July 27, 2026 Regular Council meeting
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
44028 characters
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
COUNCIL MINUTES
July 27, 2026
The City Council of the City of Mesa met in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 20 East Main Street, on
July 27, 2026, at 6:07 p.m.
COUNCIL PRESENT
COUNCIL ABSENT
OFFICERS PRESENT
Mark Freeman
Scott Somers
Rich Adams
Jennifer Duff
Alicia Goforth
Francisco Heredia
Dorean Taylor
None
Scott Butler
Holly Moseley
Jim Smith
Mayor’s Welcome.
Mayor Freeman conducted a roll call.
Invocation by Pastor Michael Heiden of La Mesa Ministries.
Pledge of Allegiance was led by James McBride of Boy Scout Troop #54.
1.
Take action on all consent agenda items.
All items listed on the agenda with an asterisk (*) are on the consent agenda which means they
will be considered by the City Council as a group, without any separate discussion of these
items, unless a Councilmember or citizen requests the item be removed from the consent
agenda to be considered separately. If a citizen wants an item removed from the consent
agenda, a request must be made prior to the scheduled start time of the meeting.
It was moved by Councilmember Heredia, seconded by Councilmember Duff, that the consent
agenda items be approved.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Somers–Adams–Duff–Goforth–Heredia–Taylor
NAYS – None
Carried unanimously.
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 2
*2.
Approval of minutes of previous meetings as written.
Minutes from the Study Session meeting held on April 30, 2026, and the Regular Council
meeting held on July 20, 2026.
3.
Take action on the following liquor license applications:
*3-a.
Aldi #173
A grocery store is requesting a new Series 10 Beer and Wine Store License for Aldi
(Arizona) LLC, 6853 East Elliot Road - Michelle Wu, agent. There is no existing license
at this location. (District 6)
4.
Take action on the following contracts:
*4-a.
Three-Year Term Contract with Two-Year Renewal Options for Original Equipment
Manufacturer (OEM) and Aftermarket Refuse Truck Parts for the Fleet Services
Department. (Citywide)
This contract will provide for the purchase of OEM and Aftermarket refuse and refuse-
related truck parts for the maintenance and repair of the City’s waste collection fleet.
Fleet Services currently maintains 96 refuse collection vehicles that are critical to
providing solid waste services to Mesa residents. Parts purchased under this contract
will support ongoing preventative maintenance and repair operations.
The Fleet Services Department and Procurement Services recommend awarding the
contract to the lowest, responsive, and responsible bidders, BTE Body Company, Inc.;
Haaker Equipment Company; Short Equipment, Inc.; Spartan Truck Manufacturing, Inc.;
Wastebuilt Environmental Solutions, LLC, dba Wastequip, LLC; and Western Refuse
and Recycling Equipment, Inc., in a combined total amount not to exceed $1,300,000
annually, with an annual increase allowance of up to 5% or the adjusted Producer Price
Index.
*4-b.
One-Year Use of a Cooperative Term Contract with Three, One-Year Renewal Options
for Instrument Service and Preventative Maintenance for the Public Safety Support
Department. (Citywide)
This contract provides consolidated maintenance management for laboratory and
scientific equipment used by Forensic Services. Specialty Underwriters, LLC, serves as
a third-party service contract manager, combining maintenance needs from multiple
manufacturers into a single, streamlined program. They negotiate service agreements,
coordinate repairs, and track maintenance spending to help reduce overall costs while
ensuring equipment reliability and uptime.
The Public Safety Support Department and Procurement Services recommend
authorizing the purchase using the State of Arizona cooperative contract with Specialty
Underwriters, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $255,000 annually, with an annual
increase allowance of up to 5% or the adjusted Consumer Price Index.
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 3
5.
Take action on the following resolutions:
*5-a.
Approving and authorizing the City Manager to enter into a development agreement,
government property improvement lease, and other deal documents to facilitate the
development of an AC Hotel by Marriott on the property located at the northeast corner
of Main Street and Centennial Way. (District 4) – Resolution No. 12557
*5-b.
A resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to enter into an
Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for Next Generation 9-1-1 Policy
Routing Function (PRF) Backup Services for Police, Fire and Emergency Medical
Communications. (Citywide) – Resolution No. 12558
*5-c.
See: Items not on the Consent Agenda
6.
Discuss, receive public comment, and take action on the following ordinances:
*6-a.
Amending Table 1 entitled Mesa Development Impact Fees in Mesa City Code, Title 5,
Chapter 17 to remove the Public Safety Impact Fee Category column to confirm the
discontinuation of this fee. (Citywide) – Ordinance No. 6020
*6-b.
Amending Sections 10-4-5 and 10-4-6 of the Mesa City Code to modify the existing
speed limit from 40 mph to 35 mph on Mesa Drive from Bates Street to Lehi Road and
modify the speed limit from 35 mph to 30 mph on Mesa Drive between Bates Street to
the north City limits, as recommended by the Transportation Advisory Board. (District 1)
– Ordinance No. 6021
*6-c.
Amending Sections 10-4-5 and 10-4-6 of the Mesa City Code to modify the existing
speed limit from 40 mph to 35 mph on Horne from Brown Road to McKellips Road and
modify the speed limit from 35 mph to 30 mph on Horne between McKellips Road to the
north City limits, as recommended by the Transportation Advisory Board. (District 1) –
Ordinance No. 6022
*6-d.
Proposed amendments to Mesa City Code, Title 11, Chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, 30, 31, 34, 43,
67, 81, 86, and 87. The amendments include, but are not limited to: modifying entryway
monumentation requirements; refining building material and color standards; updating
Employment District use tables and development standards; clarifying lot and land
division requirements; modifying standards for Detached Accessory Buildings or
Structures and Accessory Dwelling Units; updating Live/Work Unit and residential use
standards in Commercial Districts; refining screening requirements for certain specific
uses and activities; modifying landscaping and alternative landscape plan provisions;
modifying landscape diversity requirements; updating Manufactured Home and
Recreational Vehicle Accessory Structure standards; clarifying sign regulations; updating
procedural requirements related to written protests, application review, and expirations;
modifying definitions of "Home Occupations," "Live/Work Units," and "Indoor
Warehousing
And
Storage"; and
adding a
definition
for
"Hazardous
Material
Warehousing and Storage." (Citywide) – Ordinance No. 6025
Staff Recommendation: Adoption
P&Z Recommendation: Adoption with Conditions (Vote: 5-0)
*6-e.
See: Items not on the Consent Agenda
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 4
7.
Discuss, receive public comment, and take action on the following resolution and zoning
ordinance related to the development known as “San Antonio Tire Shop":
*7-a.
See: Items not on the Consent Agenda
*7-b.
See: Items not on the Consent Agenda
Items not on the Consent Agenda
5-c.
A resolution extending Falcon Field Airport’s landing fee implementation date. The
recently adopted landing fees are currently the subject of litigation in federal court as
well as a review by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA has also asked
the City to delay implementation of the landing fees. The City retained Anderson &
Kreiger LLP, a nationally recognized law firm specializing in airport matters, to represent
the City in the lawsuit and to respond to the FAA. Anderson & Kreiger LLP is currently
conducting a comprehensive review of the landing fees and has requested that the
landing fee implementation date be extended beyond July 30, 2026, to allow time to
complete their review. (Citywide) – Resolution No. 12559
City Attorney Jim Smith announced that the proposed resolution would delay implementation of
the Falcon Field Airport landing fees. He clarified that the fees were proposed and adopted to
help make the airport financially self-sustaining by recovering costs associated with airport use.
He emphasized that the fees were not intended to reduce noise or flight traffic, discriminate
against a particular user, or favor one similarly situated user over another, as such actions are
prohibited under federal law. He requested that members of the public keep the purpose of the
fees in mind when providing comments.
Justin Judkins, a Mesa resident, questioned the proposed 90-day delay in implementing the
landing fees, citing an estimated $500,000 in lost revenue and noting that federal compliance
had already been established.
Mr. Smith pointed out that the 90-day delay would allow outside counsel to independently
review the landing fees in response to pending litigation and an FAA investigation.
Councilmember Goforth acknowledged the purpose of the independent review but expressed
opposition to any further delay.
It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Heredia, that Resolution
No. 12559 be adopted.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Somers–Adams–Duff–Heredia–Taylor
NAYS – Goforth
Mayor Freeman declared the motion carried by majority vote.
6-e.
ZON26-00333 "Faith Christian School," 9.9 acres located at 3761 South Power Road.
Council Use Permit for a Private School, and Modification of Conditions of Approval (1-5,
8, 12 & 13) of Ordinance No. 4646, from Case No. Z06-088. Leman Academy of
Excellence, Inc., owner; Ganeen Harstick, Faith Christian School, applicant. (District 6)
– Ordinance No. 6024
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 5
Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
P&Z Board Recommendation: Approval with conditions (Vote: 7-0)
Jason Smithson, a Mesa resident, expressed support for the proposed Council Use Permit. He
highlighted the school’s educational programs, accessibility, service to students with diverse
needs, and the anticipated positive impact on the community.
Councilmember Taylor spoke in support of the Faith Christian School and its relocation to a
larger facility due to continued growth.
It was moved by Vice Mayor Somers, seconded by Councilmember Adams, that Ordinance No.
6024 be adopted.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Somers–Adams–Duff–Goforth–Heredia–Taylor
NAYS – None
Carried unanimously.
7-a.
GPA26-00111 "San Antonio Tire Shop," 0.4± acres located at 1609 West University
Drive. Minor General Plan Amendment to change the Placetype from Urban Residential
to Urban Center. Tres Hermanos, LLC, owner; All Right Builders, Inc., applicant.
(District 3) – Resolution No. 12560
Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
P&Z Board Recommendation: Approval with conditions (Vote: 7-0)
7-b.
ZON25-00110 "San Antonio Tire Shop," 0.4± acres located at 1609 West University
Drive. Rezone from Office Commercial (OC) to Limited Commercial with a Bonus
Intensity Zone Overlay (LC-BIZ) and Site Plan Review. This request will allow for an
approximately 4,015± square foot Minor Automobile Repair facility. Tres Hermanos,
LLC, owner; All Right Builders, Inc., applicant. (District 3) – Ordinance No. 6023
Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
P&Z Board Recommendation: Approval with conditions (Vote: 7-0)
Assistant Planning Director Evan Balmer displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See
Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer provided an overview of the proposed requests for a minor General Plan
amendment, rezoning, Bonus Intensity Zone (BIZ) overlay, and site plan review for a 0.4-acre
property at 1609 West University Drive. He stated that the requests would change the General
Plan designation from Urban Residential to Urban Center and rezone the property from Office
Commercial to Limited Commercial (LC) to allow the continued operation of a tire shop. He
presented images of the proposed site. (See Pages 2 through 6 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer reviewed the proposed site plan and pointed out that based on the anticipated
customer volume and operating hours, the applicant had determined that four parking spaces
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 6
would be sufficient. He stated that the Planning and Zoning Board unanimously recommended
approval, with a condition requiring the applicant to address any on-street parking violations
within 30 days, potentially through an administrative use permit or an off-site parking
agreement. He discussed the proposed landscaping along University Drive, Longmore, and the
south side of the property. (See Pages 7 and 8 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer presented renderings of the proposed project and explained that the existing
building, constructed around the late 1950s, would be improved in a manner consistent with its
mid-century modern character rather than being redesigned as a contemporary building. He
highlighted the proposed color palette and the breeze block wall along University Drive and
Longmore, noting that the wall would serve as a required parking screen while also enhancing
the site’s period-appropriate architectural character. He mentioned a proposed mural facing
Longmore, expanded landscaping, and a shaded customer waiting area beneath the canopy
with seating for patrons. (See Pages 9 and 10 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer explained that the requested BIZ deviations are due to existing nonconforming
conditions associated with the building’s age and the site’s limited size. He confirmed that
similar deviations would be necessary for redevelopment of the property regardless of the
proposed commercial use. (See Pages 11 through 16 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer verified that the applicant notified property owners within 1,000 feet and held two
neighborhood meetings. He reported that residents raised concerns regarding parking, lighting,
noise, public safety, code violations, visual blight, the need for the proposed use, and
consistency with applicable area plans. He noted that the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board
also reviewed the proposed project and recommended approval by a 7-0 vote. (See Pages 17
and 18 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer announced that in response to the request from Council, the applicant withdrew the
proposed overnight roadside-assistance service and limited business operations to 8:00 a.m. to
8:00 p.m., consistent with a nearby tire shop. He confirmed that compliance with the revised
Good Neighbor Policy was included as a condition of approval. He reviewed police and code-
compliance activity associated with the subject property and a nearby tire shop and reported
that each business had one related police call for service, with no police reports filed. He stated
that the subject property had an open code case involving the unpermitted use, which prompted
the applicant to pursue the necessary P&Z approvals. He clarified that LC zoning prohibits
outdoor storage, restricts light spill onto adjacent properties, and requires noise-generating
minor automobile repair activities to occur within an enclosed building. He stated these
requirements were also included as conditions of approval. (See Page 19 of Attachment 1)
Mr. Balmer recalled that the request complied with the Mesa 2050 General Plan’s Urban Center
designation and applicable site plan review and BIZ criteria. He reiterated that staff
recommended approval with conditions, and the P&Z Board recommended approval with
conditions including the added condition addressing off-site parking. (See Pages 20 and 21 of
Attachment 1)
In response to a question from Councilmember Goforth, Mr. Balmer explained that the request
would change the General Plan designation from Urban Residential to Urban Center. He noted
that the Urban Center designation is generally applied to denser areas with a mix of uses near
arterial intersections and transit. He pointed out that the property is located on University Drive
near transit in one of the City of Mesa’s (COM) denser areas and that applying the designation
to this small parcel would not materially alter surrounding development patterns.
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 7
Assistant Planning Director Rachel Phillips added that the development of General Plan
placetypes involved several factors, including existing character areas, current zoning, and the
COM’s long-term vision for the area. She stated that placetypes are assigned based on the
broader surrounding context rather than on a parcel-by-parcel basis to avoid effectively pre-
zoning individual properties. She confirmed that the Urban Residential placetype may include
supporting commercial uses, particularly along arterial roadways.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Balmer explained that the Urban
Residential placetype reflects the broader area rather than the individual parcel. He stated that
the four proposed parking spaces would meet operational needs while allowing space for
landscaping and site improvements. He added that, although the LC district permits a maximum
building height of 30 feet, the parcel’s limited size and associated parking and landscaping
requirements would significantly restrict future vertical development.
In response to a question from Councilmember Heredia, Mr. Balmer advised that when a
business is operating with a nonconforming use, Code Compliance refers the property owner to
Planning staff, who work with the owner to bring the site into compliance. He stated that the
rezoning and BIZ process was appropriate for this property because it could address existing
nonconformities while allowing site improvements and reinvestment. He added that the
applicant has been working diligently with staff since 2024 to rectify the code violation through
the COM’s review and submittal process.
Responding to Councilmember Adams, Mr. Balmer confirmed that the business had operated at
the location for approximately 18 months without incidents or complaints beyond those
previously discussed. He added that, upon notification of the code violation, the applicant
promptly began working with staff to bring the property into compliance.
Alex Hayes, attorney with Withey Morris, PLC, representing the applicant, displayed a
PowerPoint presentation. (See Attachment 2)
Mr. Hayes stated that, following Council discussion and public comment at the introduction of
the ordinance, the applicant revised its operating plan to address concerns regarding hours of
operation. He verified that the updated Good Neighbor Policy limits on-site service to the hours
of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., prohibits work after 8:00 p.m., and is enforceable through a condition
of approval.
Mr. Hayes explained that the property has historically functioned as a commercial site and that
the other three corners of the intersection were originally zoned Office Commercial and were
later rezoned to LC. He noted that the subject property had previously accommodated uses
more commonly associated with LC zoning and reiterated that the business had operated for
approximately two years without incident or complaint. (See Pages 2 through 5 of Attachment 2)
Mr. Hayes stated that the entitlement process would bring the property closer to compliance and
result in substantial investment and improvements, including enhanced landscaping, removal of
two curb cuts to improve traffic safety, site upgrades, and a public art mural along Longmore.
He discussed the citizen participation efforts made by the applicant. (See Pages 6 through 12
of Attachment 2)
Mr. Hayes reiterated that the Good Neighbor Policy addresses the concerns that were raised by
requiring compliance with lighting and noise standards, requiring all work to occur indoors,
limiting operating hours, and providing residents with contact information for questions or
complaints. He pointed out that the applicant is committed to using electric equipment rather
than air-compressor-powered tools to reduce noise. He highlighted a letter of support for the
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 8
proposed project received from the immediately adjacent property owner. (See Pages 13 and
14 of Attachment 2)
Mr. Hayes stated that approval would allow the local business to continue operating, encourage
additional investment in the property, and improve the site’s appearance. He noted that the
request was supported by the adjacent property owner and City staff and received a unanimous
recommendation from the P&Z Board. (See Page 15 of Attachment 2)
In response to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Hayes confirmed that the previously
discussed mobile service work would be performed at another site location on Broadway Road
that is owned by the applicant.
Discussion ensued regarding the previous uses of the proposed project site.
In response to a comment from Vice Mayor Somers, Mr. Smith suggested a revision to the
Good Neighbor Policy to clarify that San Antonio Tire Shop would not perform customer service
work or dispatch from the site between 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. He verified that any motion to
approve would incorporate the revised language.
The following citizens expressed opposition to Agenda Items 7-a and 7-b:
•
Tess Taylor, a Mesa resident
•
Brent Done, a Mesa resident
•
Evelyn Rivera, a Mesa resident
•
Carole West, a Mesa resident
•
Reed Done, a Mesa resident
•
James Adamec, a Mesa resident
•
Charmaine McCleeve, a Mesa resident
•
Sandi Pierce, a Mesa resident
•
Sandi Done, a Mesa resident
•
Matt Taylor, a Mesa resident
•
Mark Done, a Mesa resident
•
Nolan West, a Mesa resident
•
Nathan Taylor, a Mesa resident
•
Roxy Jetson, a Mesa resident
The above speakers offered a series of concerns with the proposed project including, but not
limited to the following:
•
General Plan amendment and rezoning could change the residential character of the
neighborhood and limit control over future uses of the property.
•
Insufficient evidence to justify the requested changes.
•
Size limitations of the parcel and insufficient parking spaces.
•
Potential noise, tire storage, and increased traffic that could negatively affect the
surrounding neighborhood.
•
Safety, security, and property impacts.
•
Residents opposed 24-hour operations and supported limiting business activity between
8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
In response to questions from Councilmembers, Mr. Balmer explained that the proposed
rezoning to LC-BIZ would remain subject to the approved site plan, elevations, landscaping,
breeze block wall, Good Neighbor Policy, and other conditions of approval. He stated that Code
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 9
Compliance would enforce both the zoning ordinance and the property-specific conditions. He
added that a future use substantially different from the approved proposal could require
additional Council review if it triggered applicable zoning or site plan criteria; however, another
tire shop or similar use operating within the approved site plan and conditions might not require
the same level of review. He noted that, although the LC district permits a range of commercial
uses, the conditions of approval would serve as guardrails for future development of the
property.
Mr. Smith stated that zoning could not automatically revert if the tire shop ceased operations.
He advised that Council could continue the case and consider a development agreement if the
desire was to limit the property to the tire shop use, although he acknowledged that future
proposals would require additional review if they could not operate within the existing building
and approved site plan.
Additional discussion ensued regarding the potential future use of the subject property.
Responding to Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Balmer explained that the BIZ overlay was requested
to address existing nonconforming site conditions associated with the approximately 60-year-old
building, including current setback and landscaping standards. He stated that the overlay would
allow deviations while supporting adaptive reuse and higher-quality infill development.
Councilmember Taylor expressed concern regarding the uncertainty of future uses but also
acknowledged the applicant’s investment in the property, the revised operating hours, lighting
and noise restrictions, and enhanced landscaping. She also acknowledged the potential for
vacant property contributing to blight and public safety concerns if the business decides to
cease operations.
Mr. Hayes emphasized that the property was already commercially zoned at an arterial
intersection and stated that the General Plan encourages adaptive reuse and reinvestment in
underdeveloped areas. He stated that the amount of parking spaces was expected to be
operationally sufficient because most customer visits last approximately 20 minutes. He
explained that an added condition of approval would require the applicant to obtain an
alternative parking compliance plan if parking, queuing, or traffic impacts occurred on University
Drive, Longmore, or nearby residential streets.
Mayor Freeman discussed the property’s historic commercial uses and stated that, although the
proposed improvements would enhance the building and landscaping, he was concerned with
the number of stipulations required, potential overflow parking, noise, outdoor storage, and
neighborhood concerns. He indicated that he did not support the General Plan amendment and
related request.
Councilmember Goforth stated that the General Plan had recently designated the property as
Urban Residential and that no significant change in the surrounding area had been
demonstrated to justify an amendment. She pointed out that the proposed improvements did not
meet the threshold of unique, innovative, or superior quality necessary to justify the BIZ overlay.
Councilmember Heredia stated that the applicant had responded to concerns by improving the
landscaping, architecture, and overall appearance of the site. He expressed concern that denial
could result in vacant property that would be difficult to redevelop and could negatively affect the
surrounding neighborhood. He supported the Good Neighbor Policy as an enforcement tool and
stated that the applicant had made the necessary adjustments to improve the site. He
expressed support for the proposed project.
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 10
Councilmember Adams agreed that denial could result in a vacant building and unattractive
nuisance on a difficult-to-develop corner. He acknowledged that the business had not initially
followed the proper approval process but stated that the applicant appeared to have acted in
good faith and was willing to make a substantial investment in the property. He added that no
acceptable alternative use had been identified and expressed support for the requests.
It was moved by Councilmember Heredia, seconded by Vice Mayor Somers, that Resolution
No. 12560 and Ordinance No. 6023 be adopted.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Somers–Adams–Duff–Heredia
NAYS – Freeman–Goforth–Taylor
Mayor Freeman declared the motion carried by majority vote.
8.
Discuss, receive public comment, and take action on one of the following ordinances pertaining
to Zoning Ordinance amendments for Fleet-Based Services and Service Stations:
8-a.
Proposed amendments to Chapters 6, 7, 8, 31, and 86 pertaining to Fleet-Based
Services and Service Stations. The amendments include, but are not limited to: adding
definitions for Fleet-Based Services, Heavy Fleet-Based Services, and Accessory
Electric Vehicle Charging; modifying definitions for Light Fleet-Based Services and
Service Stations; adding Heavy Fleet-Based Services, Accessory Electric Vehicle
Charging, and related footnotes to land use tables; modifying Section 11-31-25 titled,
“Service Stations”; and adding Section 11-31-40 titled, “Fleet-Based Services.”
(Citywide) – Ordinance No. 6026
This ordinance is a modified version of the ordinance discussed at the July 16, 2026,
study session modifying the required separation of Fleet-Based Services and Service
Stations from residential uses and zoning districts from 100 to 150 feet and modifying
the land use process for Light Fleet-Based Services in the LC District from permitted to
requiring a Council Use Permit.
8-b.
Proposed amendments to Chapters 6, 7, 8, 31, and 86 pertaining to Fleet-Based
Services and Service Stations. The amendments include, but are not limited to: adding
definitions for Fleet-Based Services, Heavy Fleet-Based Services, and Accessory
Electric Vehicle Charging; modifying definitions for Light Fleet-Based Services and
Service Stations; adding Heavy Fleet-Based Services, Accessory Electric Vehicle
Charging, and related footnotes to land use tables; modifying Section 11-31-25 titled,
“Service Stations”; and adding Section 11-31-40 titled, “Fleet-Based Services.”
(Citywide) – Ordinance No. 6027 - RESCINDED
This ordinance is a modified version of the ordinance discussed at July,16, 2026 study
session modifying the required separation of Fleet-Based Services and Service Stations
from residential uses and zoning districts from 100 to 150 feet, modifying the land use
process for Light Fleet-Based Services in the LC District from permitted to requiring a
Council Use Permit, and modifying the maximum height of fleet vehicle parking,
charging, and storage from 30 feet to located at grade, except for in the GI and HI
Districts where the maximum height would be 30 feet.
Regular Council Meeting
July 27, 2026
Page 11
It was moved by Councilmember Duff, seconded by Councilmember Goforth, that Ordinance
No. 6026 be adopted.
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Duff–Goforth–Heredia
NAYS – Somers–Adams–Taylor
Mayor Freeman declared the motion carried by majority vote.
9.
Items from citizens present.
David Winstanley, a Mesa resident, recommended the 2012 film Still Mine that might help the
viewers understand the relevance of tonight’s recommendation.
10.
Adjournment.
Without objection, the Regular Council Meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
MARK FREEMAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular
Council Meeting of the City Council of Mesa, Arizona, held on the 27th day of July 2026. I further certify
that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
________________________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
sr
(Attachment – 2)
City Council
ZON25-00110
Mary Kopaskie-Brown, Planning Director
Evan Balmer, Assistant Planning Director
July 20, 2026
1
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 1 of 24
Request
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
2
•
Rezone from OC to LC-BIZ
•
Site Plan Review
•
Minor General Plan Amendment
(GPA26-00111)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 2 of 24
Location
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
3
•
1609 W University Dr
•
0.4± parcel
•
South of University Dr
•
West of Alma School Rd
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 3 of 24
General Plan
•
Current Placetype – Urban
Residential, Evolve Growth Strategy
•
Proposed Placetype – Urban
Residential, Evolve Growth Strategy
•
Convenience Services
4
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 4 of 24
Zoning
5
•
Existing – OC
•
Proposed – LC-BIZ
•
Minor Automobile Repair is
permitted in LC district
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 5 of 24
6
Site Photos
Looking southwest from University and Longmore
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 6 of 24
• Existing 4,015 SF Minor Auto
Repair Facility and canopy
• 4 parking spaces
• Enter from University and
exit to Longmore
7
Site Plan
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 7 of 24
8
Renderings
Looking southwest from University and Longmore
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 8 of 24
9
Renderings
Looking south
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Customer Area
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 9 of 24
10
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Minimum Building and Parking
Area Setbacks – MZO Table 11-6-
3.A
Front and Street-Facing Side
Interior Side and Rear
15’
25’
10’ (east property line to building)
14’ (east property line to parking
area)
23’ (west property line to building)
5’ (west property line to parking
area)
22’ (South property line to building)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 10 of 24
11
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Auto Service Bays –
MZO Section 11-30-9(G)(2)(d)
When bay doors are less than 200 feet
from an adjacent street and the bay
doors are less than perpendicular to a
street, screening shall be provided at
least 6’ high
3’ screen wall
Parking Areas – MZO Section 11-30-
9(H)(7)
A setback of at least 10 feet shall be
provided between the screen wall and
the right-of-way
0’
Automobile/Vehicle Repair – MZO
Section 11-31-6(A)
Minimum lot size is 1 acre, unless part
of a larger group commercial center
0.4± acres
Size of Parking Spaces and
Maneuvering Aisles – MZO Section
11-32-2(J)
One-way drive aisles that do not
provide access to parking or lading
spaces shall be at least 12-feet wide
11’
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 11 of 24
12
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Required Parking Spaces by Use –
MZO Table 11-32.3.A
11 spaces
4 spaces
Setback of Cross Drive Aisles –
MZO Section 11-32-4(A)
Parking spaces along main drive
aisles connecting directly to a street
and drive aisles that cross such main
drive aisles shall be set back at least
50 feet from the property line
abutting the street
18’
Perimeter Landscaping – MZO
Table 11-6-3.A
Front and Street-Facing Sides shall
be Landscaped According to Ch.
33
15’
12’ (minimum north property line)
11’ (minimum east property line)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 12 of 24
13
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Required Number of Plants by
Street Type – MZO Table 11-33-3.A.4
1 Tree and 6 Shrubs per 25 Linear
Feet of Street Frontage
Two 36-inch box trees and three 24-
inch box trees
Two 36-inch box trees and two 24-inch
Ocotillo (east property line)
Required Landscape Yards – MZO
Section 11-33—(B)(1)(a)(i)
Landscaping for Non-Single
Residence Uses Adjacent to Single
Residence Uses less than 5 Acres
20’
5’ (minimum west property line)
6’ (minimum south property line)
Landscape Islands – MZO Section
11-33-4(B)(2)
Landscape islands shall be a
minimum of 8’ wide and 15’ in length
for single-row parking
Sizes vary; minimum 3’ wide
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 13 of 24
14
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Landscape Island Plant Material –
MZO Section 11-33-4(D)
1 shade tree and 3 shrubs shall be
provided for every 15-foor parking
island
0 Trees
Foundation Base – MZO Section 11-
33-5(A)
Exterior Walls with a Public
Entrance
Exterior Walls without a Public
Entrance, not Adjacent to Parking
Stalls
15’
5’
5’ minimum (north elevation)
4’ (west elevation)
0’ minimum (south elevation)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 14 of 24
15
Bonus Intensity Zone
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Development Standard
MZO Required
BIZ Proposed
Landscape Area in Foundation
Base – MZO Section 11-33-5(B)(1)
1 Tree Per 50 Linear Feet or Less of
Exterior Wall Length
6 trees
0 Trees
Plant Material Within Foundation
Base – MZO Section 11-33-5(B)(3)
Exterior Walls Visible from Public
Parking or ROW with Public
Entrances
33% Landscaped
0% (north elevation)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 15 of 24
• Notified property owners within 1,000’,
HOAs, and registered neighborhood
• Neighborhood meeting held June 12,
2025, no attendees
• Neighborhood meeting held April 29,
2026, questions and concerns with
parking, light, noise, use
16
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING DIVSION
Notification
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 16 of 24
17
Comments - Planning and
Zoning Board Hearing
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING DIVSION
• Parking Concerns.
• Concerning 24-Hour Operations, Noise,
Light, and Operational Disruption.
• Public Safety.
• Existing Code Violations and Visual Blight.
• Failure to Meet the Burden of Proof, Public
Necessity, or Market Demand.
• Failure to Demonstrate Need for a General
Plan Amendment and Consistency with
Area Plans.
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 17 of 24
18
Findings
Complies with the 2050 Mesa General Plan
Complies with Chapter 69 of the MZO for Site Plan Review
Complies with Chapter 21 of the MZO for a BIZ Overlay
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING DIVSION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 18 of 24
19
Recommendation
Staff recommends Approval with Conditions
Planning and Zoning Board recommends Approval with Conditions (7-0) with an
additional condition of approval related to off-site parking.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 19 of 24
Planning and Zoning Board
City of Mesa
20
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 20 of 24
• Trees: Desert Museum Palo
Verde, Canary Island Palm
• Shrubs: Octopus Agave,
Organ Pipe, Parry’s Agave,
Red Hesperaloe, Ocotillo,
Golden Barrel Cactus etc.
21
Landscape Plan
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 21 of 24
22
Elevations
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 22 of 24
23
Elevations
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 23 of 24
24
Materials & Colors
• Existing building and
canopy
• Stucco
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING DIVISION
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 24 of 24
1
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
July 27, 2026
San Antonio Tire Shop
ZON25-00110 / GPA26-00111
City Council
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 1 of 16
2
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Site Aerial Map
University Dr
Longmore
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 2 of 16
3
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
General Plan Map
Existing General Plan: Urban Residential
SITE
Proposed General Plan: Urban Center
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 3 of 16
4
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Zoning Map
SITE
Existing Zoning: Office Commercial (OC)
Proposed Zoning: Limited Commercial (LC)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 4 of 16
5
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Longstanding Commercial Corner
1986
2002
•
Annexed in 1958 with commercial zoning
•
Small infill site (0.36 acres)
•
Originally developed and operated as a gas
station
•
Eventually became carpet wholesale
operation
•
Applicant acquired property for tire shop
based on understanding of historical
commercial uses
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 5 of 16
6
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Existing Site Conditions
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 6 of 16
7
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Proposed Development
•
San Antonio Tire Shop – Supports
quality local small business
•
Adaptive reuse of existing site
•
Substantial improvement to existing
commercial corner
•
Enhanced landscaping and building
aesthetics improves relationship to
the street
•
Improved site circulation / safety
•
Small infill site requires deviations
from modern code
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 7 of 16
8
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Proposed Development
Curb cut to be removed
Service
bays
Tire and
Equipment
Storage
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 8 of 16
9
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Parking
1
2
3
4
Bike
parking
•
4 parking spaces provided -
Sufficient for operational needs
•
Quick service operation – customers
wait on site during vehicle service
•
Business is currently operating– no
off-site parking has been needed
•
Additional location at 1345 W
Broadway (2.8 miles)
•
Alternative parking plan required if
adverse impacts (Condition 8)
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 9 of 16
10
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 10 of 16
11
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 11 of 16
12
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Citizen Participation
•
Notice letters sent to property owners with
1,000’ of site / HOAs within 1 mile
•
1st Neighborhood meeting held June 12,
2025 – NO ATTENDEES
•
2nd Neighborhood meeting held April 29,
2026 – 12 attendees
•
Comments / concerns:
•
Commercial zoning
•
Parking
•
Noise and light pollution
•
Potential for uses beyond tire
repair
•
24/7 operations
•
Letter of support from adjacent property
owner
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 12 of 16
13
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Good Neighbor Policy
•
No 24/7 Operations – Limited to 8am-8pm
•
All noise generating operations (i.e. tire
installations and repairs) will be conducted
within the fully enclosed building
•
Building construction meets or exceeds 25
dB sound attenuation requirement
•
Electric tools instead of air compressor-
based tools
•
Shielded, downward directed light fixtures
•
No outside storage of tires or equipment
•
Contact info provided to community for
questions or comments
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 13 of 16
14
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Supported by Adjacent Neighbor
Site
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 14 of 16
15
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
Project Benefits and Summary
•
Revitalizes dilapidated commercial parcel
•
Adaptive reuse of challenging infill site
•
Significantly improves site aesthetics and relationship to street
•
Compatible with existing uses around intersection
•
Supports small business in Mesa
•
Project supported by adjacent neighbor / Good Neighbor Policy
•
Recommendation of approval from planning staff
•
Unanimous recommendation of approval from Planning and Zoning Board
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 15 of 16
16
https://www.wmbattorneys.com/
16
Questions?
Regular Council meeting
July 27, 2026
Attachment 2
Page 16 of 16