The Town of San Tan Valley's new Planning and Zoning Commission picked its first chair and vice chair on Aug. 24, then spent the rest of the meeting on two cases it has no power to vote on.

The short version:

• Commissioner Karen Mooney was chosen as the commission's first chair, unanimously.
• Commissioner Adrien Litton was chosen as vice chair, unanimously, while absent from the meeting.
• The commission approved the minutes of its July 27 work session.
• A shopping center on Hunt Highway asked for signs 8 feet tall where the town code allows 5. The commission does not get a vote. One town staff member decides.
• The town's first annexation, 3.3 acres at Gantzel Road and Lone Star Lane, came back for discussion. Again, no vote, and the commercial rezoning is expected before the commission next month.
• Commissioners were told a heavy load is coming: zone changes, cell towers, housing projects, car washes and storage.

The commission has its first leadership

The commission's first order of business was choosing someone to run it.

Commissioner Donna Hallman nominated Commissioner Mooney as chair. No one else was nominated, no one asked to discuss it, and the roll call vote was unanimous. Mooney took over as presiding officer for the rest of the meeting.

Hallman then nominated Commissioner Litton as vice chair. Litton was not at the meeting, which prompted the only real exchange of the item. Mooney asked whether he knew about the nomination and whether he wanted the job. Staff said he had served as vice chair of the Interim Planning Advisory Committee, the temporary group that reviewed zoning cases for the town before this commission existed. SanTanValley.com reported when the council set up that interim committee. The vote was unanimous.

The commission has seven seats. Six are filled. One member asked not to serve, and the community development director said he was not continuing on the commission.

A Hunt Highway shopping center wants taller signs, and the commission has no vote

Community Development Director Gilbert Olgin presented a comprehensive sign plan for San Tan Heights. A comprehensive sign plan is one application covering all the signs for an entire commercial center instead of one sign at a time.

The site is a small commercial parcel off Hunt Highway, across from the Home Depot. Six businesses are planned there. Two are known so far: Dutch Bros and Busy Bees daycare.

The center is allowed two monument signs, meaning low signs that sit on the ground near the road rather than on a building. One goes on Hunt Highway and one on the collector road just to the east.

The disagreement is height. The town code allows 5 feet. The applicant asked for 10 feet, then offered 8.

Olgin said he would weigh what the code allows against what already exists nearby. The large stores at the Hunt Highway retail corner have signs more than 20 feet tall, approved years ago under Pinal County rules. He described the county process as having no guardrails, because the county board could approve nearly anything, and said the tall anchor signs were negotiated so the stores could be seen from the highway. He also said he can adjust the code by roughly 25 percent, and that going beyond that requires him to put his reasoning in writing.

Two commissioners said the limit is too low.

Commissioner Paul Bond said he had lived it. As a business owner he was required to install a very small sign, nobody could find him, and the business closed. "Business actually went under and just because people didn't know I was there," he said. He said a tall Home Depot sign does not bother him, because the point is attracting business, not looks.

Commissioner Kennedy Terrill agreed that 5 feet is too small and said 10 feet is what should be considered for this location, given how fast traffic moves on Hunt Highway. He said the sign code should be reviewed sooner rather than later, and that a larger commercial area coming between Mountain Vista and Thompson may need different rules than a small center.

Olgin said his first step would be comparing what Queen Creek, Chandler and Gilbert allow.

Why the commission does not get to vote

Olgin told the commission the meeting was a work session, with no vote and no approval or disapproval of any kind. The decision is his alone, as the town's zoning administrator. He said a change in state law removed the authority of planning and zoning commissions to review and approve site plans and plats, and that those decisions are now made administratively. Staff is required to bring the cases to the commission and hear its views, but the commission's opinion does not bind anyone.

He said the tradeoff is speed. Under the county, he said, a case like this could take three months because a committee had to be assembled to decide it. This case reached town staff on a Monday and was in front of the commission the same week, because the tenants want to open soon.

Commissioner Hallman asked what an applicant does if staff says no. Olgin said he believed an appeal goes to the Town Council, and staff added it could instead be the board of adjustment. Neither could say for certain, and staff said the code needs to be double checked. That answer is still open.

Sign permits inside town limits are handled by the town, not the county. Our Permits and Zoning page lays out which government handles what since the town adopted its own zoning ordinance and town code on June 1, effective July 1.

The town's first annexation, and a fire district catch

After a short recess the commission heard about annexation case ANX2026-01, a vacant 3.3 acres at the southwest corner of Gantzel Road and Lone Star Lane. Annexation means bringing land into the town. The parcel is in unincorporated Pinal County now, zoned rural, and the owners want commercial zoning.

This was a presentation, not a hearing, and no vote was scheduled. Residents did get their say earlier: neighbors pushed back at the July 15 council hearing on the same parcel, raising the narrow private road, deed restrictions and traffic.

Olgin said the next step is a petition signature phase after a waiting period set by state law, and that he expected the council to take it up for adoption in September or October, with the date not yet final. Water and sewer would come from outside utility companies, not the town. The town did not start this. The property owners asked for it in writing, and staff said the town has to carry an annexation request through once it is filed.

The parcel is still inside Queen Creek's planning area, a boundary a town draws around land it might annex someday. Olgin said Queen Creek had advertised removing land from that boundary, that one area went through, and that this parcel was put on hold without the town being told. SanTanValley.com covered Queen Creek's move to release land from its planning boundary earlier this year. Staff said the town has met with Queen Creek twice, most recently the week before the meeting, and that Queen Creek is not opposed.

The reason for the hold is a fire district. Staff said a third attempt is underway to expand Queen Creek's fire district into that area, and this parcel sits inside the proposed boundary. Queen Creek paused the planning boundary change to see whether that effort had legs.

If the town annexes the parcel, it cannot be in the Queen Creek Fire District. It would be served by Rural Metro Fire, like the rest of the San Tan Valley area.

Commissioner Hallman, who said she has lived and shopped in that area for more than 30 years, raised the sharpest objection of the meeting. She said the town should not be so glad to gain commercial property and a bigger tax base that it stops looking at the whole picture. In her judgment, drawing on real estate and construction experience, the parcel is not suited to commercial use because of how cars would get in and out, and because the road cannot be widened. She said she never wants to feel the commission is trading favors, and that at 3.3 acres, next to state land the town is already working on, it could read as an insult to the neighbors.

"I'm not a troublemaker, but I have to ask for the public," she said.

The applicant's representative, identified at the meeting as Mr. Hayes, answered several of her questions. He said the owners would seek commercial zoning whether or not the town annexes the land. One owner is a retail broker and another is a medical professional. There are no tenants identified yet. The thinking is a mix of retail, restaurant and possibly a medical or dental office. He argued the site is not suited to rural or large lot housing because Gantzel Road is a major arterial and the area's main commercial corridor, and the parcel sits across from a water treatment plant.

On access, he said a traffic study is already finished and calls for a deceleration lane, a lane to slow down in before turning, along the Gantzel Road frontage south of Lone Star Lane. That would give the site a second way in besides Lone Star Lane. Hallman asked how a turn lane fits on a road that cannot be widened. Town Manager Brent Billingsley clarified the answer: the property would have to hand over an additional 70 feet off its frontage for road right of way to make it work.

Who maintains which roads here is a common source of confusion, and our guide to who is responsible for the streets explains it.

What happens next on this parcel

If the annexation goes through, state law requires the town to first give the land zoning comparable to what it has now, which is rural. The commercial rezoning is a separate case, and it is expected in front of this commission next month for a recommendation. Staff said the recommendation can be made before the annexation is final, because the council's action on the rezoning would be conditional on the annexation being approved. If the annexation fails, the commercial zoning does not happen.

A heavy year is coming

In his director's report, Olgin told commissioners the quiet period is over. He said the cases now in the pipeline include zone changes, with a couple arriving next month, communication towers, a couple of housing projects, and conditional use permits for car washes and public storage. A conditional use permit is special permission for a use the zoning does not allow outright.

"There's a good amount of cases coming," he said.

In other business

• Minutes approved. The commission approved the minutes of its July 27 work session. Chair Mooney initially abstained because she had not been present. Staff told her commissioners are not able to abstain and that an abstention is recorded as a yes, and she voted to approve.
• A public comment slot is being added. A commissioner asked for an agenda item letting members raise concerns or request future topics. Staff said it will start next month.
• Training trip. Two or three commissioners plus staff will attend the Arizona planning conference in Flagstaff on Nov. 4, 5 and 6, at no cost to members. Olgin said priority goes to those who have not been.
• Digital signs are allowed. Olgin noted the town's code recognizes digital signage, which many older codes do not.

What to watch

The commission's next meeting is expected to take up the commercial rezoning for the Gantzel and Lone Star parcel, along with the first of the zone changes. The Town Council is expected to vote on the annexation itself in September or October, and no date has been set.

If you are not sure whether the town or Pinal County governs your address, or which of them handles a sign, a permit or a zoning question where you live, our Town of San Tan Valley 101 guide walks through what the town does, what the county still does, and what has not changed.