Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

call to order and roll call. Chair Goss, present. Vice Chair Swap is excused. Commissioner McCoy, present. Commissioner Smey, present. Commissioner Sixa here. Commissioner Sprinkle present. Commissioner Waters present. We have a quorum. Thank you. Let's stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisibley andice for all.

Thank you. Uh, welcome to the city of Kingman meeting of the planning and zoning commission. This is for Wednesday, April 8th of 2026. The first item we have is the approval of the meeting minutes for the regular meeting minutes of the planning and zoning commission for February 11th, 2026. Um, can we have an emot a motion? I make a motion. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Um, can I get a roll call vote? All in favor? I I Perfect. Any opposed?

All right, we are good. Um, next we have the call to public to the public. Those wishing to address the commission should fill out request forms in advance. Comments from the public will be restricted to items not on the agenda with the exception of those on the consent agenda. There will be no comments allowed that advertise for a particular person or group. Comments should be limited to no longer than three minutes. The commission may not respond to speakers during the call to public. The commission may direct the staff to study the matter or request that the matter be placed on a future agenda. Do we have any comments? No. No. Great. Thank you. All right. Next, we move on to our action items. The first one we have is Z026-00001, a city initiated text amendment to the city of Kingman zoning code to clarify recent code amendments. Restore sections that were unintentionally omitted during the adoption process and minor amendments to the sign code. Z, maybe it's O260001 is a city initiated text amendment to the city of Kingman zoning code to clarify recent code amendments and to restore sections that were unintentionally emitted during the adoption process. Intro introduce minor amendments to the city's signed code. There we go. Good evening, Chair Goss and Commissioners. Before you this evening is a proposed zoning code text amendment for greater usability based on feedback received during the initial implementation and to restore sections that were unintentionally omitted during the adoption process. This is zoning case Z26-00001.

In late 2025, the city council approved the comprehensive zoning code text amendment via ordinance 1985, which became effective January 1st of this year. Over the past three months, staff and stakeholders have identified items that while they read well on paper, have not been easy or clear to implement. Additionally, during implementation, it has been discovered that several sections that were previously approved by the planning and zoning commission and city council were unintentionally left out of the la the final draft. The goal for this text amendment is to ensure that the code functions as intended while being clear and transparent. Throughout the extensive throughout the extensive revision process, these sections were unintentionally omitted from the final draft. These sections were previously approved as I mentioned and there are no changes proposed to these sections through application and use of the code. Scriber errors have been discovered. These include items such as transposed numbers and missing words which are necessary for proper and correct application of the code along with other small typos which do not in impact interpretation but are being uh corrected at this time. Some of the larger revisions before you this evening for your consideration are uh for clarity. These we found as we implemented the code along with our stakeholders were items that were either imposing unhar or undo and harsh additional restriction that was never intended or was causing a conflict with another part of the code. Uh these include accessory structure standards, specifically setbacks, including uh items like detached garages, sheds,

patio covers. Uh we found that they were limiting people's ability to really utilize their property in the way that they they would like to to fully enjoy their backyard, for example. Um, so we were able to break down those uh rules into an updated table that allows it to not only increase people's usability, but then also avoids the fact that many uh projects and previously existing structures were becoming legal non-conforming. And we did not want to put property owners in that position. Additionally, uh we were able to revise the accessory dwelling unit uh setback re uh requirements along with this. This is simply to clarify some of those and they were one of those items that appeared to be a conflict and you'd had to quite honestly read too much into it in order to understand exactly what was required. So this uh is to in clear that one. Data centers. We did extensive research and as we know data centers throughout Arizona has been a very hot topic. Um particularly here in Mojave County as well. We took a sampling of approximately seven jurisdictions that have written code on data centers, compared them, reviewed them, and ensured that we were able to expand our data center uh section to ensure that we're protecting what's important to the community, specifically water resources that have become center of that conversation. We updated the drive-thru service facility supplemental standards. This is essentially a reorganization of that section purely for clarity and a rewrite for clarity as well. Also uh assists in the fact that we were receiving requests for drive-throughs

that were leading to variances that were seemingly un unnecessary. If we were able to revise the code in a clear and transparent way in the encroachments for required setbacks, we did something similar. There was a previously there was a table that was not the easiest to read and apply. So we were able to remove that table and bring it forward into one comprehensive shortened section that lays out those requirements very clearly. Also during the review of that section we found that some items uh were missing in terms of definition. So things like uh the overhang or the uh the projection of a fireplace for example. Just making sure that we called those out for for uh extra clarity there. Although we are planning an additional future comprehensive sign code uh revision in order to um better suit the needs of the community. Uh what we addressed here were some immediate needs that we're seeing come through in um sign permitting and also in order to help some of the current economic development uh projects that are coming through that are bolstering some of the economic activity. but the sign code was really restricting them in terms of what is actually more industry standard. So we took a look these are some interim changes that allow for some of the new industry standards such as electronic message boards. They were never never mentioned in the sign code uh but yet quite common and and part of what people are expecting nowadays. So, we did a a light revision in the sign code, but I would say, and I

believe if we're still on track for summertime, if that's correct, to be bringing forward a more comprehensive sign code uh revision that will really address how cumbersome the sign section really is. So in conclusion, uh the proposed amendments before you again restores those unintentionally omitted sections uh brings in these targeted re revisions, excuse me, uh based on our review, the actual application of the code and the feedback we've been getting from our stakeholders. It is uh supported by the findings of the zoning code and is supported by the goals of the general plan. with no additional agency comments and a public notice was issued for this meeting in the Kingman Minor on March 18th. Based on the findings in the staff report, staff is seeking planning and zoning commission's recommendation for ZO26-00001 to the city council.

Thank you. Um, does anyone have any questions for staff? Um, I do. really quick. Um, regarding the, uh, industry standards for the signs, like was that did we look at at regional or like local municipalities like um, you know, like Habitatu City or Boldhead City down the road to kind of shape that or did we look, you know, more nationally to try and establish what's allowed?

Thank you, Commissioner Goss. Uh, Commissioner Waters. um at this time those when I say industry standards will be really heavily researched when we get into the comprehensive sign revision. What we're seeing here is like for example the electronic message boards um that's silent in the code but they're already being used um specifically even by the city. So we've had some applications for those that say well it doesn't say I can't it doesn't say I can. So, in terms of industry standards, some people are expecting, well, you're using it. Can where does it say in the code that I can use it as well? Um, we've had some refurbishment to marquee signs and additional items that again when it's silent, it's it's left out of the code. And Jason, I welcome you to expand on that because I'm sure I'm leaving something important out.

Chair Goss, Commissioner Waters, correct? So this is again an interim change and this is really following what we've been hearing from some of the the respective users in the city. We have various churches that are along arterial or major arteries. Those typically would be eligible for like an electronic sign. However, our code is silent in it. However, we've been permitting electronic signs previously but without having a code to back it up. So, this at least allows us to uh establish a process for those particular entities to come forward. Uh if they're in a in a residential area, then it would be by a conditional use permit. In some of the commercial zones, it would be allowed by right. So, this is again just to allow for for signs that we're already seeing that are being permitted. But again, because of the fact that it's silent in the code, it's requiring us to make a subjective uh determination on each one.

Thank you. you. Um I I had the same question basically for the uh the parking cap changes. I I assume that's based off some sort of like survey or something you did with other communities or nationwide. Um same answer.

Yeah. Chair Gosh, Commissioner Waters. With respect to the maximum parking, uh there's not a zoning code out there that I have come across that actually has a maximum parking requirement. um to where you actually have to say you cannot have more than if let's just say your business has 300 parking spaces required and you want to put 600 out there. Our code currently would say you can't do that. And it it's just it's kind of a a point which we're being overly restrictive. We're we're trying to now regulate what potentially their business needs are or their customer needs. So we're removing that.

Okay. Um sorry u madam chair goss staff one more question that's a shipping containers um so currently the city is less protected because we we accidentally omitted all the language regarding the shipping containers basically earlier this year when we redid the scriptors errors whatever right so by adding this back we're we're in effect protecting the city from um wantton shipping containers I guess is that going to be the argument that you guys are Chair Goss, Commissioner Waters, that is correct. So, and what we've done for those that have wanted to to proceed with them, we've allowed them to utilize the previous code uh because it was omitted an error. So, we have been processing them still just as as that was taking place. Uh but fortunately, I think we've only had one request. So,

thank you, staff. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Any other questions? No. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. Um, this item does require a public hearing. So, I will open this up and invite anyone from the public to come forward and speak on this matter. All right. I don't see anybody, so I'm going to close that up and open it to commission discussion. Um, does anybody have any thoughts or do we want to bring this to a vote?

Uh, sorry. Go ahead. U Madam Chair, yeah, I'd just like to commend staff for putting in the um the data center language in there, you know, to get ahead of that and protect the community. Um just two two concerns. One is the the parking lot. Yeah, you know, I I'm sure everybody here has heard about heat island effect and cities, you know, overpaving, things of that nature. Um, I could kind of see why we originally put that that language in there to try and cap, you know, the the amount of asphalt that we're putting around our, uh, businesses. So, um, when whenever we're kind of like getting rid of some language, I just try and put myself in the shoes of the people that put it in place. And I could see ourselves maybe getting into a Phoenix type um, situation as we start building out east. Um, that's my consideration with that one. The other issue was the um the signage. Um, again, I I seem to recall I keep up on the news pretty well and I seem to recall that Bullhead City and possibly even Havasu is pretty restrictive on their signage and you know, they've been kind of moving more in that direction as time passes. Uh my wife is from um oh uh Tucson and there was a huge you know multi-deade initiative to try and clean up some of the over signage you know that was put in place there. So I mean just as long as we're not allowing everything to go in um without respect to you know what that might look like in our you know if we end up making our city look over advertised I guess at some point. So staff or the commissioners might want to consider that. And just one more thing, the shipping containers. I detest the things. Um I understand though that by doing this we might be protecting ourselves a little. I'm worried about

staff being able to actually enforce codes against these things and people putting temporary um shipping containers in their lot saying it's an emergency and then you know no staff coming to check see if they get rid of them. It's an industrial kind of um aesthetic that we're basically embracing by doing this. And again, one more time, I I think we should probably look at neighboring uh communities to see if they're doing that the same thing here. They may be more restrictive than what we're proposing. So, those are my concerns. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you.

All right. Anybody else have any concerns? Because we can we can do things. We can either um discuss this and bring some concerns to staff or we can take action and improve the item. Those are our two choices. So, I guess my opinion would be um as far as the signs um I believe we can address a lot of those issues this summer when we do bring up the signs in general. Um so, if we kind of push that off until then, I think we can still deal with some of the signs. Um, as for the paving, I think we'll probably end up looking at the code again before this turns into uh Chicago. Um, so hopefully we'll be able to also deal with that then if it were to become an issue. Um, I also hate storage containers. Um, but I think most people do, so on staff, so we'll see how.

All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. That goes. Um, but I do appreciate your comments. Um, okay. Does anybody want to put this to a vote? Go ahead. I make a motion that we accept. Accept. Is that the right word? Approve. Approve. Z26-00001.

Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Can I get a roll call vote? All in favor? All in favor? I I.

Any opposed? It passed. Thank you. All right. Next, we have RZ260001. This is a reszone request to change the zone of approximately 1.07 07 acres from an R-1-5A residential single family attached 2,000 square ft minimum lot size zone located east of Benson Street and north of Kino Avenue. Uh assessor's partial number 320-4-069A. Applicant Sultan Abbas on behalf of Cedars Management LLC property owner. Um do we have a presentation? Thank you. Good evening, Madame Chair, commissioners. I'll be presenting case RZ26-00001, a reszone. The subject site is a total of 1.07 07 acres and is comprised of one parcel located north of Kino Avenue and east of Benton Street. The subject site is currently vacant. The intended use of the site is to split the property into four parcels for single family residential development which is allowed by right in the R16 zone. A parcel plat for this proposed lots split is currently under review and will be approved pending approval of this reszone. The Kingman general plan projected land use map indicates the site is currently designated as a medium density residential land use designation which allows for the requested R16 zoning designation. The surrounding land use on the Kingman

general plan map shows properties to the south and east of the site are also designated medium density residential and property to the north and west of the site are designated low density residential. The subject site is currently zoned R15A, residential single family attached minimum 2,000 square foot lot size. The R15A zone is a legacy zone created solely to consolidate the various development standards of the former R2 PDDD zones into a single zone with universal development standards. The R15A zone may not be used for any development other than within an existing planned development district and this is therefore triggering the need for the reszone. the surrounding zoning and development. To the north of the property is zoned RR rural residential and appears to be developed with single family residents. Property to the south is zoned R15A, the residential single family attached minimum 2,000 foot lot size and appears to be vacant. Same with property to the east of this site. Property to the west is zoned RR rural residential and appears to be developed with single family residences. The proposed amendment is consistent with and conforms to the goals of the general plan and any applicable specific plans. The subject property is currently designated as medium density residential under the general plan and the requested reszone action aligns with the existing land use designation and is more closely aligned with existing development in the area. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare

of the city and will add to the public good as described in the general plan. Overall, it appears the zone change to R16 will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, encouraging infill development is also an objective of the growth area element, which seeks to encourage a mix of housing types and affordability. This will add to the public good as described in the general plan. And the affected site is physically suitable in terms of design location for residential development as the site is relatively flat, has access to citymained streets as well as access to city water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. Site development will occur through the city's permitting process where any proposed development would be scrutinized to ensure adherence to various standards designed for safety and compatibility with adjacent properties. We have received no comments from internal and external agencies. The site was noticed on March 18th. The um mailing sent out to all property owners within 300 ft on March 18th and a display ad published in the Kingman Minor on March 18th. Staff has received one phone call regarding the proposal as of the date this presentation was completed with no expressed support or opposition from the phone call. Based on the findings contained in the staff report RZ26-00001, an application to change the zone of 1.07 07 acres from an R15A to an R16 zone is hereby recommended for approval to mayor and we're asking for your recommendation. Sorry. Based on the findings contained in the staff report uh to make a recommendation for approval to the mayor and city council.

Thank you. Does anyone have any questions for staff? I also have the parcel plot. It's been proposed for your viewing. Great. Thanks so much. And we don't have any questions. Thank you. All right. Since this is a public hearing, let me open up for public comment. Anybody wishing to speak can come forward. All right. I don't see anyone, so I will close that and open it up to commission discussion. All right. We don't seem very talkative this evening. We have a uh Does somebody want to make a motion? I was just going to do that. I move to approve RZ26-00001.

I second. Second. All right. Can we get a vote? All in favor? I. Any opposed? It passed.

Great. Thank you. Uh, next up we just have a report. This is a development report update. Um, and this is an item for discussion only with a staff presentation. Chair Goss, commissioners, thank you. So before you guys in your packets, uh we've been talking about the fact that we'd be producing a report that would be able to go out to the planning and zoning commission on a regular basis that would recap some of the activities that our department is undertaking on a regular basis. So we've been uh working on this report over the last few months. Uh it's been actually going out to our city council on a regular basis uh as they're getting it and as we're making uh changes and and tweaks to the report. uh now that we're at a point that we wanted to move forward, we wanted to be able to include you in that information as well. So uh it lists not just uh what type of activities that normally were coming before the commission, but it does give you a little bit greater detail of some of the other projects that we are processing. So it does keep the commission more apprised uh on some of the commercial projects we're working on as well as residential and other applications that we're processing. So that'll be included in your packets on a once a month basis uh when we have uh meetings coming forward. So look forward to those. And if you have any questions or comments, please reach out.

Thank you. Um, does anybody have any comments for staff on this? No. All right. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate that. Thank you. All right. Um, next we just have announcements by commission members. Um, these are announcements, board and commission liaison reports, availability or attendance at conferences or seminars. Um, do we have any of those? Okay. Um then we just have the request for future reports and updates. Um does anybody have any requests along those lines? No. All right. Then I will adjourn the meeting.