Town planning staff may once again be working on a proposal for a Planned Area Development (PAD) zoning district for Fountain Hills.

Members of the Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission weighed the pros and cons of a PAD district during a joint session last week.

The council had rejected a PAD district in May of this year, saying at the time it might consider a similar ordinance that focused primarily on commercial development.

At last week’s meeting some council members still sounded skeptical, believing the PAD could grant developers too much leeway on land use and zoning regulations.

“What was proposed was so flexible it doesn’t really protect surrounding land owners,” Councilman Henry Leger said.

He noted that many people make themselves aware of surrounding zoning before settling into an area.

“When they purchase they have a basic understanding of what will be around them,” Leger said. “People have a right to know what to expect on adjacent property.”

Councilwoman Ginny Dickey wondered why the PAD would be necessary with various other tools for developers to use in working with the town.

Planning and Zoning Director Richard Turner said the PAD can be useful to the town also in protecting the rights of neighbors.

“Staff’s initial thinking with regard to implementing the Downtown Vision Plan is to revise the TCCD (Town Center Commercial District) zoning district regulations to accommodate as much of the potential development as possible,” Turner wrote in a memo.

“Increasing the flexibility in the TCCE regulations has advantages in that a wider variety of non-residential and mixed use projects, consistent with the vision, will be allowed.

“However, there may be some uses that the town would have to permit because they comply with the regulations even though they are not entirely consistent with the vision.

“A PAD (district) for non-residential and mixed use projects would allow staff to negotiate and work with a developer to ensure maximum compliance with the vision.”

He added that limited use of the PAD could also be useful in other areas of town where Area Specific Plans are anticipated such as the Shea/Saguaro area.

Commissioner Cecil Yates is a proponent of the PAD.

“This is a tool that can be used in many ways,” Yates said. “It will keep Fountain Hills in the forefront in working with developers on creative ideas for using the remaining land, and when we get to a point for redevelopment.”

Yates said the approval process still includes public hearings before the commission and the council along with the ultimate approval of the council.

“This doesn’t open the floodgates,” Yates said.

Leger asked what advantages there are to a PAD over an Area Specific Plan.

Turner said an Area Specific Plan is more of a planning or concept tool. The PAD includes the actual zoning regulations that the developer will need to abide by in building a project.

Since a PAD is “negotiated” or “customized” zoning it provides flexibility for things like building setbacks from property lines.

Councilman Dennis Brown, who was planning commission chairman at the time the earlier PAD proposal was developed said he is a supporter of the concept.

“I do have mixed feelings with regard to its use with residential,” Brown said. “I still feel there needs to be an easier path needed for developers working with the commission and council.”

Commissioner Gary Goodell suggested to handle concerns about too much flexibility that staff could come up with a proposal that has a strict list of criteria needing to be met for approval.

Turner said that would be an acceptable direction to go.