20260304 NEIGHBORHOODADVISORYCOMMISSIONMINUTES.PDF

City of Tempe — Regular City Council Meeting (2026-04-30)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 13805 characters
Minutes of the Neighborhood Advisory Commission (NAC) Meeting held on Wednesday, 
March 4, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. as a hybrid meeting with in-person attendance option along with 
virtual component option via Microsoft Teams platform 
 
(MEMBERS) Present: Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
(MEMBERS) Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
City Staff: Shauna Warner, Neighborhood Services Director; Elizabeth Thomas, Neighborhood 
Services Specialist; Keith Burke, Deputy City Manager; Diana Kaminski, Principal Planner 
Community Development Planning Division; Lindsay Post, Senior Transportation Planner; Chase 
Walman, Principal Transportation Planner 
 
Guests: Diane Melrose 
 
Agenda Item 1 – Call to Order 
The meeting was called to order at 5:32 p.m. by Chair Kozel 
 
Agenda Item 2 – Public Comment 
None. 
 
Agenda Item 3 – Review and Approval of Meeting Minutes: February 4, 2026 Neighborhood 
Advisory Commission Meeting 
There was a motion to approve the February 4, 2026 minutes as presented by Commissioner Devine and 
seconded by Vice Chair Caudill. The motion passed unanimously with a vote of 10 ayes. 
 
Commission Member Ayes: Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Eric 
Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Gavin Hamilton (joined meeting at 5:45 p.m. after minutes vote), Lane Carraway, Kaylyn 
Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
Agenda Item 4 – Transportation Plan 2050, Lindsday Post, Senior Transportation Planner 
The Tempe Transportation Plan 2050 is a strategic document that outlines how people and goods will move 
in the City. It serves as Tempe's roadmap for developing and managing the City's roads, public transit, 
bicycle, rolling and pedestrian system.  Following Phase 1 Existing Conditions Analysis, the Transportation 
Plan 20250 update is now in Phase 2 Need and Gaps.  Second public meetings were held in-person and 
virtually on February 25. The survey remains open through March 18 at transportationplan2050.tempe.gov.   
 
Outreach and engagement has been extensive and varied ranging from participation in local events like 
Tempe Juneteenth Celebration, Tempe Time Machine, G.A.I.N. Kick off and Tempe Tardeada to numerous  
bike clubs, community rides, pop-up tabling and presentations.  
 
Open ended questions yielded 708 unique responses about topics like: 
• 
Active transportation 
• 
Safety 
• 
Transit 
• 
Funding/priorities 
• 
General (additional input) 
The map attracted over four hundred unique responses.  
     
  
Minutes 
Neighborhood Advisory Commission 
March 4, 2026

2 
 
Expected outcomes of the plan: 
➢ Improved mobility and accessibility making travel across the City and region more efficient 
➢ Better access to jobs, schools, healthcare, and services 
➢ Increased transportation options 
➢ Improved safety 
➢ Environmental benefits including lower greenhouse gas emissions, reduced air and noise 
pollution 
➢ Economic development 
➢ Greater equity and inclusion 
➢ Long-term resilience 
➢ Planning for future growth, climate change, and new technology (e.g., autonomous 
vehicles) 
➢ Land use and urban design impacts 
 
Over 60% of survey respondents drive as their primary form of transportation with transit at just 
over 17%, biking at 14.5% and walking/mobility device at 4.2%.  Rideshare usage is 1.5% and 
carpool at 1%. 
Top responses for prioritization of transportation needs: 
• 
Enhancing and improving bicycle travel – need more shade, lighting and better separation 
from vehicles, separated on street bike lanes, signalized intersections for bikes and peds, 
developing the BIKEit to be the foundation of continuous low stress bike networks, traffic-
calming bike infrastructure, safe and comfortable crossings at intersections, high speed 
cooridors and freeway interchanges 
• 
Improving safety for all users – address missing sidewalks and connections to schools, 
parks and bus stops, continuous sidewalks/off street paths, more shade, improve the 
distance between safe crossing locations 
• 
Maintaining and improving roadways - green arrow left turns, signal timing, signalized 
intersections for active transportation crossings 
• 
Improving transit – more destinations, bus stop amenities, improve service speed, address 
the gaps between transit propensity, frequent service and destination hubs 
• 
Improving travel to/through key destinations - prioritize areas with highest traffic volumes, 
put improvements in areas that are more disadvantaged, greatest population growth 
Survey respondents have requested walkability (47%) be the primary transportation focus with 
bicycle facilities (42%) and transit (34%) following. 
 
Safety is a top priority.  Dynamic online mapping documents that 53% of Fatal and Serious Injury 
(FSI) crashes occur at mid-block locations with 47% of FSI crashes at intersections. Fifty percent of 
intersections in the High Injury Network (HIN) are located along mid-block HIN corridors.  
 
Phase 3 Project Recommendations and Prioritization is expected from mid-March through June 
and will include ongoing internal discussions with both a Core Working Group and a Technical 
Advisory Group (TAG), made up of twenty-one representatives across 11 Departments, working to 
assess and draft policy statements.   
 
Proposed Evaluation Criteria: 
 Traffic Safety 
 Transit Performance 
 Bike Connectivity 
 Pedestrian Connectivity 
 Equity Models (Equity Priority Zones) 
 Environment (Shade/Heat Evaluation Tools) 
 Traffic Congestion 
 Cost (Estimate Models) 
 Right-of-way 
 Feasibility (ROW Needs/Implementation Timeline/Utility Challenges)

3 
 
NAC Member comments and questions included: 
? Regarding the need to add more shade, why did the city place cacti along a bike path on the 
recent Smith Road project? 
A: Existing utility locations prevented the addition of more trees.  Working with neighbors to seek 
out additional plantings to offer more shade.  
 
? Why aren’t there signs for Neighborhood Circulator/Orbit stops? 
A: Many are flag zones.   
 
Many new to area residents do not even know the Neighborhood Circulators exist.  There needs to 
be more education and awareness of the service and the flag zones and areas and destinations of 
high activity need to be identified.   
A: Thank you for this comment, I will carry it forward. 
 
Agenda Item 5 – Proposed Zoning and Development Code Text Amendments, Diana 
Kaminski, Principal Planner CD - Planning 
Principal Planner, Diana Kaminski, provided a brief overview of multiple proposed corrections, 
clarifications, updates and modifications to the 2005 Zoning and Development Code.  This process 
is part of an ongoing effort to address the most frequent questions or challenges within the code for 
applicants and staff.   
 
Updates are proposed to the Sign Ordinance and to Part 3 of the Code which include items like 
Permitted Land Use Tables and clarifications to accessory structures and existing two-story single-
family residences and to Part 4 of the Code with clarifications and updates to specific sections of 
Development, Parking and Landscape Standards.   
 
One example is that second story criteria were relocated because people were missing it and 
overlooking mandatory requirements.  Criteria for Use Permit Standards were moved to Chapter 
3/Section 6-308 Applications to make it easier to find.  Another example is regarding parking 
standards, parking ratios did not change but tables were updated correcting prior alphabetizing 
errors.   
 
The Development Review Commission provided input to the proposed changes at their February 
10 meeting and the Ordinances remain in review with City Attorney’s Office.   
Expected next steps: 
➢ Development Review Commission Hearing March 26, 2026 
➢ City Council Introduction and First Hearing April 16, 2026 
➢ City Council Second Hearing April 30, 2026 
➢ Effective Date May 30, 2026 
 
NAC Member comments and questions included: 
? My old business sign remains intact 15 years after I closed the business.  Is there anything I can 
do to get it removed?  There have been subsequent tenants after I moved out but the sign remains 
the same. 
A: Thank you for this inquiry.  I will need to look into this question further and circle back with you. 
 
Comment: I hope you are uploading pictures of old signs to Tempe History Museum, comes in very 
handy when you need a business name and can’t recall it. 
A: We have created a Commercial Table to help track these requests received that do not fit within 
the Code.     
 
There should be some sort of tie in with business licenses. 
 
? What about school districts? 
A: Code does not apply.

4 
 
? What about an existing shed?  Will it be grandfathered in? 
A: Setbacks have not changed, the first section of the table was simplified to clarify that 0 to 9’ tall 
height structures require a 3’ setback.  If existing, and permitted at time it was built, it would be 
grandfathered.  If never permitted, you must adhere to existing code standards. 
 
? What about circular driveways like those off Hardy making access onto and off Hardy easier?  Is 
that in there? 
A: Driveway can be no more than 35% of frontage. 
 
Agenda Item 6 – Neighborhood Awards Discussion and Voting and Ratings and Voting and 
Neighborhood Celebration Event Planning and Updates 
Lead by Chair Kozel, staff recorded NAC member’s initial scores for each of the thirteen nominees 
and members then engaged in some initial discussions, particularly regarding those nominees with 
the highest overall ratings. (Staff note: Members Lane Carraway and Joel Stern were not able to 
attend the meeting and had provided their ratings prior to the meeting for consideration.)  
 
Commissioners were again reminded that beginning in 2024, NAC transitioned from multiple 
separate categories to one universal, online form.  Only the Neighbor of the Year category was 
chosen to remain intact as a separate, specific award designation.  Nominators selected a 
Neighbor of the Year box on the nomination form if they wanted their nominee considered for that 
honor.  For all other “categories”, members discussed options and ultimately selected six honorees 
to recognize at the April 11, 2026 Neighborhood Celebration and chose naming of each honor. 
 
Neighbor of the Year 
 
Motion: Commissioner Thomas made a motion to award Jacque Colegrove the Neighbor of the 
Year Award 
 
Second: Commissioner Novis seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of those present, 11 - 0 
 
Commission Member Ayes: Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
Community Contributor  
 
Motion: Commissioner Rynn made a motion to award Steven Gerner the Community Contributor 
Award 
 
Second: Commissioner Devine seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of those present, 11 - 0 
 
Commission Member Ayes: Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
Community Event 
 
Motion: Vice Chair Caudill made a motion to award Burrito League with the Community Event 
Award

5 
 
Second: Commissioner Rynn seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a 10-0 vote of those present with 1 abstention 
 
Commission Member Ayes Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas 
 
Abstention: Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
  
Neighborhood Event 
 
Motion: Vice Chair Caudill made a motion to award Maple Ash Neighborhood Circus with the 
Neighborhood Event Award 
 
Second:  Commissioner Rynn seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a 10-0 vote of those present with 1 abstention 
 
Commission Member Ayes:  Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas 
 
Abstention: Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
Community Impact 
 
Motion:  Commissioner Thomas made a motion to award Tempe Community Action Agency with 
the Community Impact Award 
 
Second: Commissioner Devine seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of those present, 11 - 0 
 
Commission Member Ayes:  Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Gavin 
Hamilton, Eric Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor 
 
Neighborhood Inspiration 
 
Motion: Commissioner Devine made a motion to nominate Holly Einspahr of the Bell de Mar Block 
Watch with a Neighborhood Inspiration Award 
 
Second: Vice Chair Caudill seconded the motion  
 
Result: The motion was approved by a 10-1 vote of those present  
 
Commission Member Ayes: Brandon Abrahams, Joe Caudill, Ray Devine, Jan Doughty, Eric 
Johnson, John Kozel, Stacy Novis, Caitlin Rynn, Casey Thomas, Suri Wall 
 
Nay: Commissioner Hamilton 
 
Absent: Lane Carraway, Kaylyn Smith, Joel Stern, Angie Taylor

6 
 
Agenda Item 7 – Proposed Future Agenda Items and Member Shares 
Staff confirmed that the Utility Rate Study is slated for the April 1 NAC meeting. 
 
Agenda Item 8 – Adjournment 
Meeting was adjourned at 7:21 p.m. 
 
Prepared by: Elizabeth Thomas