. But there's a lot there's a lot to do and we've heard a lot of discussion tonight. People need to be addressed. These property owners need to be addressed. And I do take exception when someone says they're only trying to solve a problem.

This is an opportunity you're you're going after. It's not for you to solve a problem. So it you've got you do have an opportunity here, but you need to you need to do a lot more to provide the the answers that we've been looking for and to not only for today, but as I said before, long term because the people that are living out in that area are going to be impacted by what happens on this corner. It's got to be done right.

So I I will go along with a moving it to the next meeting or something to revisit this but otherwise the way it is right now if it comes back I'm totally against it. Understood. I think we're looking for a motion to continue this to the October. Do we have a date? We need a date certain correct. October 13th. Okay. October 13th meeting. All right. Thank you.

And I would like to make a motion to continue this to the October 13th meeting so that staff has an opportunity to look into some of the things that we brought up uh including HOA within a POA and there other things that we're going to include in that. Yeah. relationship between the homeowners and the POA and a master plan of the undeveloped portions of plat 206. Yeah. And the master plan within the plat 206. I I think just can we just say 206 holistically? It's 106. 106.

Did you get all that John or should I restate it? Okay. Thank you. So postponing with the discussion internally around how it will relate to planning 106. Yeah. Okay. We have a motion. I'm looking for a second. Second. We have a second. Uh can we have a roll call vote, please? Commissioner Proctor. No. Commissioner Coran, I. Commissioner Gray, I. Commissioner Schlloberg. Nay. I'm sorry. Nay. Commissioner Steven. Hi. Vice Chair Corey. I. Chairman Kova. I 52. Okay. On to 5C.

Ordinance 258 amending zoning ordinance chapter 6 section 6.08 regarding regulations for various types of signs chair commissioners. uh one of our favorite topics to discuss again. So you'll recall hopefully that back uh in May we had a discussion with you but uh for a quick recap u last time we did a comprehensive review and update to the code was back in uh 2021 within some uh minor modifications in 2023.

In January of this year, town council uh directed staff to review and make some revisions to the sign ordinance. They was not specific direction at that time, but uh we went back to them at their February meeting and they provided some guidance on some potential amendments that we should consider.

Uh staff met with the commission in May, reviewed the items that had been uh mentioned by the town council and gave uh the commission and public opportunity to provide us with any other input or suggestions for possible uh code amendments. that time we included in your packet the discussion from uh the the May meeting so you could see some of that discussion that you had at that time about the ideas that had come up uh from town council.

We received no other items uh for consideration and so uh except for one item that staff has uh identified since your May meeting. The items here were the items that some of the town council members uh wanted to take a look at based on the uh request from town council that we look at possible amendments to bring back to them.

Even though we there wasn't a lot of support at the last P&Z commission meeting, we felt it important that we go ahead and take those ideas that had me mitched by council, put them into an ordinance so they'd have that ability to officially look at those and decide what if anything they would want to change. So that's what you have before you here this evening, I guess. So these are the the five items that we're going to talk about. So A-frames, a couple of modifications uh talked about there.

One was to increase the maximum size allowed for an individual A-frame from six square feet to 8 square feet to uh right now uh for developments that have uh two signs. The maximum combined size is 9 square feet. So this would up that to 11 square feet for if you have two signs together. Right now you're allowed a second sign if you have a second public entrance. If you just have one public entry, you can only have one A-frame sign. This would make it two A-frame signs for anyone, any business.

Currently, if you're in the town center area, in the pedestrian area, you can leave a A-frame sign out after dark all night um in the sidewalk area here, but that's the only place you can leave an A-frame sign in the rideway. The proposal is that we remove that restriction and allow then the A-frame signs to remain where they're allowed to to remain in the rightway overnight.

And so the thought is that we'd go ahead and take any comments, questions you'd have on each of these as we discuss them rather than try to remember any comments you have and come back to them. So I'll stop here. Yeah, I just don't support leaving them out overnight. It allows laziness. It allows dilapidation. and allows them to blow um in the evening in the evening winds. It's it's just a good that's a good kind of self self-p policing mechanism that was in.

So I I would be in favor of uh removing that forcing the take down. Uh I looked at sign ordinances for eight municipalities surrounding the area. Phoenix Mesa Gilbert Chandler Carefree, Care, Cave Creek, Scottdale, and Paradise Valley. Not a single one of them allows A-frame signs to remain in a rightaway overnight. They are only allowed to be out during nor operating business hours.

So, I strongly recommend that they that that provision be stricken or that it remain as it is that that it remain as it is in the code. Correct. that they're not allowed to remain in the rightway overnight. Anything else on this? The changes in sizes and numbers, those are okay or u just for the commission's um consideration. uh the other e either A-frame signs are prohibited or one per business in all of the other municipalities except Gilbert which allows four.

So we're we're not in in new ground um allowing two not hearing anything. I mean single issue vote vote here. I I I thought it was um when we had it basically at one per elevation, one per door, whatever you wanted to say, that made all kinds of sense because that dealt with a corner business. You know, it gave you presence on two street fronts. Now, you're just going to get stack signs with this, but I'm kind of I'm kind of over it at this point, so let's just move on. Okay. Okay.

So, um, again, when we get to we get to the, uh, point of a motion, it sounds like, uh, a motion would include deleting the piece, uh, that allows the the signs overnight in the rightway, but otherwise agreeing with those changes. Correct. Okay. Banner signs. Uh, request here was to increase the, uh, minimum permit length from 30 days to 90 days. That's for, excuse me, that's for new businesses. That's for anytime anybody wants to do a banner sign.

We do have the a separate provision in the code for new businesses based on a new business license prior to getting any permit signage that they can have a banner sign for up to a year with certain requirements to change it out periodically. But that's a separate provision. Okay. So, the new business is the one year, right? This is at any other time, right? And can how can it be renewed? Yes, up to 150 days a year. So you could get one renewal this way.

Under the the 30-day, you can get five renewals in a year. This would just let you get one other renewal if you use the full 90 days. Okay? So in addition to the new business for 365 days a year, they can also every other year get 150 days. Every year they can get 150 days. Every year for everyone. Yeah, that's a lot. Okay, I'm in favor. I think the 90-day rule is uh is adequate. I've supported it last time, last meeting, and haven't changed. I think what's the value proposition here?

What are you going to put on the sign that needs to be on the sign for 90 days? Flash sale, two for one. Chair, Commissioner Greg, I think what we hear is particularly like during the fall football season, you've got banners that are promoting the the season um that type of thing. That's where they usually have the ones that are for a longer period than 30 days, but Supreme Court says we can't regulate that. So, Right. Right. So, it would just be a blanket 90 days.

Say happy birthday Clayton for 90 days. You sure could. Um we we would be uh have the longest period allowed relative to our neighbors. Um Phoenix is 30 days, Scottdale's 35, Mesa is 30 days, and then a 30-day gap before the next before you can do it again. Um Carefree 10 days with the permit. Um, Cave Creek just needs appro uh public approval or the the plan um town approval. Uh, PV needs an SUP 60 days a year, 7 days, then a 14-day gap. Gilbert, you need a permit 120 days max.

So, that's another one that Gilbert is uh a little more lenient on. And then Chandler's requires a permit and generally it's a 60-day permit. I I think if the if the idea is disrepair and keeping the media, you know, not fading, not tattering, okay, 90 days is fine. But I think if you look, would you read off Carefree Cave Creek was three and a half days or something? 10 days. Yeah, Carefree 10 days.

I mean, that's designed to say like it's not the juice isn't worth the squeeze is what that's designed to do. I like that. So, John, back to enforcement. What how we have one and a half staff, you said that handles enforcement of these of signage. Is that what it is? Two and a half. Two and a half. Yes. Okay. I as a business owner and with my eyes on everything all day long. I mean, it's absurd.

So, I mean that said, I mean, we're having this discussion, but I'm just telling you the enforcement's not there. I mean, not even remotely there. So, for whatever that's worth, I'm just throwing it out there because I mean, I could I could list off 10 examples right now of just what we've touched on already that have been in violation and they sit there every day. And so, that's that's kind of my comment on all this. It's it's kind of a frivolous exercise we're doing here.

Chair, if I may, with regard to banner signs, certainly there are signs that get put up that maybe we don't see or maybe don't see for a while, but when we do, we do contact them uh about getting the permit. And with our electronic system, we're able to put the days in that they're allowed with a reminder that pops up when the time's up and we inform that they they need to come down. So there are, you know, a lot of other signs that that are around.

You know, we do try to enforce them as as strictly as we can, but it is a challenge of only two and a half. Commissioner Gray, I'm really sorry, but the example that you got up on the slide is the perfect example to deliberate in a in a town riddled with vacant commercial. That's what we're going to see. We're going to see banners go up for four lease, four rent. It's not going to be happy birthday Clayton, unfortunately.

So it could be I mean I'm willing to chip in if we want to do that but whatever. So what do we want to do? Anything's not going to enforce it. Yeah. Moving on. Leaving that as it is. Commissioner Proctor has his light on. Well, call me stubborn. But um I believe the existing ordinance is is fine as written, common sensical.

However, there is a need I think to interject uh the flexibility of a special use permit for select businesses um to to expand either the banner signs or an additional A-frame. Um that way I think at least from a governance perspective we can control that a bit more. But I think the existing ordinance is fine and I would like to leave it as is.

Chair Commissioner, I will add to that the current ordinance does allow for a temporary use permit which is administrative for somebody really can make a case for more than the 150 days out of the calendar year. So that's already in the code. Commissioner Proctor hasn't done any golf net applications yet, just for the record. Building wall uh monument signs. This is the one that staff uh added to uh the mix. Recently dealt uh with a a smaller apartment complex that wanted to do a wall sign.

I think it's the one they wanted to do. And we looked at the code and if you're 20 units or more, you can have both a wall sign and a monument sign, but under that you can't have either one. And that didn't make a lot of sense to us. It seemed like you ought to have a smaller complex ought to have at least one sign, one or the other, but maybe not both. So that's what we have proposed is for those of eight to 20 units and eight was a little bit arbitrary.

If you think it should be a little lower, a little higher, we could, you know, work with that a little bit too. But, uh, complexes between that size could have one or the other is what we're proposing. And, um, this 20 units came from Scottdale. That's their uh, restriction. Uh, none of the other seven have have any minimum restriction on the monument sign. I don't see any issue with that. I think that's fine. Okay. Freestanding wall signs.

This is another one that came from council discussion and and the illustration on the picture is the issue that uh the council was trying to address particular over here off of at Plaza Fountain Side or the Waterford development and wanted to be able to put up a sign on the railing. And so we looked at how we might incorporate that into the code. And so what you have in the mix is some adjustments to our fence wall sign regulations to allow this type of signage to occur.

The sign itself would need to be made of permanent material, but could be so it's either permanently attached to the railing or could be put on and taken off on a daily basis. Commissioner Spiel, I I think um any of those signs should follow the the um the theme or the sign type that's on the on the building rather than be unless that unless this is something different.

If you're talking about Muro Pizza on that complex there, those signs should be the same placement as the other other merchants, not something hanging on the rail. Concur uniformity. You got chances of this getting away from us here.

I don't know how many of these applications we have, but um that and then also I don't know if we do in inspections on sign installations necessarily, but would that be the intent here is that it's a permanent installation and so you know we're checking structural ability of a handrail 200lb lateral load handrail can take a in this case two or three 12 square foot signs mounted with coat hangers. I don't know. Right. That's probably not I think we probably need to cut this one.

Commissioner Cor again. I think the intention is uh is is pretty specific and that permanent is permanent. You would make it safe and if there's a I don't know some sort of a a code involved uh that we can draw from other cities, towns, whatever, I think permanent might be permanent. And the issue I made last time and I may have heard another commissioner make the same comment and that is where you have an alco situation and it doesn't allow a face type or building mounted type application.

Um I think that would be appropriate for an alcove. Number one, I agree that the signage should be uniform so you don't have inconsistent sizes and shapes and and whatnot. And then thirdly, it came up, I think, for our last meeting that this is something that should only be determined by the by the property owner, which is the case anyway. I would say that that that's always the case. The um requirements from the property owner are those requirements. He owns the building or property.

I don't think that changes anything. So, I'm I'm in favor of it where it works, but only in a permanent and consistent situation. That's it. I just see it as a hazard and and a an accident waiting to happen. Uh so I would rather have the railing signs stricken. There's a sign even in this picture there's a sign band um across the top. Uh and they for these second floor spaces there's signage area provided and in an alco situation there's generally signage a signage area or a directory provided.

So, um I would want this I my recommendation for this would be to strike it the the railing signs. I agree. So, I guess again whoever makes the motion will decide which that was, but it sounded to me like it's majority of striking of it. Yes. And that's all my also my feeling, too. And I'm thinking, would this be a good use case of an A-frame? So, customers are walking along the sidewalk, they can't see the sign because maybe it's too high up.

A-frame could be down by the sidewalk and right it's a great alternative. So, okay, moving on. Uh, election signs. So, currently, well, I guess first of all, we'll say that that when we're talking here, we're just talking the signs that a person can put on their property in their yard. We're not talking about all the things allowed by state statute.

And so the proposal here is that uh we adjust during the election period which is 71 days prior to election that in your single family lot you can go from two yard signs to four uh during that period again not touching anything about the state what allowances those are still there but all you want in the rightway um but increases the the yard signs two to four during this period. doesn't control the message on the yard sign so they can all say happy birthday Clayton. Yeah. Any any comments here?

Just a thought on it, chair. Last uh election for town council, we had eight candidates. And so I suppose it might line up that you prefer four of one over four of the other. And if that's the case, you don't have any opportunity to support other candidates. Uh you know, whether it be Senate or Congress or what have you. So um I'm actually in favor of uh more than four, but I may be alone on that. So only three council people can get elected. So you have a fourth sign for whomever. Um, okay.

So, the the only I'm not clear and I'm I'm not sure we have direction on the banner signs. Are we good with 90 days or do we want to go with 30 days and renew for 30? There's always a compromise of 60 days, too. Yeah. Or Yeah, I cut it back to 30. I I'm with Commissioner Proctor, I think, made that statement. Agree. Okay. So, we're looking for a motion to recommend the ordinance without um are we looking for are we looking for a motion here? Yes, we are. We need to get this on to town council.

And so, um if we go to uh just think wonder if this is going to help. We go to the ordinance itself. Um, all right. Do we I guess we should ask for speaker cards. Do we have any speaker cards? No, chairman. Okay. Bella. Okay. So, we're looking for a motion that uh to approve the ordinance striking A-frames in the rightway during non-b businessiness hours uh limiting banner signs the 30 days and striking the railing signs. And did I leave anything out?

Chair, just to be clear, too, there was one other uh related provision that is the same as the banner signs or the A-frame signs, but it was for the residential direction signs, which are the ones used for garage sales, those kinds of things. I'm sure you're wanting to also not let them stay up overnight. Correct. Okay. So, another section of the code. Just want to make sure that was covered in in the motion.

That's both the yard signs and A-frames that the garage sale signs and the like um estate sales are do not stay out overnight as well. Think that's clear. So moved. I have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Can we have some discussion? Yes. What are we approving? We're or what are we what's the motion? What are we approving? What is being included? What changes are being made to the existing? Chair, if you'd like me to go back through it. Yes. Again.

So, I'm looking at the the attached ordinance itself and the provisions in there. And so in section one, we'll keep in the eight square feet of size for an A-frame sign, 11 square feet for the total. We will also be allowing the two signs per business. Uh so that that change will stay in the uh next paragraph. Uh we'll be putting that back to say that the signs have to come in uh at at night. Um, we're going to in section three, we're going to not change that.

We'll leave that at the 30 days for the banner signs. We'll be striking section four, which was the one which allowed No, we'll keep section four because that's the one that allows the uh signs for the apartment complexes. We'll strike section five because that's the one that allowed the um uh railing signs. And then we will um we'll keep uh se what's section six in the current codes that also deals with the signs for the uh apartment complex.

And then we will be keep section seven because that's the one that allows the two yard signs uh during election period. We will strike section eight because that uh to keep the um signs coming in after dark uh for the yard sales. Thank you. Any other discussion? Okay. Can we have the roll call vote, please? Commissioner Proctor. I. Commissioner Corgan. Nay. Commissioner Gray. Hi. Commissioner Schlloberg. Hi. Commissioner Steven. Hi. Vice Chair Corey. I. Chairman Kovac. I. 61. Okay. Okay.

Agenda item six, next meeting date. I guess I'm back again. So, um, again, I forget exactly what the agenda says, but what we usually talk about here is what's coming up. And so, I was just, uh, checking with Farhad, and at the moment, we're not remembering anything that we have, Paul, you can correct us if we're wrong, for the September meeting, September 8th meeting. We don't remember. Yeah. Anything we have uh coming up that we'll need to have a September meeting for at this point.

We'll double check that and let you know, but right now it looks like u we have no applications or or things in process to be ready for September. However, prepare for a potentially long meeting in October. We do have a couple of text amendments that we'll be working on uh that will be need to be full on your agenda in October.

Uh we may have uh another SUP for your September meeting and uh we're working with the new town's attorney in terms of review of where we're at on the wireless ordinance and may or may not have something on that for you for October. We'll have to see. Okay. Can I get a motion to adjurnn? So moved. I get a second. Second. All right. All in favor? We're in turn.