Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 07.16 City Council Regular Agenda 0 2. N "IR/zoNP it o �11 ache 2ztnclion APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ..... 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 JULY 16, 1985 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA (All items marked with an asterisk (*) will be considered by the City Council as a group and will be adopted with one motion. No separate discussion will be held on any of these items unless a Councilmember wishes to do so. In this case, the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. ) *1. Acceptance of Regular Meeting Agenda *2. Acceptance of Minutes from the Special Meeting of June 27, 1985 *3. Acceptance of Minutes from the Regular Meeting of July 2, 1985 *4. Acceptance of Minutes from the Special Meeting of July 8, 1985 INTRODUCTION OF DISTINGUISHED VISITORS AND GUESTS AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Presentation of Proclamation for "Salvation Army Awareness Week" CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 380, PZ-21-85, Application by Jim and Linda Brinkman to rezone 1 1/4 acre parcel , located on the northeast corner of the intersection of West Foothill Street and North Cedar Drive in Section 18 from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. (Postponed Item) 6. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 385, PZ-25-85, Application by Rex and Grace Boice through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone 1.57 acre parcel , located on the northwest corner of the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue in Section 21 from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. (Postponed Item) Ask ,016, 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 386, PZ-26-85, Application by Patrick Harrington through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone 5 acre parcel , located on the northeast corner of the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue in Section 21, from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. 8. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 387, PZ-27-85, Application by Ralph and DaLee Valenzuela through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone two 5 acre parcels, located between North Warner and North Desert View Drives from West Foothill to West Smoketree Streets in Section 18, from GR General .�. Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. 9. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 390, PZ-30-85, Application by William and Mary Skelly to rezone a .72 acre parcel , located on the north side of West Roundup Street between North Meridian and North Cedar Drives in Section 18, from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. 10. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 391, PZ-6-85, Application by Darcy and Lori Simnioniw through Keith Stachar to rezone 1.12 acre parcel , located on the south side of East 4th Avenue, approximately 165 feet east of South Royal Palm Road in Section 21 from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. 11. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 397, PZ-35-85, Commission Initiative Dark Sky Ordinance, Adding Article 23 Outdoor Light Control Regulations (With the Emergency Clause) OLD BUSINESS 12. COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS (Postponed Item) NEW BUSINESS 13. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-26, AB-85-05, RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT, SMOKETREE STREET FROM SAGUARO DRIVE TO IRONWOOD DRIVE 14. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-25, AB-85-04, RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT, FIFTH AVENUE FROM WICKIUP ROAD TO CHAPARRAL ROAD 15. PROPOSED FREEZE ON RESIDENTIAL ZONINGS 16. REQUEST FOR EXTENSIONS TO CLEAN PROPERTY 17. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH PINAL COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES FOR SPECIFIC HEALTH SERVICES ON A CONTRACT BASIS 18. ADOPTION OF INTERIM CODE OF CONDUCT 19. REQUEST FOR 90 DAY EXTENSION FOR OPENING OF 4TH AVENUE, EAST OF IRONWOOD DRIVE (Loewenstein) 20. SPECIAL MEETING, JULY 29, 1985, FINAL BUDGET ADOPTION WORK SESSION, AUGUST 5, 1985 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, AUGUST 6, 1985 CALL TO THE PUBLIC 21. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) REQUESTS OF COUNCIL 22. ADJOURNMENT "THANK YOUR FOR ATTENDING THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR TAKING AN INTEREST IN YOUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE COME AGAIN AND BRING YOUR FRIENDS." ornm=1, CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JUNE 27, 1985 The special meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on June 27, 1985, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hill called the meeting to order at 6 03 p m ROLL CALL Councilmen Present Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Councilman Absent: Councilwoman Taylor Staff Present Acting City Manager/Director of Public Safety Bill McDaniel City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Controller Keith Lewis City Attorney David Alexander Others Present. Dr Mike Aemmer Mr. Rene LeSieutre CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON REQUEST FROM EPICENTER FOR FUNDING TO SUPPLEMENT LEASE COSTS Dr Mike Aemmer, representing Epicenter, addressed the Council in regards to the needs of Epicenter stating that the total amount they receive from the Department of Economic Security is $80,676.00 which includes salaries, equipment, rent, and utilities. Dr. Aimmer stated that $4,000.00 is allocated for rent, which Amok leaves Epicenter with a deficit of $6,000.00 as rent came to about $10,000.00 over the year, and requested assistance with this deficit. Councilman Eidson asked how many Centers Epicenter has. Dr. Aemmer stated that there are six Centers in the District, located in Departments of Economic Security. Councilman Jimenez asked if any other critical incidentals are going to be necessary for the following year. Dr. Aemmer replied that their carpeting is in very bad shape, and also other supplies such as locking cabinets would be helpful Vice Mayor Bakkedahl asked if Epicenter is a private corporation, or a government agency. Dr Aemmer replied that Epicenter is a private non-profit corporation. Councilman Baljo asked if the City could give funds to a private non-profit organization. nr Acting City Manager Bill McDaniel stated that it should not cause a problem, as Epicenter does provide a service to the City and the Police Department, and recommended giving the funds to Epicenter. City Attorney David Alexander stated as a "common law" City, we are restricted to expenditures that are directly provided for by powers of a common law city and this concern is legitimate, and in the future we will have to contract for services of certain organi- zations to benefit the City that are under some of our powers, that fit under "the prevention of disease", and in considering this donation of funds, this specific organization to be worthy in that light Mr Alexander stated that comments concerning rent and supplies are not appropriate with this law in mind, but prevention of mental health diseases should be reasons for assistance. Councilman Jimenez suggested that the City give the Community Foundation, next year, possibly a sum of $15,000.00, so that they could be the City's agent for organizations such as this Mr. Rene LeSieutre, representing the Community Foundation, explained their procedures for allocating funds to different organization. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEND FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,000.00 FROM ACCOUNT NO. 001-105-513-005-18 TO THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF EPICENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF MENTAL DISEASE IN THE CORPORATE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried ADJOURNMENT Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 6.30 P.M. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF , 1985, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Or'n E CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. Norman S Hill Mayor SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 27, 1985 PAGE 2 OF 3 ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk I /mlik SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 27, 1985 PAGE 3 OF 3 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JULY 2, 1985 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on July 2, 1985, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. oommik CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hill called the meeting to order at 7.00 p m INVOCATION Councilman Eidson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Bakkedahl led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present. Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Eidson, Councilman Baljo, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Staff Present: Acting City Manager/Director of Public Safety Bill McDaniel City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Finance Controller Keith Lewis Superintendent of Community Services Jeff Bell Deputy City Clerk Lori Clark City Attorney David Alexander Director of Public Works ommk Rich Broman Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer Economic Development Specialist John Schoeph Others Present: Mr. Larry Richardson 8600 San Ardo Scottsdale, Arizona Mr Keith Stachar 6301 E. Roundup Apache Junction, Az 85220 Mr. Larry Barrington 359 N Ironwood Apache Junction, Az 85220 Ms Dorothy Eckard Ramsey 950 E 4th Avenue Apache Junction, Az 85220 Mr. Bill Beaulieu 306 E Frontier Apache Junction, Az 85220 Ms Ione Chivonnic East Gate Realty 1980 W. Canyon Apache Junction, Az 85220 Ms Martha Burkinshaw 303 W. 6th St. Mesa, Az Ms Blanche Hardisty 2130 N Starr Rd. Apache Junction, Az 85220 0.1114, Mr Everett Walker 2 West Palm Aire Phoenix, Az Mr Dale Fuller 1565 N. Geronimo Apache Junction, Az 85220 Ms Donna Loewenstein 101 S Ironwood Drive Apache Junction, Az 85220 ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Baijo MOVED THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1-3 BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion. VOTE In Favor Councilman Baljo, Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill (Councilwoman Taylor and Councilman Eidson abstained on Item Nos. 2 and 3) The motion carried. Introduction of Distinguished Visitors and Guests Mayor Hill recognized State Representative Roy Hudson, ex-Mayor Amok Wendell Clarke and his wife, President of the Chamber of Commerce Sandy Smith. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Councilwoman Taylor objected to the Council seating arrangement. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None PUBLIC HEARINGS PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATION, SUPERSTITION HEIGHTS ) Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 2 OF 21 IOW /Mk IPP""Mr Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer explained that this is a preliminary subdivision plat for a 47 lot twin-home subdivision, and that the two rezoning cases, PZ-8-85 and PZ-30-83, have been approved by the Council Mr. Larry Richardson, 8600 San Ardo, Scottsdale, representing Lewis-Brewer Development, addressed the Council outlining the proposed development, and that there will be fences surrounding the homes with gates. Allak Councilman Jimenez wished to know what the selling price would be per home, what was the square footage per unit, and what parking allotment would be. Mr. Richardson stated that the goal for the selling price would be under $50,000, each house would have it's own carport and driveway in the front and there would be a 20-car parking lot for visitors, and the square footage would be around 900 feet. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr Newcomer stated that the Development Coordinating Committee recommends approval of the proposal. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR SUPERSTITION HEIGHTS (PZ-8-85 AND PZ-30-83) BASED UPON THE ELEVATIONS, PLANS, FLOOR PLANS AND RENDERINGS, AND INCLUDING THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN DATED JUNE 24, 1985 BE APPROVED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 361, PZ-10-85, MEADE ) Mr. Newcomer addressed the request for rezoning from GR General Rural to CR-5 Multiple Residence Zone of a 17,780 square foot parcel, located on the east side of Ironwood Drive approximately 500 feet north of Roosevelt Street in Section 20, and stated that a letter was submitted by Mr. Keith Stacher, representative for the applicants, requesting that the Council consider CR-4 rather than CR-5, noting that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not address CR-4 in their transmittal to the Council. Mr. Keith Stachar, 6301 E. Roundup, Apache Junction, again requested that this case be referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to be considered for CR-4 rather than CR-5. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the rezoning. Mr Larry Barrington, 359 N. Ironwood, Apache Junction, representing protesters of the case addressed the Council in opposition of the application. Mr Newcomer stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial of the application and the staff also recommends denial, with stipulations if approved. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 3 OF 21 Al\ Adak Mr. Stachar replied to the oppositions, stating that the parcel is large enough for the request and is compatible with existing neighborhood uses. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 361 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baijo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill called upon the City Clerk to read Ordinance No. 361 by title only. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly, read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 361, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-10-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-5 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO 361, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-10-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-5 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE In Favor: Councilman Eidson, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Taylor, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Amok Opposed. Councilman Baljo The motion carried, Ordinance No. 361 being denied. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 362, PZ-11-8-5, BRADLEY AND VANDEVER Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone of two separate 1 25 acre parcels, located between Ironwood and Gold Drives, about 330 feet south of Tepee Street in Section 20. Mr Manard Vandever, requested approval of the application Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the rezoning A resident at 1477 N. Ironwood, Apache Junction, addressed the Council in favor of the application. Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public and called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 4 OF 21 riy..�rl Ink Adiork Mr. Newcomer stated that the staff has no objections to the rezoning with stipulations of roadway dedications and that it not be developed into a mobile home or RV park unless otherwise permitted by the City, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission also recommends approval with the same stipulations. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 362, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. iak Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 362, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-11-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY Vice Mayor Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 362, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-11-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE* Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 366, PZ-14-85, RAMSEY Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Mr. Newcomer addressed the Council, stating that this is an application for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone of a 1.25 acre parcel, located on the north side of Fourth Avenue between Hopi and Arizona Roads in Section 21. Ms Dorothy Eckard Ramsey, 950 E. 4th Avenue, Apache Junction, requested approval and explained that the purpose of this rezoning would be to set up a mobile home for a relatives use. Councilwoman Taylor asked about two trailers presently on the parcel. Ms Ramsey stated that one is a travel trailer and the other is a trailer that is not set up or occupied. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 5 OF 21 — Mr Newcomer stated that the staff has no objections to the rezoning and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the application Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT i.� ORDINANCE NO 366, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows ORDINANCE NO. 366, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-14-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 366, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-14-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous Amok The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 368, PZ-16-85, BEAULIEU ) Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for rezoning from GR General Rural to C-2 Local Commercial District of a 27,150 square foot parcel, located on the southwest corner of Valley Drive and Superstition Boulevard in Section 20, and that protest petitions have been filed requiring a three-quarter vote of the Council for approval Mr. Bill Beaulieu, 306 E. Frontier Rd., Apache Junction, requested rezoning of the parcel, proposing shops to be developed on the property. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr. Newcomer stated that staff has no objections to the rezoning as is consistent with General Plan designations, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with stipulations REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 6 OF 21 Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 368, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 368, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-16-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO C-2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 368, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-16-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO C-2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 376, PZ-20-85, PERRAULT AND FORD Mr. Newcomer stated that this is a request for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone of a 1 1 acre parcel, located on the east side of Main Drive between Foothill and Smoketree Streets in Section 18 Ms Ione Chivonnic, of East Gate Realty, 1980 W. Canyon, Apache Junction, representing the applicants, requested approval of the rezoning. Councilwoman Gardner wished to know how many trailers the owners proposed to place on the property. Ms Chivonnic stated that possibly three trailers. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr Newcomer addressed the Council, stating that staff has no objections to the case and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with stipulations including that the site not be developed into a mobile home or RV park. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 7 OF 21 AN*. rms. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 376, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO 376, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO 376, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill recessed the meeting at 8 35 p.m. Mayor Hill reconvened the meeting at 8.45 p m Am\ PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 380, PZ-21-85, BRINKMAN Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public Mr. Newcomer stated that this is a request for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone of a 1 25 acre parcel, located on the northeast corner of the intersection of West Foothill Street and North Cedar Drive, and as the applicant has not signed the quit claim deed for the dedication of rights-of-way, recommended that the Council postponed until this is completed Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT 3 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 380, PZ-21-85, BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 16, 1985. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 8 OF 21 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 381, PZ-22-85, BURKINSHAW Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the application for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite of a 1 25 acre parcel, with a mobile home on the site, located on the northwest corner of the intersection of West Shiprock Street and North Cedar Drive in Section 18 with surrounding land uses including mobile homes and a house. Ms Martha Burkinshaw, 303 W 6th /— St., Mesa, requested approval of the rezoning, and stated that they proposed to split the parcel in half and place another mobile home on the east side. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the rezoning. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr. Newcomer stated that staff has no objections with stipulations, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the application with stipulations. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 381, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows ORDINANCE NO. 381, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-22-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. ,^ Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 381, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-22-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 384, PZ-24-85, HARDISTY ) Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone of a 1 25 acre parcel, located on the west side of North Gold Drive, approximately 165 feet north of West Roundup Street in Section 17. Ms Blanche Hardisty, 2130 N. Starr, Apache Junction, requested approval of the application REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 9 OF 21 Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called on the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr. Newcomer stated that staff has no objections and that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 384, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 384, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-24-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO 384, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-24-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO 385, PZ-25-85, BOICE ) Mr. Newcomer stated that this is a request for rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the quit claim deeds for dedication of the rights-of-way have not been signed by the applicant, and recommended that this rezoning be postponed until the deeds are completed. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 385, PZ-25-85, BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 16, 1985 Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 10 OF 21 Amok REQUEST FOR MAJOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT, SUPERSTITION LOOKOUT TRAVEL TRAILER RESORT Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for major amendment to the Planned Area Development for Superstition Lookout Resort, which is a 11 acre site located on the south- east corner of East 4th Avenue and South Cactus Road in Section 21 and is currently a rental park with improvements completed and approved by the City, and that the applicant is requesting permission to proceed with subdivision of the property to convert it into a travel trailer subdivision. Mr. Everett Walker, 2 West Palm Aire, Phoenix, developer and manager of the subdivision, requested approval of the project. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the request. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called on the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr. Newcomer stated that the Development Coordinating Committee recommends approval of the major amendment to the Planned Development with stipulations. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE REQUESTED MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR SUPERSTITION LOOKOUT TRAVEL TRAILER PARK (PZ-17-81 AND PZ-27-83) TO PERMIT SUBDIVISION OF THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED, BE APPROVED, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. CITY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TO BE FOLLOWED 2. ALL INSTRUMENTS OF PROPERTY CONVEYANCE, C.C. & R'S AND FINAL PLAT TO INDICATE REQUIRED SETBACKS 3. REQUIRED MINIMUM SETBACKS TO BE: A. SIDE 3 FEET B. INTERIOR STREET: 4 FEET C PERIMETER• 10 FEET D. REAR 9-10 FEET 4 UTILITY EASEMENTS ACROSS REAR OF LOTS TO BE REDEFINED TO ELIMINATE ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN EASEMENTS AND SETBACKS. 5. THE MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN TRAVEL TRAILERS AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND OTHER TRAVEL TRAILERS, RECREATIONAL VEHICLES OR BUILDINGS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN TWENTY FEET (20') EXCEPT THAT THIS SEPARATION MAY BE REDUCED TO 19 08' BETWEEN UNITS ON LOTS SHARING A COMMON REAR LOT LINE Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 388, PZ-28-85 CORRECTIONS IN ZONING ORDINANCE Mr. Newcomer stated that the current zoning ordinance contains technical errors, and that this ordinance makes corrections in order to avoid misinterpretation that may arise as a result of these errors. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 11 OF 21 Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the item. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 388, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows* ORDINANCE NO 388, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, VOLUME II, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 1, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CORRECTING TECHNICAL ERRORS IN SECTION 6.0102(a), SECTION 13.0105, AND SECTION 13.0110; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 388, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, VOLUME II, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 1, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CORRECTING TECHNICAL ERRORS IN SECTION 6.0102(a), SECTION 13.0105, AND SECTION 13.0110, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE* Unanimous The motion carried. au PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 389, PZ-29-85, COMMISSION INITIATIVE Mr. Newcomer explained that the current Zoning District Map adopted on March 7, 1985 contains an error and an omission and that this ordinance would correct this. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the item. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 389, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 12 OF 21 �iiYY- OPI" . i. s ORDINANCE NO. 389, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY CORRECTING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-5-80 FROM CR-5 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE TO CR-4 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE; AND BY CORRECTING THE OMISSION OF THE ZONUIG DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-41-83 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 389, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY CORRECTING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-5-80 FROM CR-5 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE TO CR-4 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE, AND BY CORRECTING THE OMISSION OF THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-41-83 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl asked if the emergency clause was necessary for this ordinance. City Attorney David Alexander stated that if the laws are to reflect what they should have been showing all along, the emergency clause is a quick method of correcting this error. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO 401, AMENDING PERSONNEL POLICIES City Attorney Alexander explained that the proposed revisions to the Personnel Policy are a result of deter- minations made by the Supreme Court in February of 1985, and that these decisions apply to all city governments. Mr. Alexander stated that these changes were made on February 19, 1985, but the Federal Department of Labor Arw, did not issue its regulations until June 14, 1985 and these should have been enacted as of April 1985, so the emergency clause would be appropriate for this ordinance. Mayor Hill asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this item. As no one wished to speak, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 401, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO 401, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 3 ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 3-10 PERSONNEL SYSTEM PERTAINING TO EXEMPT AND NON-EXEMPT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 13 OF 21 r--" EMPLOYEES, OVERTIME COMPENSATION, DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS, PROBATIONARY PERIODS, AND RENUMBERING TO CONFORM; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 401, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 3 ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 3-10 PERSONNEL SYSTEM PERTAINING TO EXEMPT AND NON-EXEMPI EMPLOYEES, OVERTIME COMPENSATION, DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS, PROBATIONARY PERIODS, AND RENUMBERING TO CONFORM; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING /mak PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 403, FOUR-WAY STOP SIGN ) Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated that a study was requested to determine if a four-way stop was necessary at the intersection of Idaho Road and Superstition Boulevard, and the traffic counts and other statistics warrant a four-way stop at this intersection. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposal. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. 1 Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 403, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 403, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING A FOUR-WAY STOP AT SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD (UNIVERSITY DRIVE) AND IDAHO ROAD; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 403, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING A FOUR-WAY STOP AT SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD (UNIVERSITY DRIVE) AND IDAHO ROAD, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 14 OF 21 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 392, TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES Mr. Broman explained that field inspections confirmed the location of all of the stop signs in the City, and that this ordinance insures Council approval of these devices. Mayor Hill asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the issue There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 392, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows ORDINANCE NO. 392, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING LOCATIONS FOR STOP SIGNS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 392, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING LOCATIONS FOR STOP SIGNS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS RECONSIDERATION OF PURCHASE OF JAYCEE'S EQUIPMENT Councilman Eidson informed the public that he was on vacation when this item was submitted to the Council at the last meeting, and expressed his feeling that it would be cost effective for the City to purchase the bleachers and equipment. Mr. Dale Fuller, 1565 N. Geronimo, Apache Junction, of the Jaycee's, stated that the bleachers cost $6.00 per foot when purchased three years ago used, and would like to offer this equipment to the City for $10,850 to put the Jaycee's organization financially clear Councilman Eidson called on the Superintendent of Community Services, Jeff Bell, if this equipment could be of use until 1987, when the Chamber of Commerce could utilize the bleachers for Lost Dutchman Days. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 15 OF 21 ^—mot Mr. Bell listed possible uses of the facilities which include: races, bicycle rodeo, starting locations for hikes and trail rides, music festivals, equestrian activities, dog show, halloween carnival, and other special events. Councilman Eidson asked Mr. Bell if he felt the bleachers were worth the asking price. Mr. Bell replied that yes, they are well worth the money Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT THE PURCHASE OF JAYCEES EQUIPMENT BE RECONSIDERED, AND THAT THE JAYCEE'S EQUIPMENT BE PURCHASED FOR THE AMOUNT OF $10,850 00. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. Mayor Hill stated that he did not feel that the large bleachers are worth the money VOTE In Favor' Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Baljo, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl Opposed: Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Mayor Hill The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS Mayor Hill MOVED THAT COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS BE POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 16, 1985. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PARK ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr. Bell stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission recommends establishing a committee to study and formulate a City Park Ordinance to consist of three Parks and Recreation Commission members, two City Councilmembers, one representative from the Police Department, and one representative from the Community Services Department and that at present Dee Weber, John Granillo, Jr , Lieutenant Reed Cox, and himself are on the Committee Vice Mayor Bakkedahl volunteered to serve on the Committee. Councilwoman Taylor suggested Councilman Jimenez for the Committee. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE APPOINTED TO THE PARK ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE: JIM BAKKEDAHL AND FRANK JIMENEZ (COUNCILMEMBERS) JOHN GRANILLO JR , DEE WEBER (PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEMBERS) LIEUTENANT REED COX (POLICE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE) REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 16 OF 21 JEFF BELL (COMMUNITY SERVICES STAFF MEMBER) Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS TO CLEAN PROPERTY City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that these are four property owners requesting additional time to bring their property into compliance with Article 9-2 of the City Code, and gave each respective reasons for the requests Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS TO CLEAN PROPERTY BE GRANTED* JOSEPH KUZMICKI FOR 30 DAYS ROBERT MARSALL FOR 30 DAYS S.Q. NIMS FOR 30 DAYS JOSEPH E. PRICE FOR 30 DAYS AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF DAYS GRANTED BEGIN UPON THE PROPERTY OWNER RECEIVING CERTIFIED NOTICE. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. Councilwoman Gardner amended the motion giving Joseph E. Price an extension of 14 days. Councilman Jimenez seconded the amendment. Councilwoman Taylor asked what the procedure would be if Mr. Price's request was denied. Ms Connelly stated that he would be notified of the denial and if he has passed the initial 30 day deadline, he would have to immediately clean the property and if he doesn't, the City would clean the property, billing him for the labor VOTE. In Favor: Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Mayor Hill Vice Mayor Bakkedahl Opposed: Councilman Eidson, Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Baljo The amendment to the motion carried VOTE Unanimous The original motion carried REVISION OF GENERAL PLAN AND PREPARATION OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE Councilman Jimenez explained that this item is for the purpose of giving instruction to the City Manager to revise the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO PROCEED WITH THE REVISION OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE PREPARATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE AND ASSOCIATED ORDINANCES, WITH THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 17 OF 21 A) HENCEFORTH, THIS PROJECT WILL BE GIVEN TOP PRIORITY STATUS. B) GENERAL PLAN REVISION BE CONTRACTED OUT TO A CONSULTING FIRM FOR PROCESSING. C) GENERAL PLAN REVISION BE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS WITHIN 180 DAYS AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL AWARDS THE BID TO A CONSULTING FIRM D) THE RESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE AND ASSOCIATED ORDINANCES BE COMPLETED AND ADOPTED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF TODAYS DATE E) THAT ASSOCIATE PLANNER JIM NAKAGAWA BE ASSIGNED THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE COORDINATOR AND THAT A MINIMUM 75% OF THE COORDINATOR'S 40-HOUR WORK WEEK BE DEVOTED TO THIS PROJECT. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. APPOINTMENT TO CITY BOARD OF HEALTH ) Ms Connelly explained that two representatives from the City Council normally serve on the City Board of Health, and as the previous representative, Councilman Shanks is no longer on the Council, it is necessary for a second representative to be appointed. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT MARI GARDNER BE APPOINTED TO THE CITY BOARD OF HEALTH, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE APRIL 1986 Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Mr. Newcomer stated that two terms tft"' on the Planning and Zoning Commission did expire as of July 1st, and Ken Sanchez resigned from the Commission on June 5th and that Mr. John Betzner wishes to be reappointed. Councilwoman Taylor asked the applicants for the vacancies various questions Ms Connelly stated that Ronald Classen has withdrawn his application. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE RESIGNATION OF MR. KEN SANCHEZ FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET, AND THAT JOHN BETZNER BE REAPPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF KEN SANCHEZ, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988, AND THAT GIL VERLEY BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 18 OF 21 VOTE: In Favor: Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Baljo, Councilman Eidson Opposed: Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Mayor Hill Vice Mayor Bakkedahl The motion failed. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT THE RESIGNATION OF MR. KEN SANCHEZ FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET; AND THAT JOHN BETZNER BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF KEN SANCHEZ, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988; AND THAT MIDGE CONWAY BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988 Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE In Favor Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Councilwoman Gardner, Mayor Hill, Councilman Jimenez Opposed Councilman Baljo, Councilman Eidson, Councilwoman Taylor The motion carried. APPOINTMENT TO LIBRARY BOARD Councilwoman Taylor stated that the present members whose terms have expired do wish to be reappointed. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT RUBY FORSBERG AND ROSALINE DEBNAM BE REAPPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY BOARD, SAID TERMS TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. APPOINTMENTS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Mr. Newcomer stated that two terms have expired that John Schmidt has declined reappointment, but Mary Luddy does wish to be reappointed. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT MARY LUDDY AND MICHAEL SCHAEFFER BE APPOINTED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, SAID TERMS TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1988. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor: Councilman Eidson, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Taylor Opposed. Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 19 OF 21 SPECIAL MEETING, JULY 15, 1985 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, JULY 15, 1985 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, JULY 16, 1985 Mayor Hill MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M , AND A WORK SESSION AT 7 00 P M., ON JULY 15, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6 00 P.M., ON JULY 16, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT A SPECIAL MEETING BE HELD ON JULY 15, 1985, AT 7 00 P.M., IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF TENTATIVE BUDGET ADOPTION AND PROPOSED USE HEARING FOR FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms Donna Loewenstein, 101 S Ironwood Drive, Apache Junction, addressed the Council requesting a 90 day extension for the opening of 4th Avenue Mr. Keith Stachar, 6301 E Roundup, protested that the public hearing on Ordinance No 361 which was denied, was not closed and sufficient consideration given to the rezoning, and requested that the case be put back on the agenda for reconsideration to CR-4 INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) Councilman Jimenez stated that parents of the children involved with Southwest Human Development should be aware that work is being done to resolve this issue. Councilman Baljo read a letter from the Department of Transportation in regards to the scheduling of the construction on U.S. Highway 60 and S R 88, which is rescheduled for May of 1986 to better accomodate winter visitor traffic. REQUESTS OF COUNCIL Councilman Eidson requested a public apology from the new Councilmembers for past statements against the incumbent Councilmembers. The other Councilmembers responded to this request ADJOURNMENT Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 10.48 P.M. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 20 OF 21 Amok /Pk *Consent Agenda Items are as follows: *1. Acceptance of Regular Meeting Agenda *2. Acceptance of Minutes from the Regular Meeting of June 18, 1985 *3. Acceptance of Minutes from the Special Meeting of June 20, 1985 ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF , 1985, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIIY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk I REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 2, 1985 PAGE 21 OF 21 Auk Am. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING JULY 8, 1985 The special meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on July 8, 1985, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law „Am\ Ir CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hill called the meeting to order at 6 15 p.m ROLL CALL Councilmen Present Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Councilman Eidson, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Councilman Absent Councilwoman Taylor Staff Present City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney David Alexander EXECUTIVE SESSION, JULY 8, 1985 Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD ON JULY 8, 1985, AT 6 15 P.M., IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried ADJOURNMENT Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE /mak SPECIAL MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 6 16 P.M. Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF , 1985, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. Norman S Hill Mayor SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 8, 1985 PAGE ONE /^ ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk l SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 8, 1985 PAGE TWO Ark Am. ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES I /t/ 0/8--( ITEM # / MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: ei6"'14' YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO v VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL v UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NOS. 1-4 I MOVE THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1-4 BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. A. A. PUBLIC HEARING 1 • FOR OROTNANCE NO. 380, P7-21-85 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE . 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE. 4 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7 . IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) ,•� CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE PQACHE✓G 1. -L O lit' . Z _ _ �'•\ • gPizo , cO.ily (*ache unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 12, 1985 Approver for Agenda MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Dat Item # THROUGH: MICHAEL J. McNULTY, CITY MANAGER First Reading /1) Sccond Fles.c;no /I(r T FROM: HUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING _'Public Hearing Old Business SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 2, 1985 New Business PZ-21-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 380) Consent Agenda Project Description Rezoning case PZ-21-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 380, is a request by the applicants Jim and Linda Brinkman to rezone their property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is a 14 acre parcel developed with a mobile home located on the northeast corner of the intersection of West Foothill Street and North Cedar Drive in Section 18. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include condos, mobile homes, and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning would be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the south thirty-three feet (33' ) , the north twenty-five feet (25' ) and the west thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-offs at intersections. Staff also recommends that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Stipulations in Ordinance The staff and Planning and Zoning Commission both recommend roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 9828002 Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 2, 1985 PZ-21-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 380) Page Two of Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 11, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Heermans/Jorgensen 5-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-21-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 380, application of Jim and Linda Brinkman for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicants dedicate the south and west thirty-three feet (33' ) and the north twenty-five feet (25' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-offs at intersections. 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The reasons for this recommendation are: The request is in compliance with the General Plan's Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity designation for the site." CRN.mas PZ-21-85 ORDINANCE NO 380 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE W T WINDSONG STREET CR-5 Condos Vacant Single I Family Vacant e I Mobile Mobil TH I Single Mobile 4, Home Home i Family Home WEST FOOTHILL STREET Vacant Mobile w Home > w E w > A > E z x O _a a x z H as Horses x E w w a x x x F E+ E.x rz 0 0 0 z z z WEST SMOKETREE STREET i! Fl SUBJECT SITE I J LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: 200 400 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1 I/We hereby request a change of zoning classificationaq Parcel No 1 From• ,fbj�,Q�'(c � To: •`2CLchiti Parcel No 2 Parcel No. 3 'ark Parcel No. 4 2. Whq,t is the General Plan designation for the site(s)? (.,d . 3. Size of the subject property. /U/2e, e5y(/S() t L [acres] [square feet] 4. How is the property currently developed? 2 jiatcL a i'ZU!,Y,/,e_/Z -, J__ c�v z i /Irate. J/2 5. What are the adjacent land uses? North. ?111142/ South f y QC- ��G`eGeC ls'2i-ss,,4i ./ East• /�r 'iC_ West: /y a -ys1_rc-f'�c.ec. 6. The legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned Gt�z CA}2- <S SE` N60`; N W v •n5 /8, Section /Q, , Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7. Why are you requesting this rezoning? 67_,yv (l�Oi il�i „z*4 /-C- iQ-O r C +�1i/aCc24 LZ `h/,e/ (Please Complete Reverse Side of Form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. -PZ --?7 - Proposed Ordinance No. ,3�0 Date Filed 4/9,p,5 Application received by Receipt No. a s'11 Fee Amount y d.fo. a-o Page 1 of 2 4/18/84 8. I/We hereby certify that: a. (I am)011!_m0 the owners of the property described in this application for rezoning and have attached copies of deeds, title reports, or other documents as proof of ownership b I/}fie-have truthfully completed this application for rezoning. c. I/ga understand the filing fees to be non-refundable, the rezoning process to involve public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Com- mission and the City Council, and action to approve or disapprove our request is discretionary. '^ d. I/l .understand in order to obtain approval of this rezone we may be requested to dedicate portions of our property for public roadway and associated purposes. e I/W. being the owners of the property in this rezoning application have appointed named below as our representative in this rezoning application and have authorized him to do anything whatsoever necessary to have the rezoning considered favorably by the City of Apache Junction (1) BR/A/ ,-1 N (signa Lec�� 2�ir��Iist� print owner's name) ( ure , 6 5" to, /7 a&-e- (address) �,r �. cfi�i �"`' ��aso q83-lU-i/z) hone) (2) //rdJA ;/Y /A/,-.,7749A/ �,��1 , (print owner's name) signature (7765 GcJ. /759,0-e (address) GG C vz-e, v5aa d 963" /0-0-0 (phone) (3) (print owner's name) (signature) (address) (phone) STATE OF AP/z o4vs9 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge COUNTY OF SS before me this (1 7 day of /=-E8 , 19 C )A/A, by D My Commission Expires Aug 12 1886 (My commission expires• ) Notary Public 9. I hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owners in this rezoning application as their representative and that they have requested that all correspondence in this matter be mailed to me (print representative's name) (signature) (mailing address) (phone) STATE OF ) SS The foregoing instrument was acknowledged COUNTY OF ) before me this day of , 19_ by. (My commission expires. ) Notary Public Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. 380 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, „arkARIZONA, THAT: SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcel of land described as The West z of the West 1 of the South z of the Southeast ; of the Northwest $ of the Northwest ; of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, subject to the following stipulations 1) the applicants dedicate the south and west thirty-three feet (33') and the north twenty-five feet (25') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-offs at intersections; and 2) this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, �.� ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM avY�� F. le a r City Attorney .�. s PZ-21-85 ORDINANCE NO 380 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE /1"1 WEST WINDSONG STREET I I I I I CR-5 II TH 1 I I I � I WEST FOOTHILL STREET w w 9 x w A - A A z A _ A zz A U 3 x x F F Cx 0 0 z z WEST SMOKETREE STREET M SUBJECT SITE N L- 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: I 0 200 400 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ,(� / ? ' : A' ,, ;7////'ea ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY : SECONDED BY: /0 YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR / COUNCILMAN BALJO V VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL v COUNCILMAN EIDSON " COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ " MAYOR HILL V i UNAN MOUS ,J IN FAVOR OPPOSED A3STAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES i) f, ITEM # MEETING OF n MOTION 3Y: SECONDED BY : 2,4 NO A3STAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR w COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL ✓� COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL V I UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED A3STAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 5 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 380, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 380 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 380, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 5 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 380, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance.) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 380 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 380, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL A PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 385, PZ-25-85 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE . 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE . 4. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7. IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE PQACHE✓° 1 'Co U Z ..r--•-. \ .,..... ,q P c0it� o "pache &unclion RiZON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY • DEVELOPMEN T June 12, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Approver for Agenda -J D-W , THROUGH: MICHAEL J. McNULTY, CITY MANAGER 41 __Itel._1— First Reading FROM. JJCHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Saco, d Heading VAT•1► Public Hearing SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 2, 1985 Old Business PZ-25-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 385) New Business Consent Agenda Project Description Rezoning case PZ-25-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 385, is a request by the applicants Rex and Grace Boice through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone their property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is a vacant 1.57 acre parcel located on the northwest corner of the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue in Section 21. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include mobile homes, a house, Superstition Lookout Recreational Vehicle Park, the Palms Mobile Home Park, and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning would be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the east thirty-three feet (33' ) and the south thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue. Staff also recommends stipulating that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Stipulations in Ordinance The staff and Planning and Zoning Commission both recommend roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The Commission added a third stipulation, stating that this parcel not be developed into a subdivision without required improvements, however this stipulation is not in the Ordinance, but can be added at the Council 's discretion. In all subdivisions, the City requires improvements, so it is not really necessary to put this in the Ordinance. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982-8002 Amk Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 2, 1985 PZ-25-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 385) Page Two of Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 11, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: ,.� (M/S Taylor/Hoaglin 5-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-25-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 385, application of Rex and Grace Boice through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicants dedicate the east and south thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue. 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. 3. This parcel not be developed into a subdivision without the required improvements. The reasons for this recommendation are: According to the City of Apache Junction 's General Plan, this is the best use of the property to be rezoned from this holding pattern of General Rural to Trailer Homesite. It complies with all the density requirements of the City of Apache Junction. " CRN:mas PZ-25-85 ORDINANCE NO 385 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE • 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I —1 I 1 TH I I I I I I I a I I o I I X I I Single a I 1 Family o 1 I Dwelling o Vacant 1 1 I E. o 1 I = 1 I Vacant L-------- EAST 4th AVENUE r Palms Mobile I Superstition 1 MHP Home I Lookout RVP TH I TH I I 1 L -- L---- — --- 11 ® SUBJECT SITE N 1 J LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: f 0 200 400 Aft. o. CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1 I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification from: Parcel No. 1 From ,vital(E,j,J To: �������� , No 2 (�` No 3 No 4 /Ink 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? 3. Size of your property: / 5-7 a. [acres] [square feet] 4 What is built on your property now? C_A N 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? North: WO Uses South• TH41LeR PARK East V9CAN r West. V/R c A N T 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned e 310 ' of -r++t S Zo, So e -i9-8S 0442_ Section , Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona 7 What is your Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? /0/ - a -,,/3-A 8 Why are you requesting this rezoning? /R\ (Please complete reverse side of form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. ?7 (3 S Proposed Ordinance No. .3 n Date Filed LA\�Zl d j Application received by: J S- Receipt No r) Fee Amount ?k�Sp.po Page 1 of 2 11/20/84 3 P-ne Two of Two 9 I/We do hereby certify that: a (I am) (We are) the owners of the property described in this application for rezoning and have attached copies of deeds, title reports, or other documents as proof of ownership b I/We have read the rezoning procedures and requirements and have truth- fully completed this application for rezoning. c. I/We understand the filing fees are non-refundable, the rezoning process to involve public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and action to approve or disapprove our request is discretionary. d. I/We understand in order to obtain approval of this rezone we may be requested to dedicate portions of our property for public roadway and associated purposes e I/We being the owners of the property in this rezoning application have appointed A, , S/J/j /V/1/4 .TR as our representative in this rezoning app ication and have authorized him/her to do anything necessary to have the rezoning considered favorably by the City of Apache Junction. (Representative is to complete #10 ) 6t (1) 7ex 73oice ` ORA-de �a/ce � �' 63-z.ce z s (Print Owner's Name) ature) vs'- 9s�- � /97 z a�t /3�x 2 S l � � hl l_l Ei C(��lif 7 Z , (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) td-nq P iC e' V 07)1a Kd/Y/SD ,y�, � (City, State, Zip Code) V 1Zz (/ (2) AC-;< .d 0AAGe Bc/GL nc� (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) 76 3 7 C. SU A nlir/I /'Id& c;oz q' 2 333 (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) Z-A ME5/4, i RlzoniA - SS S r✓Sf Q (City, State, Zip Code) (3) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) (4) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) ;ail ir,g Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF 'y, , ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before /� SS. me this // day of Qc� , 19 /5 , COUNTY OF C i r,eL ) by' C13 y. B.-L:e • My Commission Expires. NOTARY PUBLIC 10 T hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owner(s) in this rezoning application as their representative and that all correspondence in this matter be mailed to me at their request. ALF SULLIVAN ,T'R (Print representative's name) Signature o representative j-- /72i eJ sUPensr/roN 982-4-/-09 (Mailing address) (Phone number) /IPAcye J P/vcJ /J, AZ. _15,2.20 (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF/4JT/z 0/Yf4 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before SS me this day of Dr� __ , 19 675 , COUNTY OF f�/N/�L ) by: l�.�"- . My Commission Expires /a 4-9$ eve > .I(1TM1 ORDINANCE NO 385 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-25-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcel of land described as: The East 310 feet of the South 220 50 feet of the East 1 of the Southeast 4 of the Northwest } of the Southeast 1 of Section 21, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone; subject to the following stipulations• 1) the applicants dedicate the east and south thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue; and 2) this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Mayor ATTEST• Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Da . Al r City Attorney PZ-25-85 ORDINANCE NO 385 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE „,..\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I TH I I I I M I I o I I x I I x I 0 1 II o I x x I I EAST 4th AVENUE I I I I TH I TH I I I I I I L ---- L---- J 1 ill SUBJECT SITE N 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL)l L SCALE: 200 400 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET "DOTES / ( / it l'/ LS ,... P , i i ° q )/ i, AtI ITEM # (P MEETING OF 77)taikti, MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: 3,S NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO ' / VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V COUNCILMAN EIDSON ✓ MAYOR HILL i UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOT I ON BY: SECONDED BY : YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 6 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 385, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 385 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 385, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-25-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 6 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 385, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 385 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 385, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-25-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL it A. PUBLIC HEARING l • FOR ORDINANCE NO. 386, PZ-26-85 .olk 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE . 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE . 4. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7 . IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE j /"N A NZ' A ,,/ c : 1 \ :,.......... ,s,t!........./ / ( ity 4 ( 170ache cunction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 14 Approver for Agenda MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ate Item e THROUGH: Apt BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER First Reading 7 Second Beading FROM: ��CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING y . Public Hearing Old Business SUBJECT. AGENDA ITEM - JULY 16, 1985 New Business PZ-26-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 386) Consent Agenda Project Description Rezoning case PZ-26-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 386, is a request by the applicant Patrick Harrington through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone his property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is a vacant 5 acre parcel located on the northeast corner of the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue in Section 21. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include houses, a mobile home, Weaver's Needle RV Park, Superstition Lookout RV Park, and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning would be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. If approved, �` staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the west and south thirty- three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue. Staff also recommends stipulating that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Stipulations in Ordinance Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend stipulating roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The Commission added a third stipulation, stating that this parcel not be developed into a subdivision without the required improvements. However, this stipulation is not in the Ordinance, but can be added at the Council 's discretion. In all subdivisions, the City requires improvements, so it is not really necessary to put this in the Ordinance. o01 NOR ri+ IDAHO ROAD .,I'ACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982-8002 /Mk Am Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 16, 1985 PZ-26-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 386) Page Two of Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 25, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Taylor/ Betzner 5-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-26-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 386, application of Patrick Harrington through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. for his property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant dedicate the west and south thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue. 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. 3. This parcel not be subdivided into a subdivision without the proper amenities as required by the City of Apache Junction. The reasons for this recommendation are: 1. The request is compatible with the General Plan of the City of Apache Junction. As. 2. It is in keeping with the adjacent properties. 3. It is the best use of the property." CRN•mas rmk CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1. I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification 1! from- Parcel Parcel No. 1 From 0 , (1�,.,s„Q To c .1%U&4)4.7,2 No 2 No. 3 No. 4 2 According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? 3. Size of your property: 5 n eif¢LJ [acres] [square feet] 4 What is built on your property now? 176g.e.,a421— 5 What has been built on the property next to yours? North.' VAL'AN 7 South. j/A I'ANT East r"RA/Le if PA RH West: Veeam21,-- • 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned: itl Y.; J, 77f. „IF;-he .2 i 177, RS E. Section,/ , Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian -Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7 What is your Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? 101 --,2,7- 11// 8 Why are you requesting this rezoning? at sle CM (Please complete reverse side of form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No —1)? -at, - Proposed Ordinance No. 3$(0 Date Filed 1-01 L I FrS Application received by: Receipt No. Oyci c7 Fee Amount Page 1 of 2 11/20/84 PZ-26-85 ORDINANCE NO. 386 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE r ----1 Weaver's Needle RVP � I I I I i I I _ Single TH Family Dwelling Single a Family z Dwelling „, I I I I H I i U I I PZ-25-85 Vacant ° �L------__—� EAST 4th AVENUE Superstition Mobile I Lookout RdTH Home I I I I I ® SUBJECT SITE 14 r � J LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: 6 200 400 ORDINANCE NO 386 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-26-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT t SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcel of land described as: The West of the Southwest 4 of the Northeast I of the Southeast I of Section 21, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, subject to the following stipulations: 1) the applicant dedicate the west and south thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue; and 2) this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING`PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 eg1 Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM D v , lex City Attorney 7- PZ-26-85 ORDINANCE NO. 386 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE rk 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 // I TH 1 7 I t I I I I I I I I I 0 I I x I I I I H0 I I I 0 H I I 0 Al\ EAST 4th AVENUE I TH I TH I I 1 I L ---- L_.__- ----, I isi SUBJECT SITE N 1 ; LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) L__. SCALE. 6 200 40O ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ,... KV" Q0 f • ITEM # 1 MEETING OF %O. s MOTION BY: SECONDED BY(.. /AVW YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR v COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL ✓ UNANITOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOT I ON BY : SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS [ IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 7 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 386, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 386, BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 386, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-26-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 7 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 386, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 386, BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 386, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-26-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 387, PZ-27-85 .n. 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE . 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE . 4 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7 . IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE ( CH )\...4 -1PizoN1'• 'Oily an 04pache &unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH. Of,41BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: 0. CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 16, 1985 PZ-27-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 387) Project Description Rezoning case PZ-27-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 387, is a request by the applicants Ralph and DaLee Valenzuela through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. to rezone their property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is two 5-acre parcels developed with a house and horse ranch located between North Warner and North Desert View Drives from West Foothill to West Smoketree Streets in Section 18. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include mobile homes and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning could be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site only with the suggested stipulations. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the north, south, east, and west thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-offs at intersections. Staff also recommends stipulating that these parcels not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Staff recommends that if the applicant desires to develop the property as a mobile home or travel trailer park, that it be done by Planned Development. Approver for Agenda_ JDate !ter # First Reading 7/I/j 1 8t5 Y Second Reading ..Public Hearing - Old Business - New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARiZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 0Mik 'OW Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 16, 1985 PZ-27-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 387) Page Two of Two Stipulations in Ordinance Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend stipulating roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or ... recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The Commission added a third stipulation, stating that this parcel not be developed into a subdivision without the required improvements. However, this stipulation is not in the Ordinance, but can be added at the Council 's discretion. In all subdivisions, the City requires improvements, so it is not really necessary to put this in the Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 25, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Taylor/ Jorgensen 4-1-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-27-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 387, application of Ralph and DaLee Valenzuela through A.E. Sullivan, Jr. for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicants dedicate the north, south, east, and west thirty- three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes with twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cut-offs at intersections. 2. These parcels not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City of Apache Junction. 3. These parcels not be subdivided into subdivisions without the amenities and necessary improvements required by the City. The reasons for this recommendation are: 1. The request meets the density requirement of the General Plan of Apache Junction. 2. It appears to be the best use of the property at this time. " CRN.mas CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1 I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification from. Parcel No. 1 From eFAL 7l/R/4I. To: Ti V/.eR ,/O/YJ.e S/7. No 2 _ No. 3 No. 4 2 According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? 3 Size of your property: /O [acres] [square feet] 4. What is built on your property now? A70US e 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? North.' j1748H-t 2t' es South: /1© e(Le Alemt East- t%4l',4N t West: iVoef4 J4f'/1)P 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned /}/72/i4)/SE/Y .Seec/g T/I %�NuJ.SkjN1jSec. /gil/1678� Section/5 , Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. /OO—33--(',.3 7. What is your Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? /OO—3 3—O/8 8. Why are you requesting this rezoning? Jo ,tinr�tJi /v29tfle,S (Jnmi (Please complete reverse side of form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. —‘)L Proposed Ordinance No. 35E.n Date Filed y\1D Application received by: -, 7 Receipt No. n Fee Amount ,:>S c-oo Page 1 of 2 11/20/84 Page Two of Two 9 I/We do 1 y certify that: a. (I am, kWe are) the owners of the property described in tnis application for rezoning and have attached copies of deeds, title reports, or other documents as proof of ownership. b. I/We have read the rezoning procedures and requirements and have truth- fully completed this application for rezoning. c. I/We understand the filing fees are non-refundable, the rezoning process to involve public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and action to approve or disapprove our request is discretionary. d. I/We understand in order to obtain approval of this rezone we may be requested to dedicate portions of our property for public roadway and associated purposes. e. I/We being th owners of the property in this rezoning application have appointed f4. (14L/(/i4N as our representative in this rezoning application and have authorized him/her to do anything necessary to have the rezoning considered favorably by the City of Apache Junction. (Representative is to complete #10.) (1) R'9/(. L', 1I�P'P1rOwner's Name) Signa ure lailing Address) one Number (City, Sta , Zip Code) (2) (7 (� 2f C �. � 1r< �/rN Prin Owner's Name (Signatu e 11J o e qg - i1-9/ Mai in Addr ss (Phone Number) -220 City, Sta , Zi Cod (3) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) (4) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF a/tL�1Wi11L ) The foregoing instrument was ack owledged before ��jjllll // ) SS. me this J day of 19 COUNTY CF entn.L' ) . by:C f1.J/rnf, (/ o /.. .// My Commission Expires. /-)41-gg ( 9 ,t NOTARY PUBLIC 10 I hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owner(s) in this rezoning application as their representative and that all respondence in this matter be mailed to me at their request. ,4 Sev N (Print representative's name) na re o representative /_7�l SthPeR,sT/rioAi 9 ,tlarfing address) hone number 44-4 le C On! ``City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before n ) SS. me this // day of ,J F, , 19 g 5 COUNTY OF 12,{�(,.,cy ) by• A.f• S ILI i._1 V RN My Commission Expires. /-,2 — gg tJ(1TL ,.u0, 1r PZ-27-85 ORDINANCE NO. 387 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE I r TH 1 TH I I i MH I MH MH MH MH MH WEST FOOTHILL STREET co MH a Vacant a ; w 10111 •z VacantVacant °z19 WEST SMOKETREE STREET MH MH MH MH=Mobile Home — ® SUBJECT SITE N 1 J LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: f 0 200 400 110"-Mr ORDINANCE NO 387 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-27-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, "mak ARIZONA, THAT. SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcels of land described as The North of the Northwest 4 of the Southeast A of the Northwest ;; and the South # of the Northwest ; of the Southeast < of the Northwest of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona; be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, subject to the following stipulations 1) the applicants dedicate the north, south, east, and west thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-offs at intersections, and 2) these parcels not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM !1n A c (� '1 1'7 D F. A vi lexan er City Attorney f PZ-27-85 ORDINANCE NO 387 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE Aml\ I I I TH TH 1 1 1 I I I I I I WEST FOOTHILL STREET fi A w a I A H x a w w z a a w d A x x E4 O / O z WEST SMOKETREE STREET 1 ill SUBJECT SITE N 1 , LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) L--I SCALE. i 0 200 400 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 4 )4 3 1 .ii y tok • ITEM # MEETING 0 /A MOTION BY: 5 SECONDED BY : YES/ NO ABSTAINED - COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V COUNCILMAN BALJO I/ VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MAYOR HILL / , UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTESJ f r g7,ITEM I/ MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY, _ YES NO ABSTAINED _ COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ , COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V COUNCILMAN BALJO . VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL 17 COUNCILMAN EIDSON /' COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V/ _MAYOR HILL UNANIr^,OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 8 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 387, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 387 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 387, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-27-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 8 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 387, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 387 BY TITLE ONLY. I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 387, AN Step 3 ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-27-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL PUBLIC HEARING l • FOR ORDINANCE NO. 390, PZ-30-85 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE . 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE . 4. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7 . IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE O 2 U ` 6 Ri � 0- ` iq a � pac/ie ,unction Zo DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: wok BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: CCHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 16, 1985 PZ-30-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 390) Project Description Rezoning case PZ-30-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 390, is a request by the applicants William and Mary Skelly to rezone their property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is a .72 acre parcel developed with a mobile home located on the north side of West Roundup Street between North Meridian and North Cedar Drives in Section 18. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include mobile homes, a house, and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning would be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the south thirty-three feet of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes. Staff also recommends stipulating that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Stipulations in Ordinance Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend stipulating roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Approver for Agenda D/ to Item IfF+rst Reading 7//I�� _..1. •-,� Second Reading ✓Public Hearing — Old Business New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDA.HO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 Amok /11\ Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 16, 1985 PZ-30-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 390) Page Two of Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendations The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 25, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Jorgensen/ Hoaglin 5-0-0) f "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-30-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 390, application of William and Mary Skelly for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant make all dedications required by the Planning Department. 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The reasons for this recommendation are: 1. It is consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. 2. It is the highest and best use of the property." CRN:mas CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1 I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification from• Parcel No 1 From. To• No 2 No. 3 No 4 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? NN Sir-ES 3 Size of your property: ,7a AC. [acres] [square feet] 4 What is built on your property now? /y/,/ 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? North. / / South. VA-,17-- East /yy West /y/// 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned iA//CIO'OF ,e41/3 'OFSir OF,-o% _27 Sj c i' iNPE Section /f, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7. What is your Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? /oo -29 8 Why ar,k you requesting this rezoning? (Please complete reverse side of form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No.7 Z g' Proposed Ordinance No. 3`1 0 Date Filed Q.•a_ -FSj Application received by: Receipt No O Soto Fee Amount aS o• 00 Page 1 of 2 11/20/84 ,� Amok@ge Two of Two 9 I/We uu hereby certify that. a (I am) (We are) the owners of the property described in this application for rezoning and have attached copies of deeds, title reports, or other documents as proof of ownership b. I/We have read the rezoning procedures and requirements and have truth- fully completed this application for rezoning c I/We understand the filing fees are non-refundable, the rezoning process to involve public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and action to approve or disapprove our request is discretionary. d. I/We understand in order to obtain approval of this rezone we may be requested to dedicate portions of our property for public roadway and associated purposes. e 1/We being the owners of,the property in this rezoning application have appointed —)ELF as our representative in this rezoning application and have authorized him/her to do anything necessary to have the rezoning considered favorably by the City of Amok Apache Junction. (Representative is to complete #10 ) (1) /1A23/ SKFLL/ Q (Print Owner's Namel Signature .3gY/�/. �outli)u!� 9A --0(.90 (Mailing Address (Phone Number) T. 4z (City, State, Zip Code) (2) "p(Print Owner's Name) ( gnature) 7/2- 0 6 e) (Mailing Address) 1 (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) (3) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) (4) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before .� SS me this Jq-,� day of , 19 COUNTY OF Y i�1F'L ) by' pry C`..7;,;.�..,.•,s 1e;y_5,1"/ My Commission Expires NO ARY PUBLIC 10. I hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owner(s) in this rezoning application as their representative and that all correspondence in this matter be mailed to me at their request (Print representative's name) (Signature of representative) (Mailing address) (Phone number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before SS. me this day of , 19 COUNTY OF ) by. My Commission Expires PZ-30-85 ORDINANCE NO. 390 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE WEST SHIPROCK TJ L__, 1 ! 1 1 1 TH 1 1 TH 1 L_____J L._ -.-_1 W G W MAN7ANITA C, MH MH W U z F. a MH A MH z WEST ROUNDUP STREET Single Family Vacant a Dwe111ng ,_ I G 1 z I a 1 Q 1 W MOCKINGBIRD w TH I I H I I TH 0 1 z I I I 1 I W. GREASEWOOD L ® SUBJECT SITE N 1 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: 0 x 200 400 s eh. Ark ORDINANCE NO. 390 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-30-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcel of land described as. The West 190 feet of the East 413 feet of the South 2 of Lot 27, in Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, subject to the following stipulations 1) the applicants dedicate the south thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes, and 2) this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST• Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM• Davi lexande City ttorney PZ-30-85 ORDINANCE NO 390 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE I �\ WEST SHIPROCK STREET I 1 I TH I I TH I L-----J L_---t --! W a Ca W MANZANITA W 0 W z AO IWEST ROUNDUP STREET W z I 1 a 1 z 1 A j W MOCKINGBIRL w TH 1 � I I H I TH W I I- 1 °z I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 W GREASEWOOD L. -____ L Is SUBJECT SITE I 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL)l 1— SCALE: 0 • j 200 400 .•. is ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 10 ,11 ,rr ITEM # MEETING OF 1/6' MOTION BY: • SECONDED BY ' NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO Viz VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL J UNANI"SOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES UV aiiefi /47/ rAz • ITEM # MEETIN OF �� 0 MOTION BY : SECONDED BY: vY/55A NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER ✓ COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL i / UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 9 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 390, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 390 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 390, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-30-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 9 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 390, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 390 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 390, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-30-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL A. A. PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 391 , PZ-6-85 2. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE. 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS CASE. 4. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS CASE? 5 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS CASE? 6. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS . 7. IS THERE ANY REBUTTAL? (APPLICANT / THOSE IN FAVOR / THOSE AGAINST) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE Am. Ao k P�AONF✓G O ti0 U ,, . Z �Ri N� city cif ,ache 2unction ZO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Approver for Agenda to item M n THROUGH: BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER First Reading i/�'/K�� I 0 Second Reading FROM: r \CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING V/ Public Hearing `�'1-� � SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 16, 1985 Old Business PZ-6-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 391) New Business Consent Agenda Project Description Rezoning case PZ-6-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 391, is a request by the applicants Darcy and Lori Simnioniw through Keith Stachar to rezone their property from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone. The site is a vacant 1. 12 acre parcel located on the south side of East 4th Avenue, approximately 165 feet east of South Royal Palm Road in Section 21. It is designated Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity on the General Plan. Surrounding land uses include a house, a mobile home, White Sands Mobile Home Park, Superstition Mobile Ranch, and vacant land. Planning Department Comments and Recommendations Staff notes that the rezoning would be consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the north thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes. Staff also recommends stipulating that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. Stipulations in Ordinance Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends stipulating roadway dedications and that this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 16, 1985 PZ-6-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 391) Page Two of Two Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 25, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Jorgensen/ Hoaglin 4-0-1) /0116. "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-6-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No. 391, application of Darcy and Lori Simnioniw through Keith Stachar for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations: 1. The applicants make all the dedications required by the Planning Department. 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The reasons for this recommendation are: 1. The zoning is consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. 2. The request is compatible with surrounding uses." CRN:mas CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1. I/We hereby request a change of zoningn! classification from. Parcel No 1 From:(rf.,tl%/IrL.WIA0l6.40To• "trnt(c,C,fa"a vS1.(571) No. 2 No 3 No 4 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? Gn'lait")rn/i3%71%) 1ws' 3 Size of your property t/,?AQ y96/9s [acres] [square feet] 4. What is built on your property now? /j- ! ' 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? North. (/1QC,T4I South• tr,9-v ( Xj-,Q,/tC. /.pc-, East .M.,7, yp West. -y-*.z L �fy2 V-posre�0irc Ig*,rr 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned A)� Ld, tiu�f1 SCcJ51 SE/: .2/ r`z.J.Q Section ;4, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and MeridianTApache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7 What is your Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? /O/-22-252) 8 Why are you requesting this rezoning? 6(9� " o, "g .1111141/0 lL j97,9 ` ?9 X y.?5/i. %%-S c4' (Please complete reverse side of form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. i'— 6 ^ca- Proposed Ordinance No. �91 Date Filed /oZ/r.S— Application received by. /LW Receipt No PO S./ .2 Fee Amount ' SQ, Page Iof2 • • 11/20/84 • /rge Two of Two 9 I/We Co hereby certify that. E ° a. (I am) (We are) the owners of the property described in this application for rezoning and have attached copies of deeds, title reports, or other documents as proof of ownership. b I/We have read the rezoning procedures and requirements and have truth- fully completed this application for rezoning. c. I/We understand the filing fees are non-refundable, the rezoning process to involve public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and action to approve or disapprove our request is discretionary. d I/We understand in order to obtain approval of this rezone we may be requested to dedicate portions of our property for public roadway and associated purposes e I/We being t e own rs of the pr,opperty in this rezoning application have appointed/,6 S/65) d c as our representative in this rezoning application and have authorized him/her to do anything necessary to have the rezoning considered f'vorably by the City of Apache Junction. (Representative is to co lete #10 (1) 1nRCq 0lf. 0/nstyidtice3 y ve9� Print Owner's Name) /� o2345' 01,- ,E'rr QLucL (}74-53`5 (Mailing Address) 6gliffealiunbed u y ALL u p�p /.0 7S13 7 S� (qity, State, Zip Code) (2) Log S.,rrte;,,�,�v xS l/nou (Print Owner's Name) (:1 geaturei oarclre.041m elf, /-ozob- ilin Address K yMa,_ �,1 � � ' 7y •C ;, State, Z•p Coaa (3) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) (4) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF '3 -S N ) The foregoing instrumenc was acknowledged before ) SS me this ?S day of ahe t , 19 q r-, Ler COUNTY OF ) by: • u My Commission Expires: (fl IQg7 - ac'„�� WiNaligara. . ,.s 10 I hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owner(s) in this rezoning application as their representative and that all correspondence in this matter be mailed to me at their request. (Print representative's epresentative's name) Piugnaatur e oo rep rese nts ive) ar iv -'.Po /LUOocO Ih Qc02-6'/76 (Mailing address) (Phone number) C ty, State, Zip Code STATE UF— , as ul;Eµ The foregoing }nstrument was acknowledged before A AEL E.)KSii/ACS me this 2..U/ day of 19 Li, COUNTY 17 ,4 '„c-1 by.My Comm i s s .ngxpwe:Jury za,less PZ-6-85 ORDINANCE NO. 391 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE • I. : NU;, I — I < 1-- ,----1 a TH 5 I a a y I _ z z a < I Single o a x o I (� Family I a Dwelling — E = I 1 0 Mobile F 1 y 0 ° ° I Vac. Vacs Home N ______ r EAST 4th AVENUE MHP ' White Superstition Mobile Vac. ( Sands Ranch P EAST 5th AVENUE I TH I Vacant I CB-2 CB-21 I I I I I ' I i I i I t--- -----I. ----j EAST 6th AVENUE 1.-------_--i Vac= Vacant _ MHP=Mobile Home Park M SUBJECT SITE N r 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: I 200 400 Ink /Ink ORDINANCE NO 391 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-6-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, /'k, ARIZONA, THAT- SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcel of land described as- The East z of the North I of the West I of the Northwest I of the Southwest I of the Southeast I of Section 21, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona; be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone; subject to the following stipulations. 1) the applicants dedicate the north thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes, and 2) this parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST- Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM vi xa e City Attorney 11R•-_Ir PZ-6-85 ORDINANCE NO 391 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE /m., 2n. A ENUE Ga I I-- x1 TH Ao I za:, I 4 z z w al I o • I I. N_ a 2I I • x m I I p, E. E. D I I o I x O \_ --9 ' cn EAST 4th AVENUE — I I I TH I 1 EAST 5th AVENUE i -I I----i I I I CB-2 I I CB-2I I I I I I I I L-- ___--1 I----1 I EAST 6th AVENUE L_---------I 1 18 SUBJECT SITE N 1 LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: 0 i 200 400 I I 1 (77SI 111 1 1-7V)-7,42,-/ 4,27, 0-6/y 4ar.s.-„J 1$22s) / Aok-kt 7 E - re4'12-<t 'rz47d CT 7, 1 ,� �, W-37719a'64-V' 47'191=D,7744,s1-V ' ;ZEZ ç26S - i0.aCV_530 )S�,Zd D.!7r�'�y i{ s,Dsl l/ ��DD ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES elb- gr)vjliblii / ilr' ITEM # l° MEETING OF & 04 cv,,A) MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: k6-71/ YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL ‘,/ COUNCILMAN EIDSON IV COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ ✓ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR l/i, COUNCILMAN BALJO v i MAYOR HILL / UNANI""O S , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL A ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ‘17 .))/1 / ITEM # 1 U MEETING OF MOTION BY: &,/,' SECONDED BY: YES I NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO V VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL Amok COUNCILMAN EIDSON V COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL UNANITOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 10 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 391, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 391 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 391, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-6-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO. 10 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 391, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 391 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 391, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-6-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 397, PZ-35-85 2 . WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM . 3 . IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? 4 . IF NOT, THIS HEARING IS CLOSED . CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE P@ ACHE (, 0 i y0 ( yM i . \\\`\./Z00‘ ity on v pache 2unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Approver for Agenda THROUGH. t4A BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER 49ate Item # First Reading FROM: OCHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Second Reading AZ Public Hearing SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - JULY 16, 1985 Old Business PZ-35-85 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 397) New Business Consent Agenda Project Description This is a Commission-initiated request to add Article 23 Outdoor Light Control Regulations (Dark Sky Ordinance) to the City Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of the Ordinance is to keep outdoor lighting from escaping upward into the night sky through shielding and filtering devices. Restrictions on lamp types are also proposed. Background Arizona is one of four areas in the world that is suitable for celestial observations. The Kitt Peak National Observatory was established 30 years ago in Arizona because of the sparse development in the area at the time and because of Arizona's clear skies. Since then, urban growth with its proliferation of street lights and other sources of illumination has created a light pollution problem that is having an adverse impact on astronomical studies. The sky glow from the lights of Los Angeles, for instance, has just about rendered the Mount Wilson Observatory useless. Bill Robinson of Kitt Peak National Observatory has drafted a model dark sky ordinance that would control outdoor lighting through shielding and filtering devices, establishing hours of operation, and prohibiting certain lamp types such as mercury vapor lamps. This ordinance in various forms has been adopted by many cities and counties in Arizona. The economic impact of the observatory research is given in the attached reprint. Mount Graham in southeastern Arizona is in competition with Mauna Kea in Hawaii for the $100 million National New Technology Telescope. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 A ,p Honorable Mayor and City Council Agenda Item - July 16, 1985 PZ-35-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 397) Page Two DCC and Planning Department Comments Staff recommends approval of the Dark Sky Ordinance. In order to be consistent with the terms used in the Sign Code, staff suggests substituting the term "Outdoor Advertising Structure" with "Off-Site Signs (Billboards)" as presented in the Ordinance. In addition to advancing the main objective of the Ordinance, which is to promote a dark Arizona sky, a spinoff benefit of energy savings from the use of more efficient sodium technology is also anticipated. The billboard industry advocated changing the hours of operation for the lighting of their signs from 11:00 p.m. to 12 midnight. This was rejected by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Salt River Project recommended going with the more lenient ordinance adopted by the City of Mesa. This was also rejected by the Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of June 25, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion: (M/S Jorgensen/ Hoaglin 5-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that case PZ-35-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 397,E Dark Sky Ordinance, is recommended to the Apache Junction City Council for approval . The reason for this recommendation is: This is a reasonable request to support a worthy endeavor and because ,.� this is in the best interest of the astronomy industry and should not cause a financial burden on the citizens of Apache Junction." CRN:mas .— , 3uN --- 1e)8 -- ARIZONA STREETLIGHTING STUDIED The OEPAD Energy Office and the for municipal streetlighting, the nomic incentives and barriers exist, Western Area Power Administration number and type of streetlights and for conversion of existing facilities. (WAPA) have undertaken a study associated economic data. Resources Alternative methods for promoting of Arizona streetlighting. The study available for streetlight conversions, streetlighting conversions will be will determine the economic poten- utility policies and other pertinent generated as well as estimations of tial from the conversion of in- data will also be requested. Tech- the total energy and dollar saving efficient incandescent and mercury nical data related to streetlight potential from conversions. vapor technologies to high or low conversions is being generated from pressure sodium technologies. It is demonstrations conducted in the This study is part of an ongoirr' estimated that up to 56 percent cities of Kingman, Safford and effort of the OEPAD Energ, energy savings can result from con- Tucson Office to promote the use of version to more efficient tech- efficient and cost effective outdoor nology The information generated through lighting Our efforts have also been the surveys and demonstration pro- directed to promote a dark sky in The study consists of several dis- jects will be used in an economic Arizona for the valuable astronomy tinct phases. A survey of Arizona analysis of Arizona streetlighting industry. This industry benefits cities, towns and counties will be conversion potential. The analysis from the reduction in light pollu- used to determine current numbers will focus on several key points. tion when more efficient lamps are of streetlights by technology and The cost effectiveness of conversions appropriately installed and shielded. wattage. Additional information will be examined in relation to en- The partnership of the OEPAD will be requested regarding plans ergy efficiency improvement The Energy Office and the Western Area for, and resources available for, split responsibility between mun- Power Administration in this study conversions of existing facilities. A icipalities and utilities for street- is a positive example of energy separate survey of Arizona utilities lighting will be studied to deter- efficiency and economic develop- will be conducted on rates charged mine what institutional and eco- ment in Arizona y+'�"`^...'x"''�kzt�.ya� ��'SpY"'Fy.` ..ti�a'igy.;+o-�t 't'fh".F?':Y'��t�*..`-s�0 ;�4 .. �s ''.*, . ' t�� �� ..,� ;�� �'x' `'`.q� � OEPA43 D "NAME f N�,,'I-R •G,•( �SA�:J �Eym RWit 6 �x TH,Eray rviO f Y � / ?!iF , "7:� t d,jat ! nr/V4r! ,fr,M.[liH ., "n,r'•�4.�''.s_' ,wir„),p v' : zs. t ' c .+>-• v <.t .fj..t.44 Too often, deeds of merit go un- 1984 ing Coconino County. One of heralded. A great many people in July - Frank and Nellie Noe, Stevens' efforts included converting Arizona have given their time and Bullhead City arcadia sliding glass doors to stan- expertise to develop new ways to Aug - Robert Stevens, Flagstaff dard size exterior doors and win;.•., cut energy costs as well as evaluate Sept. - Edward W Ramsey, Jr , dows thus decreasing the high leve more efficient energy usage of exist- Grand Canyon of air leakage and heat loss associ- ing techniques Oct. - Robert Sikorsky, Tucson ated with sliding doors. Over the Dec - Beverly Navarro, Riviera past two years, Edward Ramsey, OEPAD has implemented a month- maintenance director of Grand Can- ly awards program and encourages 1985 you School District #4, has saved communities and individuals to sub- Jan. - Raj Dholakia, Phoenix over $27,000 in heating fuel and mit frr consideration entries that Feb - Ann Tilghman, Peoria electricity costs, representing a 33 offer unique energy saving activities March - Dan Hunter, Phoenix percent reduction Robert Sikorsky or programs April - Brent Crosby, Phoenix writes a weekly energy column for May - Thom Doran, Tucson the Arizona Daily Star entitled The Energy Saver of the Month is "Mileage and More," that stresses recognized for outstanding com- Frank and Nellie Noe were among fuel efficient driving techniques - munity efforts to realize a signifi- the first to be trained as volunteer His column has been syndicated cant energy and dollar savings on a senior energy consultants with the with the New York Times news ser- local or state level. Each selected Seniors Helping Seniors program vice. Energy Saver of the Month receives and have given many energy saving a certificate of appreciation from presentations to local senior citizen Beverly Navarro had an ambitious the OEPAD Energy Office signed groups Robert Stevens is program dream to provide community bus by the Governor A news release is manager and field supervisor of a service to Bullhead City residents. sent to the recipient's local press highly effective Low Income Weath- Through her enthusiastic promo- for added recognition. erization Assistance Program cover- tional efforts, the Colorado River Continued page 6 -5- ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY MI COLLEGE OF BUSINESS - - 4- a -- ' x BUREAU OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH Astronomy Adds $84 Million to Arizona Economy As host to the largest collection of DIRECT EXPENDITURES in the state, with 284 employees research-quality telescopes in the Astronomical facilities provided and annual operating expenditures world (see Table 1), Arizona has jobs for 862 Arizonans during 1982 of more than $13 million. benefited from astronomy's transition Total value of astronomical facili- i into big business. The value of con 83, and their combined annual op- ties and equipment in Arizona was erating expenditures totaled $34 con- struction activity required to build the million. About two-thirds of that estimated at nearly $300 million (in observatories and the annual ex- total ($21 million) paid personnel 1983 dollars). More than half of this penditures for their operation repre- costs, including salaries; other costs total ($158 million) comprises all fa- sent a substantial contribution to the of operation made up the remain- cilities associated with the Kitt Peak local economy. To document the ing $13 million. The Kitt Peak Nation- National Observatory; in addition, the magnitude of this contribution, all as- al Observatory is the largest facility See "Astronomy,"page 2 tronomy-related agencies in Arizona were asked to provide information GSP Growth Sets Record In '84 concerning employment, expendi- tures, and the value of physical plant and equipment during the 1982-83 Despite slower growth during the increase of 12.1 percent during the fiscal year. Seventeen agencies sup- fourth quarter, the Arizona Gross third quarter (see Table 1) An inevi- plied the requested data, and the re- State Product (GSP) expanded at an table deceleration of growth in the sults of this survey are summarized inflation-adjusted 14.4 percent rate Arizona economy began during the in Table 2. during 1984, surpassing the prior fourth quarter, when the GSP, ex- record of 12.1 percent during 1978 cluding the agriculture and mining The record expansion during 1984 industries, rose just 4.6 percent. In This Issue followed a 10.3 percent GSP rise The economy's smaller fourth during 1983, which was the third quarter gain was especially due to 5 April Purchasing Survey greatest in the 24 years for which a slight decline in the GSP of the 6 1st Quarter Home Sales GSP data are available finance, insurance and real estate 7 AZ Leading Index, March Double-digit GSP gains had oc- See "1984 GSP,"page 3 8 AZ Economic Indicators curred during the first three quarters of 1984, including a sharply revised E :� s. h R ,,,4da.j ,,�yxi��rr7� a r�n.,� , ' . -.. , ' • ZO ... .. ' , VOLUME 32'. N MBER 4 e — I "Astronomy," from page 1 value of 2.42 ($1 of direct spending mountaintops in an area where a Smithsonian Institution's Fred Law- by a high-tech firm ultimately gener- maximum number of cloudless nights rence Whipple Observatory and Mul- ates additional spending of $1.40 in prevail. The Southwest is the only tiple Mirror Telescope Observatory other sectors of the economy), mak- area in the mainland United States, C facilities on Mt. Hopkins are valued ing the total economic impact of and one of only four areas in the at $50 million, and several other every dollar spent equal to $2.40. world, that satisfies these require- agencies reported physical plants Assuming the multiplier for astrono- ments Hence, a National Cbser- worth more than $10 million Several my is similar to such high-tech ac- vatory and several other major astro- agencies also reported planned ex- Uvities, astronomy's overall annual nomical facilities have been located pansions and/or new astronomical contribution to the state's economy in the mountains surrounding the facilities that could potentially total in 1982-83 was $83.9 million. Tucson urban area. more than $110 million in value. Interestingly, one of the major rea- Taking all of Arizona's facilities to- OUTLOOK sons that Kitt Peak was chosen in gether, the number of employees in- Modern astronomical research 1958 as the site for a National Ob- volved in astronomy is equivalent to requires siting telescopes on high servatory was the lack of background the number of jobs provided by a illumination in the night sky At that large private sector employer, such 2This multiplier value was taken from time, it was believed that further as one of the top 20 high technology the publication, High Technology in Ari- growth in the Tucson area, 45 miles companies in the state. The annual zona, Arizona Office of Economic Plan- away, would not adversely affect Kitt operating expenditures of $34 million ning and Development, 1984 Peak's celestial observations How- in 1983 is equivalent to more than one-half of the total National Science - » . r _T .,,, ,. .. ; ,•}_ 4 ,� Foundation budget for astronomy , .; , `j = 'TABLE 1 r �,..,: �; ,1 k. ($62.5 million) for the same period. MAJOR OBSERVATORIES IN ARIZONA A"4 . . ' : Observatory Location= ° ' •L TOTAL IMPACT F. ry s } z Kitt Peak National Obseatory Kitt Peak, southwest of Tucson ?;; Although already sizable, the fig- Lowell Observatory.. .r .....a...... Flagstaff '' ,. `,'. getV }_ ures presented in Table 2 do not Multiple Mirror Telescope ........::...,...Mt. Hopkins, southeast of Tucson ,,..• represent the full contribution of An- National Radio Astronomy Observatory Kitt Peak ;: r ` •6-t V zona's observatories to the state's Steward Observatory Facilities on Kitt Peak and Mt Lemmon, C economy Many of the facilities are !, �> • northeast of Tucson k ,�1 /` r U S Naval Observatory . Fla staff °' ` used extensively by scientists from rY 9 z? �<r < Whipple Observatory Mt. Hopkins :;3rr __ ' other parts of the nation and world. ,,;a ,, .<,ah,,__ i While in Arizona, non-resident scien- . Source: Astronomy and Communities: The`Impact of Lighting Practices,are tests spend money for lodging, meals, search report by the authors, May 1985 .-., ..,. - 1 .,; . ' = and other expenses, estimated by the facilities to total $975,000 during 1982-83.' TABLE 2 These indirect expenditures plus -;� v, ,V,1 ,rA ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION )'. the fact that almost $30 million of the ` " 7OF ASTRONOMICAL ACTIVITIES IN ARIZONA total $34 million in annual operating •• 4r R,r`` ti-0`_tc a • L1982 83 '�V (`v` ."js :� expenditures is funded by out-of- Number of Agenclesa ' ' • " ` ," -r: 4 ••17 state agencies (the National Science Number of Employees: -`` ` ', 1.1 a .. : - :' .'G 862 .. Foundation and NASA, for example) Total Direct Expenditures, -:.,:'� '% h A '' .$33,895,000 , qualify Arizona's astronomical activi- .Value of Physical Plant(1983$)` ,'`:� . :' '$291,385,000': ties as a basic industry Astronomy Value of Planned Projects (1983$)b`�• ` 77? :..' q � $110,765,000 brings dollars into the state, which Visitor Expendituresc 1.-.':• ^ •t;;.'t ,.r° 1`fi �y'$975,000 ' are spent within the local economy, Number of Tourists .r . `4 215,000 providing revenues for local bush aThe 17 agencies in this survey(with their total fiscal year 1982-83 expenditures nesses and income for local resi- in millions of dollars):Kitt Peak National Observatory($132 million;U.of Arizona dents. In turn, as these revenues Optical Sciences.Lab ($5.3 million); U. of Arizona Steward Observatory ($5.13,;. • are respent in Arizona, additional million); U. of Arizona Lunar and'Planetary Lab ($3.1 'million); National Radio Astronomy Observatory ($1.1 million);Whipple Observatory income and jobs are generated ($1:05 million);MuN';°' To estimate the total contribution Ole Mlrror.Telescope Observatory($1.0 million); Lowell Observatory($0.93 mil-'' of astronomy to the state's economy, lion), U of Arizona Physics Dept. ($0.8 million), ASU Planetary Geology ($0.54 these induced expenditures must al- million); U.S. Naval Observatory ($0 53 million); U.'of Arizona Flandreau Plane- t ti,-;um($0 37 million);Planetary Sciences Institute($0.35 million),ASU Astronomy so be taken into account. For exam- :-;,22 million); NAU Astronomy ($0 15 million); McGraw-Hill Observatory ($0.11 -.. ple, the so-ca iec' :Itipher effect" -ion);ASU Planetarium ($0.03 million). »«•. 1; ' -;-3.;;;�,- , for high technoic 'Jstries in Ar eludes the projected cost of National New Technology Telesco zona has bees i _ �,,,d to have � �'Graham 33- 1,nzona is one of two sites being considered. '-�. _ -- = •t•`'4'`� 'j=; _. ,des only expenditures by out-of-state astronomer- 'hor scientists who ever, the light from Tucson and small mountain is in competition with ture effect on both celestial observa- communities nearer the observato- Mauna Kea in Hawaii to be the site tions and the Arizona economy ries, along with the sky glow of met- for the National New Technology — Timothy D. Hogan ropolitan Phoenix (an area much Telescope (NNTT) Observatory that David Burstein more distant but having three times will house a planned 15-meter instru- Michael D. Kroelinger Tucson's population) have begun ment With projected costs of $25 to produce substantial background million for the U of A/OSU telescope Dr. Hogan is Professor of Econom- illumination in the skies over these and well over $100 million for the ►cs in the ASU College of Business observatories. NNTT, the building of such facilities and Director of the State Data Cen in Arizona would generate a sizable ter. Dr. Burstein is Assistant Profes- Unless the growing background it economic impact. sor of Physics/Astronomy, and Dr lumination is controlled, modern as- Kroelinger is Associate Professor of tronomical observation will no longer To combat further increases in Design Sciences in the College of be possible at Arizona's observato- background illumination from outdoor Architecture and Environmental De- ries. Additional "light pollution" would lighting, the astronomical community sign diminish the usefulness of existing has been encouraging city and coun- The authors gratefully acknowl- observatories and adversely impact ty governments throughout Arizona edge funding by the Arizona State planning for future astronomical facil- to adopt "dark skies" ordinances, University Research Fund for a grant ities. Mt. Graham, in southeast Arizo- which would limit artificial sky glow entitled, "A Comprehensive Evaiva- na near Safford, for example, has Although the observatories in Arizo- tion of the Impact of Community been selected as the site for a new na have not yet been seriously af- Lighting on Astronomy in Arizona." observatory to be developed jointly fected by the growth of neighboring The foregoing article reports on the by the University of Arizona and communities, failure to adopt such economic impact aspects of that re- Ohio State University. The same ordinances will have an adverse fu- search project "1984 GSP,"from page 1 state's gross product past $41.5 bil- na's largest during 1984 In current sector, after a record expansion ear- lion in current dollars (see Table 2). dollars, its $7.2 billion gross product her in 1984, and to virtually no gain The GSP of each sector of the An- represented 17 4 percent of the in the GSP of the manufacturing in- zona economy climbed during 1984, state's total. With a gross product of >k dustry, following near-record growth with most sectors expanding at the nearly $6.9 billion, the manufacturing earlier in the year. While employment fastest rate in several years. Leading industry surpassed the finance, in- continued to rise during the fourth the increases were a record 28.0 surance and real estate sector to be- quarter, output per employee de- percent inflation-adjusted rise in the come the state's second largest. The dined sharply, after posting solid GSP of the finance, insurance and agriculture and mining industries gains in six of seven prior quarters. real estate sector and a record gain continued to decline in importance of 13 3 percent for the trade industry and remained the state's smaiest ANNUAL ECONOMIC GROWTH Manufacturing recorded its second sectors (see Figure 11). The Arizona GSP expanded during highest rate of growth, 14.7 percent, 1984 at a rate more than twice that with the smallest gain occurring in EMPLOYMENT AND of the Gross National Product (GNP), the government sector, 2.8 percent PRODUCTIVITY which grew at a more rapid pace Employment in Arizona rose 9.6 than in any year since 1951 (see SECTORAL SHARES percent during 1984, more than in Figure I) This growth pushed the The trade industry remained Arizo- any year since 1978 The number of TABLE 1 QUARTERLY ECONOMIC GROWTH Gross •- - - Arizona Gross State Product National Product '`' "'''"'`Brllions of-'''' `Billions of - • Annualized Annualized Annualized Current Dollars, 1972 Dollars, Percent Change Percent Change Percent Change Quarter' - -Annualized Annualized ;'(1972 Dollars) (Adjusted GSP)* (1972 Dollars) - First, 1983. $33.802 $16.646 12 6% 15 9% 3 3% Second, 1983 . . 35.571 17.467 19.7 . 22 1 9 4 Third, 1983 37212 18119 14.9 134 68 Fourth, 1983 - 38.223 . 18.534 9.2 5.7 5.9 First, 1984. .. 39.770 19.535 . 21 6 22.5 10.1 Second, 1984 40.840 19.897 7.4 11.7 7.1 Third, 1984 42.308 20 686 15.9 12.1 1.6 Fourth, 1984 • ' 43.266 20.945 5 0 4.6 4.3 'The adjusted GSP is the annualized GSP in billions of 1972 dollars,minus the contributions of the agriculture and mining industries. - ' «s / , June 1984 C . • • ARIZONA CHAPTER—AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION •PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF ARIZONA -.. _ — : ., � OEPAD Supports Use of Q Ft` — Low Light Pollution, a = ---- Energy Efficient Outdoor Lighting t- - I.: y ,I- ax Y"t` C j 0•' The adoption of light pollution control ordinances has recently : �, 1 • *° •'a aroused lively debate in the Mancopa County area Newspaper .-/ • l and television stones, editorials and public meetings have • - k- 4.41 `" Y-.. focused on the economics and environmental impact of •A / _ .4 _ ; inefficient outdoor lighting The debate has revealed some very ,'• " - //f`_ , m real issues for those involved. ' 1 .�n t" r;- The Arizona Office of Economic Planning and Development 9 it/ i. oil i - (OEPAD) became involved in the light pollution issue over two 3 F'• ��� , V "� years ago, when Bill Robinson, a consultant to the National ' � • '.•'Y Science Foundation, bnefed key Energy Office staff on the j i s ',.1i i �,�,. •' Z r impact of light pollution on the astronomy industry The I f• ,£'-,4 A +,�__ 3 `.-fie' _I " .• 1 decision of OEPAD to support the astronomy industry efforts ! ,"' �k _ 4{T-I,.i to maintain a dark sky was based on the unique opportunity to I , li °+-- 1'P\ -mot j. -.— address two objectives at one time economic vitality and °f b rix., , } �t ;' energy The primary mission of OEPAD, as an economic L " k ''' N� development agency, is to support existing industry and to = ' �)' '� 'r �'�''f srsl` �.. attract new investment With the astronomy industry ,tw° i representing over$290 million in current capital investment and $33 million in annual payroll and expenditures, a definite FUNCTIONAL USE PLAN ,^ incentive to support thepreservation and enhancement of thecrioNAL UNITS PP ��PHg1ARY USES _- industry was apparent. The potential of siting the worlds DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS A-COIPACT PHYSICAL FORK :i newest and largest telescope on Mount Graham in Cochise GIs-.N Ilsou. • - C-LARGE ` _�• County, representing over$100 million in new capital .O Pp1O4IfTY DEVELOP UPI" tt.r,. ' .a z ,k 3,, investment, provided additional compelling reason for support. >.. The Energy Office also recognized that the alter-native lighting DOWNTOWN SCOTTSDALE PLAN—As the winner of last technologies most responsive to the needs of the astronomy year's APA award for the best tannin industry consumed less energy and represented an avenue for planning project in Arizona, the local governments to cut utility bills The dual objectives of Downtown Scottsdale Plan was presented at the recent economic development and energy conservation thus are the National Conference in Minneapolis. twin cornerstones of OEPAD support for light pollution control In fate 1982 the OEPAD Energy office began its efforts to support local adoption of a "dark sky"ordinance In concert with representatives of Kitt Peak Observatory and the astronomy industry, presentations were made around Arizona. INSIDE STORIES In Mancopa County, the Mancopa Association of Govern- Groundwater Quality 3 ''''''-the-ents (MAG) established a Kitt Peak Task Force to examine Energy Planning 5 model light control ordinance proposed for local adoption Rezoning Protests 6 by Kitt Peak National Observatory This model ordinance has Legislative Summary 10 been adopted in some form by over twenty local government jurisdictions statewide and is the basis for cooperative agreements with several unincorporated government entities and utility companies k.:ONTIAIUZD ON PAtiE 7 LIGHT POLLUTION (CONT. F -' PAGE 5) analyzing the rate structures for municipal street lighting The Changes Considered Foi results of these meetings and the rate study analysis are being prepared as a report to the MAG Management Committee and Rezoning Protests will be available some time in April Progress has been made. tie utilities are now aware of the local government concerns ( and the Arizona Corporation Commission has taken an interest House Bill 2279, introduced by Representatives Ridge, in the light pollution issue. Johnson and Goudinoff, attempts once again to modify the vote rule"for cities and counties The existing legislation has The outdoor advertising industry has been quite vocal in its been the biggest single obstacle for property owners, planner objections to the portions of the ordinance affecting them architects and attorneys in trying to change zoning on their Most of the light control ordinances, as adopted, have not property or for their clients who have plans to build anything banned the use of searchlights, but have restricted the times other than that which is allowed by current zoning— often which they can be used. The billboard industry has recently times, large-lot, single-family residences only struck a compromise position with the astronomy industry, ,,which accepts the time control provisions of the ordinance but As the Act applies to cities and towns, Figures 1 and 2 illus- .lso allows bottom lighting of certain billboards The billboard trate the existing procedure and that being proposed For too industry is also cooperating with the effort to control light many years, one landowner out of twenty surrounding the pollution by investigating shielding for bottom mounted lights property to be re-zoned (specifically,20% of either the area of that would restrict lighting to the billboard surface These the lots included in the proposed change, OR of those imme- cooperative efforts are encouraging and should be applauded diet* adjacent within 150' on any one side)filed a written protest against the change, an affirmative vote of'/. of the Although the model ordinance does not mandate that a certain governing body was required in order to effect the change. lighting technology be used, it does express the preference of This requires approval by six of a seven-person Council or 7 the astronomy industry for low pressure sodium lamps. out of a 9 member body— a mighty feat to please so small a Unfortunately, this aspect of the model ordinance has taken voice as a single property owner,who might have any number attention away from the main thrust of the light pollution effort of reasons for his opposition including some not related to keeping light out of the sky Appropnate filtering and shielding appropriate land use (Figure 1) of the various light sources, as laid out in the model ordinance, is more critical than technology choice It is clear that A more equitable method, but still adequate protection for a technology choice for new installations of municipal street neighborhood, is suggested by HB 2279.The revision would lights should be the province of local governments, based on require a written protest by 50% of the property owners within the local economic, political and regulatory context the area to be rezoned OR by 30%of the combined property owners within 150' of the property to be rezoned and, under ( lEPAD continues to support the astronomy industry's effort to those conditions, an affirmative vote by a majority plus one of .ontrol light pollution While economically impacted parties are the governing body in order to change the zoning category. beginning to work out their problems with the astronomy (Figure 2) industry in local government forums, much work remains to secure equitable utility rate structures for municipal street Under the existing statute governing "Amendment of lighting In the coming months OEPAD's efforts will be Ordinance or Change of Zoning District Boundaries"for concentrated on coordinating with both the Arizona counties, in order to have an application processed for Corporation Commission and the utility companies to resolve hearing,a petition must be filed bearing the names of fifty-one the rate structure issue Once a rate structure is established percent of the owners by number and area of all properties that rewards use of energy efficient technology, a major barrier within three hundred feet of the proposed change One •+•116:1 controlling light pollution will be removed extreme example of how difficult this can be to achieve is —JERRY DION, OEPAD shown on Figure 3, where two owners hold all of the property within 300' of the property to be re-zoned If the owner of Parcel B—a tiny piece of the surrounding area— decides not to sign, the application cannot be filed, except by Commission initiative Another possible impediment to County zoning by virtue of the petition requirement is in the case of a fully developed area surrounding the subject parcel,with each of the four sides containing small, single-family residential lots; in this case,the number of signatures to be obtained can be astronomical, causing time delays and increased costs to the applicant The protest provision under current statues provides that if 20%of the landowners within the zoning area— again by number as well as area— file a protest, the change can be made only by a unanimous vote of the governing body (five, in the case of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors) HB 2279 would eliminate the petition requirement, asking only for an application for a change of zoning, and amend the protest provision to more closely parallel that for cities and towns, specifically, if the combined owners of fifty percent or 6 ORDINANCE NO. 397 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ADDING ARTICLE 23 OUTDOOR LIGHT CONTROL REGULATIONS (DARK 'SKY ORDINANCE), REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE �` JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I IN GENERAL The Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance, is hereby amended by adding Article 23 Outdoor Light Control Regulations (Dark Sky Ordinance), to read as follows ARTICLE 23 OUTDOOR LIGHT CONTROL REGULATIONS (DARK SKY ORDINANCE) SECTION 23.0100 PURPOSE These provisions are intended to control the use of outdoor artificial illuminating devices emitting rays into the night sky which have a detrimental effect on astronomical observations. It is the intention of this Ordinance to encourage good lighting practices such that lighting systems are designed to conserve energy and money, while increasing nighttime safety, utility, security, and productivity. SECTION 23 0200 CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES Section 23.0201 All outdoor artificial illuminating devices shall be installed in conformance with the provisions of this Article and with the provisions of Chapter 7, Building Codes and Construction Standards, of the City Code Section 23.0202 Where any provisions of the Arizona State Statutes, or any Federal Law, or any other ordinance conflicts with the requirements of this Article, the most restrictive shall govern. Section 23.0203 The provisions of this Article are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of installation not specifically prescribed by this Ordinance, provided that the Building Official approves an alternative design, material, or method that he deems to be equivalent to the requirements of this Article. Section 23 0204 As new lighting technology develops which is useful in reducing light emitted above the horizontal, consideration shall be given to using state-of-the-art technology in keeping with the intent of the Ordinance. SECTION 23 0300 DEFINITIONS FULLY SHIELDED shall mean that those fixtures so designated shall be shielded in such a manner that light rays emitted by the fixture, either directly from the lamp or indirectly from the fixture, are projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest point of the fixture where the light is emitted oK dimo•Mw amok olimk INDIVIDUAL• shall mean any private individual, tenant, leasee, owner, or any commercial entity, including but not limited to companies, partnerships, joint ventures, or corporations. INSTALLED: shall mean the initial installation of outdoor light fixtures defined herein following the effective date of this Ordinance, but shall not apply to those outdoor light fixtures installed prior to such date. OUTDOOR LIGHT FIXTURES. shall mean outdoor artificial illuminating r devices, outdoor fixtures, lamps and other devices, permanent or portable, used for illumination or advertisement. Such devices shall include, but are not limited to, search, spot, or flood lights for: 1. Building and structures 2. Recreational areas 3. Parking lot lighting 4. Landscape lighting 5. Billboards and other signage 6. Street lighting PARTIALLY SHIELDED shall mean that those fixtures conforming to the classification of "cutoff," defined in accordance with Illuminating Engineering Society recommendations which currently reads as follows. "A luminaire light distribution whose candle power per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 25 (2-1/2 percent) at an angle of 90 degrees above nadir (horizontal), and 100 (10 percent) at a vertical angle of 80 degrees above nadir. This applies to any lateral angle around the luminaire". SECTION 23 0400 PROHIBITIONS Section 23.0401 Searchlights The operation of searchlights for advertising purposes is prohibited. Section 23.0402 Mercury Vapor /mik The installation of mercury vapor fixtures for street lighting, parking lots, and security lighting is prohibited SECTION 23.0500 EXEMPTIONS The following illuminating devices are exempt: Section 23.0501 Fossil Fuel Light: lighting produced by the combustion of natural gas or other utility-type fossil fuels. Section 23 0502 Low Intensity Fixture which has a maximum candle power of 1,000 candelas or less (one candela = 12 75 lumens) and is equipped with an automatic device which shuts off the fixture between 11 00 p.m. and 5.00 a.m.. Section 23.0503 Incandescent fixtures of 150 watts or less. ORDINANCE NO 397 PAGE 2 OF 6 GO"nr Section 23.0504 Low pressure sodium fixtures Section 23.0505 Any illuminating device which was installed or for which a permit was issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. However, such devices must comply with Section 23.0801. SECTION 23.0600 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Section 23.0601 Sign Lighting External lighting of the face of all signs shall be placed above the sign and shielded so that the illumination source shall not be visible from adjacent real property and so that the light is not directed upward. Bottom-mounted lighting for all signs must have the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and such lighting shall consist of not more than four (4) individual fixtures or lamps per sign face, produces a maximum of 40,000 lumens per fixture; and spills beyond the sign face no more than 1,017 lumens per fixture. Such permit may impose sign size, landscaping, and other requirements. Off-site signs (billboards) shall be equipped with a permanent automatic shut-off device such that the lights are not operational between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5.00 a m Section 23 0602 Outdoor Building or Landscaping Illumination The unshielded outdoor illumination of any building, landscaping, signing, or other purpose is prohibited, except with incandescent fixtures of 150 watts or less, or low pressure sodium fixtures. Section 23.0603 Recreational Facilities No outdoor recreational facility, public or private, shall be illuminated by nonconforming means after 11 00 p.m., except to conclude a specific recreational or sporting event or any other activity conducted at a ballpark, outdoor amphitheater, arena, or similar facility in progress prior to 11.00 p.m. Section 23 0604 Light Trespass Illuminating units shall not direct light upon adjacent real property Lighting sources shall be hooded or shielded so that they are not visible from adjacent real property. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit supported by sufficient justification is required for lighting that does not comply with this provision. SECTION 23 0700 REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIELDING AND FILTERING Section 23.0701 Shielding All exterior illuminating devices except those exempt from this Ordinance, and except low pressure sodium fixtures or incandescent fixtures of 150 watts or less, shall be fully or partially shielded as required in Section 23 0703 Section 23.0702 Filtration Those outdoor light fixtures requiring a filter in Section 23.0703 shall have glass, acrylic, or transluscent enclosures (quartz glass does not meet this requirement). ORDINANCE NO 397 PAGE 3 OF 6 Section 23.0703 Shielding and Filtering Table The requirements for shielding and filtering light emissions from outdoor light fixtures shall be as set forth in the following table: Fixture Lamp Type Shielded Filtered ,..� Low Pressure Sodium 1 None None High Pressure Sodium Fully None Metal Halide 5 Fully Yes Fluorescent 7 Fully 4 Yes 2 Quartz 3 Fully None Incandescent Greater Than 150 Watts Fully None Incandescent, 150 Watts or Less None None Mercury Vapor (not permitted) Fully 6 Yes 6 Fossil Fuel None None Gas Tubes Filled With Neon, Argon, and Krypton None None Other Sources As Approved by the Building Official FOOTNOTES: 1. This is the preferred light source to minimize undesirable light into the night sky affecting astronomical observations. 2 Warm white and natural lamps are preferred to minimize detrimental effects. 3 For the purposes of this Ordinance, quartz lamps shall not be considered an incandescent source 4. Outdoor advertising signs of the type constructed of transluscent materials and wholly illuminated from within do not require shielding. 5. Metal halide lighting shall not be used for security lighting after 11.00 p m (or after closing hours if before 11 00 p.m.), unless fully shielded Metal halide lamps shall be in enclosed luminaries 6. Recommended for existing fixtures The installation of mercury vapor fixtures is prohibited. 7. Outdoor advertising signs may be fluorescent fixtures. These fixtures must be mounted at the top of the sign structure and may be partially shielded, but need not be filtered. SECTION 23.0800 NONCONFORMING FIXTURES Section 23 0801 All nonconforming outdoor light fixtures permitted prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, except street lights, that are equipped with a permanent automatic shut-off device shall not be operated between the hours of 11.00 p m and 5:00 a.m. All outdoor light fixtures permitted prior to the effective date of this Ordinance that are not equipped with an automatic shut-off device may remain unchanged. ORDINANCE NO. 397 PAGE 4 OF 6 s Section 23.0802 There shall be no change in use, replacement, structural alteration, or restoration of any nonconforming outdoor light fixture after discontinuance of its use for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months unless it thereafter conforms to the provisions of these regulations. Section 23.0803 Any replacement or structural alteration of a nonconforming light fixture which requires a permit shall conform to the provisions of these regulations. SECTION 23.0900 APPLICATION PROCEDURES FOR ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE Section 23.0901 Any individual applying for zoning clearance or other permit approval, and intending to install outdoor lighting fixtures shall, as part of the application, submit evidence that the proposed work will comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. Section 23.0902 Utility companies providing a notarized affidavit in which they agree to comply with the provisions of these regulations shall be exempt from applying for and obtaining a permit for the installation of outdoor light fixtures, including residential security lighting Section 23 0903 The submission shall contain, but shall not necessarily be limited to, the following (which may be in addition to information required elsewhere in the zoning regulations upon application for any required permit) 1 Plans indicating the location on the premises and the types of the proposed illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, and other devices, etc. 2. Description of the illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, and other devices, etc. This description may include, but is not limited to, manufacturer's catalog cuts and/or drawings (including sections where required). Section 23.0904 The above required plans and descriptions shall be sufficiently complete to enable the Building Official to readily determine whether compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance will be obtained. If such plans and descriptions cannot enable this ready determination by reason of the nature or configuration of the devices, fixtures, or lamps proposed, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance by certified test reports as performed by a recognized testing laboratory. SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. ORDINANCE NO. 397 PAGE 5 OF 6 orrnme SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause, or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION IV EMERGENCY CLAUSE an* It is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health, and safety of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that this Ordinance become effective immediately, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 NORMAN S. HILL MAYOR ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY TTORNEY ORDINANCE NO 397 PAGE 6 OF 6 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ql eir 4/ 50 „ ITEM # II Ilj MEETING OF ��/ MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V - COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MAYOR HILL UNANIOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE HEET NOTESizr 1 q V � V ITEM # (( MEETING OF (CaMOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYI OR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Ink An\ leROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES17 " / i(i."/r t / V I )6 ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY. SECONDED BY: 9,10 -'' YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V/ COUNCILMAN EIDSON V COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ r COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR (/ COUNCILMAN BALJO X MAYOR HILL V UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 11 (OPTIONAL MOTION) Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, AND THAT THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (Note: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 397 BY TITLE ONLY Auk WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ADDING ARTICLE 23 OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONTROL REGULATIONS (DARK SKY ORDINANCE), AFTER AMENDING SECTION 23.0902 TO READ AS FOLLOWS: "UTILITY COMPANIES PROVIDING A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT IN WHICH THEY AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THESE REGULATIONS SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM APPLYING FOR AND OBTAINING A PERMIT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF OUTDOOR LIGHT FIXTURES FOR ON-SITE RESIDENTIAL SECURITY LIGHTING. PERMITS SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY," REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL (with the emergency clause) ITEM NO. 11 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 397, BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ADDING ARTICLE 23 OUTDOOR LIGHT CONTROL REGULATIONS (DARK SKY ORDINANCE) ; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. FOR APPROVAL (With the Emergency Clause) ITEM NO. 11 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the entire ordinance. ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 397, BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 397, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ADDING ARTICLE 23 OUTDOOR LIGHT CONTROL REGULATIONS (DARK SKY ORDINANCE) ; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, BE DENIED. FOR DENIAL (With the Emergency Clause) .•. or. 1 tx?ACHF do O (1 gRIZONP ( its o pacGce unction July 10, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER FROM: CITY CLERK 0 SUBJECT: COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS At the Council meeting of July 2nd, action was postponed on the Council liaison appointments in order to give each Council member enough opportunity to indicate which organizations they would like to represent. With the exception of Councilwoman Gardner, I have not had any indication of which groups you may be interested in. Councilwoman Gardner has indicated that she would like to be liaison to the Chamber of Commerce and the Community Foundation. Please contact Mayor Hill or myself with your wishes as soon as possible so that action can be taken at the July 16th Council meeting. kmc Approver for Agenda F t'✓ Date/ Horn M First Reading '// 5[r/ : / - Second Reading__._._____ _ _ _ Public Hearing _IZOld Business New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 , PQ ACC mF, G in�a'+air < Z qR/Z. city o 479acIie vunction July 3, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: COUNCIL LIAISONS The attached list includes all standing boards and commission of the city as well as additional organizations that interact with the city at various times. Please indicate on this list any of these groups that you may be interested in and return the list to me by Tuesday, July 9th so that your requests can be handled in time for the next Council meeting. Please add to this list any other groups or agencies (DES, Social Security, r Department of Health Services, etc. ) that you may be interested in. Please contact either Mayor Hill or myself if you have any questions. kmc //)1 l /- ; 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION "61"i PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION �"cJi/X-/ '6'/ ANNEXATION COMMITTEE ' 6-e47) �,/ /`'1- 1 LIBRARY BOARD / `it,g1/ ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TEAM - /Z--&-it1LV POLICE DEPARTMENT --$1*. ij/tX•47 C'' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ' --7//Y1 K✓ COMMUNITY FOUNDATION //'C,a-1-/ CIVIL DEFENSE/NATIONAL GUARD- &Cie-, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT --'=' `'" /f/ ;66P;4 sr i CHAMBER OF COMMERCE a_701 /0Q./% DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COMMITTEE . .1--- 62--71--a' 1 IitC a ('C , r'" C ix?P CHE fo _� Z41i U O �4 4;ro Z 'IR/ZONP c ity o &ipache 09unction DATE: JULY 8, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER 1./0 � FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING: AB - 85-05 RESOLUTION NO. 85-26 RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT (AGENDA ITEM) Approver tor Agenda GENERAL INFORMATION Date, Item a First Reading 7/G;/'i_ , Second Reading APPLICANTS: DR. & MRS. R.S. MINNICK --- - Public Hearing - Old Business �C New Business PARCELS: 100-32-028, 100-32-029 -Consent Agenda STREETS REQUESTED: SMOKETREE STREET FROM SAGUARO DRIVE TO IRONWOOD DRIVE STREET CONDITION: NOT OPENED OR MAINTAINED BY THE CITY. ALL PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE ACCESS FROM OTHER STREETS. D.C.C. COMMENTS: NO OBJECTION IS EXPRESSED TO THE APPLICATION. (SEE MEMORANDUM ATTACHED. ) File No. 100.051, AB-85-05 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 O� PQACHFGti O 0 z gRiZ0N P (-0 it p o acne �unction DATE: JUNE 27, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER FROM: VICE CHAIRMAN, DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COMMITTEE REGARDING: RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENTS AB-85-05 (MINNICK) The Development Coordinating Committee reviewed the above application on and expressed no objection for the following reasons: 1 . The roadways have never been opened or maintained by the City for public use. 2. The roadway is a local classification. 3. The use of property by the owners would be enhanced. 4. Adequate access to public rights—of—ways would remain available. 5. Area transportation circulation would not be adveor?sley affected. 6. Parcels 28 and 29 were previously zoned TH by Pinal County. 7. This abandonment could permit parcels 28 and 29 to be developed into a mobile home park. 8. The general plan inidcates parcels 28 and 29 to be a medium/high density opportunity area. 9. Required dedications have been obtained. cc Engineering nivision Planning Department File No. 100.051, AB-85-05 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 s RESOLUTION NO. 85-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT A CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES DESCRIBED AS SMOKETREE STREET FROM SAGUARO DRIVE TO IRONWOOD DRIVE IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE AB-85-05, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS A ROADWAY AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND Alm\ EXTINGUISHED AS PRESENT OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEREAS, the requested abandonment is a Federally Patented Easement described as a parcel of land located in a portion of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, and more particularly described as follows: The South sixty-six (66') feet of the North six hundred ninety-three (693') feet of the East half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 18 EXCEPT the West thirty-three (33') feet; and EXCEPT the East Fifty (50') feet thereof. WHEREAS, the abandonment requested, if approved, would not leave a parcel in separate ownership without access to an established public roadway connecting such lands with another public roadway, or have access by a Federally Patented Easement which may in the future be developed, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, finds that these said Federally Patented Easements for public right-of-way purposes as described herein, are classified as local streets on the Apache Junction Street Classification Plan, and are no longer necessary for public use as roadways; and WHEREAS, these said easements requested for abandonment have never been improved as public roadways and maintained by a local governing agency NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the above-described Federally Patented Easement reserved for public right-of-way purposes are hereby abandoned and extinguished as present or future public right-of-way BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the abandonment of the public right-of-way has no effect on reservations for public utility easements. Amok, PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF ,1985. Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David F. Alexander City Attorney AB-85-05 SEC 18 FOOTHILL ST. 19 I S 20 2I O O w C O A27 28 50' Q SMOKETREEj / g z O 130 ED • • 29 50' ' 33 66' 33' 35 35 TEPEE-ST. -- PROPOSED ABANDONMENT OASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO N SCALE I"= 200' 3 e „ , Amok Aft. P ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ( /9/1j/0;)/1)) ,...., 4( .1 ()3/ Y ,._.(6p/ ks 3 ITEf1 # /?? a4ovrtik MEETING OF 0(0' MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER ✓ COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ �✓ 0E4' COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO ✓ VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL ✓ COUNCILMAN EIDSON 1/ MAYOR HILL 7 UNANIIOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL 3 a ITEM NO. 13 I MOVE THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-26, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT A CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES DESCRIBED AS SMOKETREE STREET FROM SAGUARO DRIVE TO IRONWOOD DRIVE IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE AB-85-05, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS A ROADWAY AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND EXTINGUISHED AS PRESENT OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Ask Ask QACHF d‹,,,,,Aili„,V4/,// — U z �R,ZoNNPt (ity o75 pache c-unction ,.., DATE: JULY 2, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER Vie FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING: AB 85-04 RESOLUTION NO, 85-25 RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT (AGENDA ITEM) GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANTS: ROBERT S. MILLER, CARL F. WELLS & MARY T. WELLS, EUGENE KOPPEN & K4THY KOPPEN PARCELS: 103-04-037A, 103,04-047B, 103-04-037B STREETS REQUESTED: FIFTH AVENUE FROM WICKIUP ROAD TO CHAPARRAL ROAD STREET CONDITION: UNIMPROVED AND NOT MAINTAINED. DCC RECOMMENDATION: SEE MEMORANDUM DATED MAY 2, 1985 ATTACHED. Approver for Agenda J�ate Item First Reading A/o-- // Second Reading _ Public Hearing File No. AB-85-04 ✓- Old Business New Business - Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 PQAC-41 HF✓ 4 U r� t Z "IPIZONP `Oily o unction ,00114 DATE: MAY 2, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER FROM: VICE CHAIRMAN, DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COMMITTEE REGARDING: RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENTS AB-85-04 (Miller) The Development Coordinating Committee reviewed the above application on and expressed no objection for the following reasons: 1 . The roadways have never been opened or maintained by the City for public use. 2. The roadway is a local classification. 3. The use of property by the owners would be enhanced. 4. Adequate access to public rights—of—ways would remain available. 5. Area transportation circulation would not be adversley affected. 6. All the property owners desire the abandonment. cc Engineering flivision Planning Department File No. AB-85-04 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 OPP /em s /Mk RESOLUTION NO. 85-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT A CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ON FIFTH AVENUE FROM WICKIUP ROAD TO CHAPARRAL ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE AB-85-04, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS A ROADWAY AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND EXTINGUISHED AS PRESENT ,^ OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEREAS, the requested abandonment is a federally patented easement described as a parcel of land located in a portion of Section 22, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona, and more particularly described as follows: The South sixty-six (66') feet of the North three hundred sixty-three (363') feet of the West half of the Northwest quarter of the South East quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 22: EXCEPT the East thirty-three (33') feet, and EXCEPT the West thirty-three (33') feet thereof WHEREAS, the abandonment requested, if approved, would not leave a parcel in separate ownership without access to an established public roadway connecting such lands with another public roadway, or have access by a Federally Patented Easement which may in the future be developed; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, finds that these said Federally Patented Easements for public right-of-way purposes as described herein, are classified as local streets on the Apache Junction Street Classification Plan, and are no longer necessary for public use as roadways, and WHEREAS, these said easements requested for abandonment have never been improved as public roadways and maintained by a local governing agency NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the above-described Federally Patented Easement reserved for public right-of-way purposes are hereby abandoned and extinguished as present or future public right-of-way. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the abandonment of the public right-of-way has no effect on reservations for public utility easements P\ PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF ,1985 Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. David F Alexander City Attorney e—s AB-85-04 �l SEC 22 FOJRTH AVE 33 32 33' 87 0 0 „of A FIFTH AVE. 47 .: B 66' 49 4B 5 0 0 o c SIXTH AVE J a. 55 v- 54 052 ® 5 = A s SEVENTH AVE g 6 mum 66 67 68 6A9 f) •'DWA *Y t V//// PROPOSED ABANDONMENT Q N ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO SCALE I"= 200' 4 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES i , r 1 ........ 7' K'‘/e ' Po° e/ r ITEM # IL( MEETING OF ?/4/ 6 (-)(\f aAL MOTION BY: SECONDED BY , cf.:1-r)41 1,ScA' YES NO ABSTAINED V COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER i/COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR / COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V MAYOR HILL I 1/ 1 i UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 14 I MOVE THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-25, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT A CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ON FIFTH AVENUE FROM WICKIUP ROAD TO CHAPARRAL ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE AB-85-04, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS A ROADWAY AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND EXTINGUISHED AS PRESENT OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. ... ....... „Nc HE,/,. U IASt 7 Z Mx Jam. gRIZ`�Np, its o 047Jace C unction ,,., July 9, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: ACTING CITY MANAGER V)".‘" FROM: CITY CLERK OCI SUBJECT: PROPOSED FREEZE ON RESIDENTIAL ZONINGS At the work session of July 1st, Councilwoman Gardner requested that an item pertaining to a proposed freeze on residential zonings until such time that the "lot-splitting ordinance" is in force be placed on the Council agenda for consideration at the July 16th meeting. Attached is a memorandum from the Planning Director outlining the status of both the lot-splitting ordinance and the residential zoning districts. A sample motion is attached for your consideration. kmc Approver for Agenda /et% T.14to Item # First Reading "/-' /S Second Reading Public Hearing Old Business New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 r PQALHE✓G n� l "IPizoNP 'Oily o �GLG�28 unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 9, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: ili CV'BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: C tJ)CHARLES R. NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: STATUS OF LOT SPLIT ORDINANCE AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Residential Zoning Districts Draft of District regulations is completed, anticipate a public hearing on them by the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 13, and by the City Council on August 20th or 27th. There will also probably be a need for a Planning and Zoning work session prior to August 13th. Lot Split Ordinance The first draft of this ordinance (to be part of the subdivision ordinance) has been completed. This ordinance will require extensive review by the Development Coordinating Committee, City Attorney, Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council . Due to its complexity and likelihood of numerous revisions , I would not anticipate public hearings prior to the end of August, at the earliest. CRN:jl 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982-8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET/ I � NOTES4 , �1 1 � / opfv,)" 0)/) YD ITEM # MEETING OF /(g 1 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL C= ITEM NO. 15 I MOVE THAT THE PROPOSED FREEZE ON RESIDENTIAL ZONINGS, UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE "LOT-SPLITTING ORDINANCE" IS IN FORCE, BE (APPROVED/DENIED) . ACIHF✓ - i -, Gc. ' Z IZONP City on pache &unction July 10, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER J 6tn. FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXTENSIONS TO CLEAN PROPERTY Attached are requests from three property owners who are either wishing an extension of time to bring their property into compliance with the City Code or appeal the request to clean the property in its entirety. These requests are as follows: Mr. Peter Bodnar: Wishes to have an additional thirty days to bring his parcel into compliance. Mr. Bodnar has been in contact with me on at least two occasions and is very regretful that this situation arose. His letter indicates that he is working with the renters to resolve the problem. Mr. Kenneth Blair: Wishes to have an extension of ninety days due to the poor health of his mother and his need to care for her. Mr. Blair had a similar violation in 1984, but did resolve the problem at that time. His ,.m, letter indicates that he would be able to personally resolve the problem in October. Mr. Robert Maples: Wishes to appeal the original action to have the property cleaned and indicates by his letter that he feels there is no violation. I have attached pictures of the original inspection as well as recent ones taken by the Building Department. Mr. Maples is not requesting an extension. He is asking for a suspension of the action to have the property cleaned since it is not in violation. These requests will be placed on the July 16th agenda for your action. ,, Approver for Agenda ' - kmc ���Qate Item # First Reading j%/(r/g$' llp Second Reading _ Public Hearing - Old Business _'New Business - Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 . ei. ,. ._. C c--17---", ,,_,..) 6.,,,..,, • . ,. ) L,-/L-1 .f - ---,,,,„e. : -- ic/1)--c---Lje-- :_<?)----)-----ri--Lt--,--4--- -- -- -= --,---P -147 /e /_ / 8---- C ,:-3 7 ( t_. -_-,- ----.,/ ce.--,- , ( 3 c) ) ------- 71 __Ci __. i 3-1,... __-1------a., ,-- ----e-"--"-r--t- . t-'11--"? L.-----) : 1 - il (.4) .___L i___A-. - t 1 r --6..../L - . r L11 -t-L- ------1 7 ) ",,,,,,-/2---- tj\--4-2-- 0A-e-Q-e-t-4-0-,Lj ti---"L'-it-• (-.)---'4,, c-.4.- ---rel c'-ci--- ---- C-r—•----e-A-: -z-1----4-1-- d -±L-- t--------r-- (...,..-, i (1-1,,,,,,,L/ ....1„.le 4 0..' ,...4•L'L'7 '.. --.( L-'''-' \ ..,., ,..-•--1-"7"---j_ g.---jtte------ --e-1-- --- - ,........../..-e---v- -4----z— , ,... ' • . ' j 7.41.4*.cinl-• do, , ,.."-------7 .. .i,"- ___:_::,t27 '-----) 3-L_...:._:\..v.L._.,.5.;•, „ d.,_...., •,-C-1--••-- '1_,- r• ( PERMIT JOB ADDRESS - NO DATE WANTED ❑ RE INSP DATE RCVD A FND B UNDR FLOOR C TOP OUT FRAME C 1 MASONRY ❑ 1 FOOT'S/STEEL ❑ 1 SOIL&WASTE 0 1.ELECT. 0 5.HTG/VENT ❑1 GROUT ❑ 2.STEM/STEEL 0 2 WATER 0 2.PLUMB. 0 6.REFRIG ❑ 3.MONO FTG WALL ❑ 4.TN SLAB 0 3.BLDG.SEWER ❑ 3.FRAMING ❑ 7,OTHER 02 GROUT 0 4 WATER SERV 0 4.ROOF SHTNG. F PLACE y.. FIRE PL 0 5.ELEC COND. 0 CONSTR POWER .FENCE ❑3.BOND BM D INT/WALL E MOBILE HOME F POOLS G FINAL INSPECTION 0 1.DRYWALL/ 0 1.ELECTRICAL 0 1 PRE-GUNITE 0 1.BUILDING ❑ 6 PAT.COV NAILING ❑2.GAS 0 2.ELECTRICAL ❑ 2.PLUMBING ❑ 7 CAR PRT ❑ 3 WATER ❑ 3.HEATER 0 3 ELECTRICAL❑8.OTHER ❑ 4 SEWER 0 4.PRE PLASTER 0 4 HTG/AC 0 9.PUMP ❑ 5.AWNING ❑5 FENCE 0 5 FENCE ❑ 10.SIGN ❑ 6 BLOCKING 0 6.PLUMBING OTHER t L-_ ❑APPROVED ❑REJECTED ❑CLEARANCE IF APPROVED (IF REJECTED,MAKE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED CALL FOR REINSPECTION) �,fJ 1 s�7 Z,od- r-,V) " ' `--- . �2� - ; .-r=3 ' :. INSPE igin Inn 98: RTI ^� t 522 _-_ J -_—.' �j� ri - 'w• s�]�. � may' ��Y }-4 'S�•- j �� i '� °? . .. r ,' tia , i' a-; • - -7s,. s'' �,c .;-;1,-;.';Y Q L a •Ky' -ate;�,-t Y '�",.,__ -� ;�-5,s/ '.�-�' :..`r r. `t T >- - + yy a ' _ _,,;' _`yK 3S .-' !'. fat' 3Z �' '>r'>'� -!�. � "~_ r` ' 'TO' 'r r g j 4+'6,J7M j� 3 F at.�ti ►' -3� ~,- :" yam` e:-.3 �'1 1b -:y_'_W-6 ,2- i City Council City of Apache Junction 1001 North Idaho Road Apache Junction, AZ 35220 30 June 1985 sear Council .:embers: Please refer to City Clerk letter of 14 June 1985 addressed to me re violation of city code, article 9-2, Parcel numbered 102-33-051. This is an appeal for a ninety (90) day extension of the deadline from 18 July to 13 October 1935 for the reason(s) set forth below. (I am presuming the present deadline date of 18 July based on the following: City Clerk's letter of 14 June 1985 received by my mail forwarding ser- vice in Sparks, Neveda, on my behalf, on about 18 June. City Clerk's notice stipulates, "thirty (30) days from receipt cf this notice.", therefore, presumed present deadline date of 18 July, even though I didn't actually, personally receive the notice until 29 June.) My Father passed away last October leaving my 83 year old Mother alone in Santa :Maria, California. Now my Mother has just undergone surgery. She is being discharged from the hospital tomorrow as a matter of fact. My wife and I are staying close to her until the end of September to help her during her recovery. At that time we will be free to proceed to Apache Junction, arriving about 2 October. If this request for an extension is granted, it will give us about two weeks in which we can personally attend to the property in question. A copy of two photographs of the property, forwarded with the City Clerk's notice, appears to indicate weeds are the primary cause for the complaint and issuance of notice. Just last year I spent 4'723.75 to have property cleared of all trash and weeds, trees trimmed, holes filled, ground generally leveled with frontend loader/blade, and all ..•••••. rubbish hauled to the dump. Please address reply directly to me at the below address. Awaiting your decision, I remain Sincerely yours, kenneth L. Blair 512 3. Ranch St. .a.nta Maria, CA 93454 Copy to: City Clerk • AM• �"' �j/C� /Y PERMIT JOB ADDRESS/2(5/) 47/ J�rJ /�jJ � NO/�/ -/(%e.el/-G _ !t -'� ��l '' �i ���-l,C'lli��% "�1�`f/ DATE / ,c Z.f '_''-O i t(', WANTED / 0 RE INSP. DATE P/l/� RCVD G _.., A END B UNDR FLOOR C TOP OUT FRAME C 1 MASONRY ❑ 1 FOOT'S/STEEL 0 1 SOIL&WASTE 0 1 ELECT. 0 5.HTG/VENT ❑1.GROUT ❑ 2 STEM/STEEL 0 2 WATER 0 2 PLUMB 0 6 REFRIG WALL t ❑ 3.MONO FTG 0 3 BLDG SEWER 0 3 FRAMING 0 7 OTHER 02 GROUT I❑ 4 THKN SLAB ❑ 4 WATER SERV ❑ 4 ROOF SHTNG F PLACE ' 11".1 5 FIRE PL 0 5 ELEC COND 0 CONSTR POWER 03.BOND BM 6 FENCE D INT/WALL E MOBILE HOME F POOLS G FINAL INSPECTION ❑ 1.DRYWALL/ 0 1 ELECTRICAL 0 1 PRE-GUNITE 0 1 BUILDING 0 6 PAT.COVI NAILING 0 2.GAS 0 2 ELECTRICAL 0 2 PLUMBING 0 7 CAR PRT ❑ 3.WATER 0 3.HEATER 0 3 ELECTRICAL❑8 OTHER ❑ 4 SEWER ❑4.PRE PLASTER 0 4.HTG/AC 0 9.PUMP ❑ 5 AWNING 0 5.FENCE 0 5 FENCE 0 10.SIGN ❑ 6 BLOCKING 0 6 PLUMBING n OTHER //aGi�// ZL,'c_ i ❑APPROVED 0 REJECTED 0 CLEARANCE IF APPROVED 1 (IF REJECTED AKE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED CALL FOR REINSPECTION) I c 4-- 1 INSPECT/ I . r"-' f _, • • .. •71 .*:.•i ' • , .�'• _ '" . MI .-.,,, a. r ; ` •�• r H ; '� t �.., 4 t. u' ' it i ^ %. — 2wr J qy,,,,1t 0 IL))2-, .tv-Q-z- '•/,' -c(i7_, ,ouz.f. 44_,zzti_ ,. to 1?2x--e-t-u-c tf-cv .L-tz,,,, IbtataA,4.4'.i„,„ / 4 CO-A-4)-ttl--vt: 4 efi-C-k-A_ liLelaib—" _A_ ,dt (2.1,A-'d,L--0,0_&ite)r, 9 i - i z.,CLIL ril _ L2.__ - -Z4/ 4-L76-L- --t-t I 7-62--c-c-- el ' _,0-,'' e-j- ' u I 8)i____ 46t4L ,(:_ j 1 4 a-A- 1-?rZ . ,jle-t ,le-cecra— 1 ‘ , 4,Lott_,j & 4.,ku± .1.-2L, aans4> cf-frxj/julLil)2 ; a-'/0(_ t .-t- efj- ---Q-41 a... hie-exi ,- ,- 14---, , Le--1- 117 ---- 1V1k-, /1124(A - Alti i,:z if 4 1 %-e-O-J2A - 142i4, /C-Q-4Li Z_O-41-0 it. U 4' P76-12--c-t- tt,LA- -6•2-Le --1.1f-e" 76 e&vvce-e-t a>A-2, p. Le-itee-xe..0 - L 4,<:=IL p}Le/1-6-J_e_ei, 7 1 --) --- , ) )) I el i / 1 I ,k 1 ! Ail •v ,...'''" ` \:›),4s: I s- i i ignma..; i G.._ "4-7..."_ 1_:-: ft flaiVata:ftsonnassaj aillEnsai: _ ......60 '.0 ......•''''''''Virl.- ,,?...5r,_, . !..3.„..-•••1 . -A....* -7.10. '... .. ". 1.- 7 '- 1 ri.--.-.-....;''.4i.;•••""°- ----..... X • • :*. --..4fr•VtliO• . .1 • ••. •• :i., ...t... .....,... ..,,,. • Z .-774.77--;'''`. -_ .'' ..t..4 ..:...` ''- Ai•Vrif---4C-' " -il•:•4- a. =;...:- s" ---0, --,,,;,-..;,....;.viza-: ...,, .,.. 7' , - - r -_. --..... ,;.- - i r .."'"f'pe *_;•._•••••., -.1.47".' • 1:''':. - ''•‘3,....+.4!..' -..'"":. . •.1 I i I i ,.. .',.116,F.Ys.-' . ..,...7'...c.... ...4, •••1.--i*' 4...SZI't.' -,Sivert.....5..% . . "' -s ' . 4 !....i .. --- : •- '''‘ .111:1Ps-141r7-'-'••-••-• • . - •,-' ._,::1".4ti`•,,i,, - * '•--.• •'•"-•r••••• i ' I :r..." '' .1*-.4-”!!4":•.,?•.,,--,'• "' _."•-•41 :-.N...---17.r.' • •- '-'''''..-,`• "---.---- - `'•-•-r----:•••-t- - - , ...--Z*Vr•-•*--. -.-• ., - ;---,!t•,.....;,,--6,44.4.tkzobee. . . . . ., -••• -;A-,:.•,-•" • - -•, •'-r.'7--"&•••-•.,ag.,--o•:,..., '' :-"•''•'•74 of •••-----. * • • - "11= 3 • • `-'' 0 -N ------- - 41,,, 4_____•iNAPF- • „„ ..... - 4".7'..4jmny"... •- . -- ; 1'4—, As.hardim=dirizibie,, •..... 1 _ • --:*--- - 1 A--p 6-', f--:- o'lle • _ ' -41, - • . - - • —. , ..,,...,. •-_4_,_.......„2,,i•.:,:-- ,,.. _ . - -- . ..,.. . .7.,.., ...-,•,*;...` -.„ ' - .,,N .--,.. .,,...s:.;4, ,P"....,..7_,...:-----,---...----"r'7-•••• : a ' •-• ,,,.....„,:_,..,;_,.. ,.,_, ,.. Ts-............_ ,*r0.,.....!....„-.;-4.•41;„-- ' -7`:7. .-.'* r.ii.....7.',.: ,,'......:- -:.-.,,,r...,.. ,.,...4..;,..;:,. ' .V.3*..;4.,, ...*.. ..,„ ''„7. " '7." '''', •.,‘,41 ." N i . ',,.,:c.,,,- 4,- 4,• "-. .;.:..-;•V;,k25'.---'_ -4`.----W .' .•,*•4:-''''-"---',.! 44-...44,3M ..,-,i.,..-1174. -1,.. ,-,,,t-4-,E,&,.i,- -,..„, ,..:::::;.- •0;44--;...;,st. -., ;-- ., , ,mw--• --..;.---, .-.,.:v -. 11 .....'t,--.-.!,,t,tze,..;.,-A -',-ii:-....,--,-.7--,-1,'.5,.....4i.'--.4!"..t-...:,;,+, , .-.- 1:„.0,i*7' - '.-r. , Tt '--.,'•• ',',,L.A.,• -:-,'''.,',f,-„,_•_•.,1,-,•...."•••,-----,,:.•-•-... ._ ,c_4. c...:,, 4..1'...;4W;%44.,. V'4. .;' , . ,.,..,:*.ZA.1".1,4Z. 4..'4244,;4r;.:- 4,-.IfitVAN%., 4 .7i.i.-.: itj::.-,-.-. - . ... - :.-- ,' •".-N.,-,0-Tr,--:.;-A 1,T=.0.:, -.!;.,,„yricA,...--4.1,--.L.,,,..,---,-,4*-41-5-ii••ati,14,.---; A-:-..- , ,t1,,,,.-- . ,...r,f- --,...??.?›;-,,,„...-wii-irTair.--wt.-,„ '---, -- . . . ..,-- ,_-- -• ,--;- -,..I. '':'•::',.'..''......:i;*eV Mk --,•;,,,,ic.,•57.114.:,. 4.--.•4--_,-;•1_,1?",-;',..-..':• .... . , w,,,.411%,; ,..._,, ,r, 0,- •••••*,,-- ''',.• • •r C •-...- -r •,,,-, 1 ...-- . .fi• --• ter...) Zip -.116:144.-.- -;- -.:--:-.- ,- • ,..--• , .-,• • .01.:,~,c r . '..;-• -'.'-'1-- .• vr::` --* k•.:;-':- Illictv",‘ ..- - . f•''' r .'rrxiiii,h4r.""'"" Ilk • .,_,,i-‘-ez• -.• -., : - ••* ..,,I.- 21 ;;;r: it:: V''' - ..a.,-.74...•--2........!,1,,,4_-!_f...A,...:Loza„-Art • ..- -* •-•- -`•12,p-tIrT" —4.PI": •-,''..VI-. fr ..- 1...., .e. a-- a .4- 4...k,,; •-ol....",....•••0 • • %..,,,_714•3".7 45., • ,„.-- _....• ••'' '•••• __ ....... _ • •••---. .4:1‘,--r-_,...•!.. -%•,,,,,,•-• ' t'f''. ...! saife47-•••"diriC''•• •,.7.1.-. 11174•-:P:,.. . ,.. , - -...-.:- .0,-....t.:_..7:-. ,•-. • - jr•-+'- . -- ---Aa..-----— . :-.-._ . .,....... .-4,- -,..... .- -,Z.:-: - ,:" ;;::,-*a - ,t-...je '4.4""Liiie.i'•-: . ' .,, ,i4... ,7-j,- -, : • C.•. '....' 4s , ''.' • " ' -54--_--... ... ''...--• - •• " .. ..- • ;•"77•• .,-.' • 4F"'"- . :-.:-..-.3. 1 : ,.,... t.A.... ,.. e% - - • ' — : ..•., -•,-; -,...:-.ft--t :'-. ‘e '.1.,--;-, :3'6;-?-;›, .447'7:. „-. ',•••• • / ,r-S-"' • -.7*Fitq„S• atti*--,-"` 0;- 's .,..-.1v4.-; •-1.,-!,.:..,,..... - ...:.sifFT&I.•i...,io„,„r_..•• :, •- •f-,rvIza#4-1,_•.: ••••- -HI ••- •J., .. •., ,11 ''' • . '''A. ....-.. .**." 7'7_7_r•--Z ''• ' -* ,' • ''''.-7 ' 11 .1',.. ., :,•1-,:. .,- *,....'. .. -.,-"'''`"7-' ' '1•":.P..r.-'-' '''''"1"•;4.'47:70' '''•-• -- -‘• ••‘. "*"‘"r".4.7•9 .....•y.....•••••,„;L:„...,,,, _ • •-44-"•••: • •- ,: • _ Mi-t.r..*••10.••••''•• • ' • • '-''• t ' . • '1,1i0e.-*•'--: . • ,•, •• • , . , - • r '‘IN.01 . .'•' .._. tf, ki." 1/14•,••1., . . • 7 •tleiri,, . ..- --....." • ‘3, , ,46 . • , 1,. -- Si • - .-_""i " ' "-- ---7k.7:7;-`7.!r----1 T,......, • • - -..--'—'44P.4')•.:..S,' i.,---A,.. --e_ . itt 4 - • .. I ,..., ..... r " (2 ' '.j i _ PERMIT JOB ADDRESS <' f,'_ ,� '1 .2,<"/) ;1„,": .•7:r,/ / A NO. DATE DATE WANTED ❑ RE INSP. !RCVD .-" r' A FND B UNDR FLOOR C TOP OUT FRAME C 1 MASONRY I ❑ 1 FOOT'S/STEEL 0 1 SOIL&WASTE 0 1.ELECT. ❑ 5.HTG/VENT ❑1 GROUT ❑ 2.STEM/STEEL 0 2 WATER 0 2 PLUMB. 0 6 REFRIG WALL ❑ 3.MONO FTG ❑ 3 BLDG SEWER ❑ 3.FRAMING 0 7 OTHER 02 GROUT ❑ 4 THKN SLAB 0 4 WATER SERV 0 4 ROOF SHTNG F PLACE ❑ 5 FIRE PL 0 5 ELEC.COND 0 CONSTR POWER 03.BOND BM iak ❑ 6 FENCE D INT/WALL E MOBILE HOME F POOLS G FINAL INSPECTION ❑ 1.DRYWALL/ 0 1.ELECTRICAL 0 1 PRE-GUNITE 0 1 BUILDING 0 6 PAT COV NAILING 0 2.GAS 0 2 ELECTRICAL 0 2 PLUMBING 0 7 CAR PRT ❑ 3.WATER 0 3 HEATER 0 3.ELECTRICALD 8 OTHER ❑ 4 SEWER 0 4.PRE PLASTER 0 4.HTG/AC 0 9.PUMP ❑ 5 AWNING 0 5.FENCE 0 5 FENCE 0 10 SIGN ❑ 6.BLOCKING 0 6.PLUMBING OTHER. f %1- 2.e /? ,/,/ .*) / ?// / "- 0 APPROVED 0 REJECTED 0 CLEARANCE IF APPROVED (IF REJECTED MAKE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED-CALL FOR REINSPECTION) L• INSPECTOR SIGN• g• /1.4 4,r, t 982-8002+ INFORMATION + F CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION I 1001 N Idaho Rd.,Apach i `_ , ,, ' .4y f NO - ,ft•-.t4'. ". 0:4-` - ' V }�. 1 ....\ /r, ' ' ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET 1 NOTES V , 'J 1 ITEf1 # tiik MEETING OF �� MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: tr/' ae." YESz. NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO CZ VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL // . COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER v COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ 1/ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL I/ ' , UNAN IOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL 1 ea ITEM NO. 16 I MOVE THAT THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSIONS TO CLEAN PROPERTY BE (GRANTED/DENIED) AS FOLLOWS: MR. PETER BODNAR FOR ?)D DAYS MR. KENNETH BLAIR FOR 30 DAYS MR. ROBERT MAPLES FOR 30 DAYS Ink Alift. C HE I ✓ O &unction ity 4 ipace July 10, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER GAO. FROM: CITY CLERK i'/ SUBJECT: INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT - PINAL COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES Attached is a proposed intergovernmental agreement between the City and the Pinal County Health Department to provide specific health services on a contract basis. The City would be contracting with the county health department to provide services such as nursing and nutrition services as well as the inspection of eating establishments, public pools, and septic tank systems. The County will not be charging the City any fee for providing these services. This item will be placed on the July 16th agenda for your consideration. The Council may wish to postpone action until City Manager Mike McNulty is available to discuss the agreement since he has been working with the County on this agreement. kmc Approver for Agenda Date Item # First Reading -1k/M-- /7 Second Reading - Public Hearing - Old Business ✓ New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 Pinal County HEALTH DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 807 1301 PINAL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING II FLORENCE,ARIZONA 85232 0807 TELEPHONE(602)868 5801 June 25 , 1985 ;, Michael McNulty, City Manager ° City of Apache Junction 0 1001 N . Idaho Road Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 o Dear Mr. McNulty, V Enclosed is a copy of the intergovernmental agreement with Pinal County regarding health services . This agreement has been approved by the County Board of Supervisors and signed E by Mr. Karam, Chairman of the Board. 9 Please attach a letter requesting specific environmental health services from the Pinal County Health Department , ... complete the signature blocks , and return the original as soon as possible to : a a CHARLES A. GUINN, CLERK-BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0 POST OFFICE BOX 827 °p FLORENCE , ARIZONA 85232 o The Pinal County Health Department will provide environmental 'c health services within your corporate limits until July 31 , 1985 , or until an IGA is entered into with Pinal County at which time environmental health services by the County will �-•y 0 either be discontinued or modified. If you have any questions please contact either Charles a Teegarden or me w a d x Saincerely,f.4.4 ,1413/A Chris G. Sexton °' Sanitation Program Director 0 0 a CGS/cgs "b � w a .. 0 Ca V. m A. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 THIS GREEMENT is entered into this V day of / ALL , 1915 , between PINAL COUNTY, a 2 3 political susbdivision of the State of Arizona, I4 hereinafter referred to as "County, " and the CITY OF 5 APACHE JUNCTION , a political subdivision of 6 the State of Arizona, hereinafter referred to as "CITY. " 7 8 WHEREAS: 9 10 1. The parties are authorized pursuant to A.R.S. 11 11-951, et seq. , to enter into intergovernmental 12 agreements for the purposes of contracting for services, 13 jointly exercising powers common to the contracting 14 parties, and taking joint or cooperative action. 15 2. Pursuant to A.R.S. 36-165, 166 and 167, the 16 CITY has responsibility for health regulations and /I"` 17 certain health services within its corporate limits. 18 3. Pursuant to Title 36 Chaper 2, Article 4, the 19 COUNTY has established a County Health Department. 20 4. The CITY desires the COUNTY to provide certain 21 health services to its residents within its corporate 22 limits, and the COUNTY is willing to provide those 23 services. 24 5. Pursuant to A.R.S. 36-190 and applicable case 25 law, the CITY must request the COUNTY provide health 26 services within the CITY's boundaries and enter into an p 1 agreement with the COUNTY regarding those services in 2 order for the COUNTY to have jurisdiction to provide 3 those services. 4 NOV THEREFORE, the parties to this agreement "".,k 5 mutually agree as follow: 6 1. The services the COUNTY will provide fall into 7 three categories: Nursing services , Nutrition Services , 8 and Environmental Health Services. The COUNTY will 9 provide the Nursing Services and Nutrition Services 10 listed below to the residents of the CITY and within the 11 CITY's corporate boundaries, subject to the availability of grant funds where marked by an "*. " The COUNTY will 12 13 provide each of the Environmental Health Services listed 14 below upon specific written request of the CITY: 15 a. Nursing Services: to include Communicable 16 Disease Control (sexually transmitted diseases, 17 tuberculosis control, and communicable disease 18 investigation) , Family Planning Services*, Maternity 19 Services*, Child Health Services* ( including 20 immunizations ) , Community Health Nursing and Health 21 Education* (program in schools and community) . 22 b. Nutrition Services : to include WIC* (Women, 23 Infants and Children--food supplement and education 24 services ) , other nutrition-related services* and act as 25 a resource center for programs related to nutrition and 26 cardiovascular risk reduction. * 1 c. Environmental Health Services: to include 2 Temporary and Non-Temporary Food and Drink Services 3 (plan review, inspections, code enforcement) , Schools 4 (kitchen and grounds inspections, code enforcement) , 5 Public and Semipublic Bathing Place Services 6 ( inspections and code enforcement) , Trailer Park and 7 Subdivision Approvals as 8 Required for State Health Department approval, and 9 Septic Tank Systems (plan review, inspections, code 10 enforcement) . Only those specific Environmental Health 11 Services requested in writing by the CITY and for which 12 the CITY has adopted applicable chapters from the Pinal 13 County Sanitary Code will be provided by the COUNTY. 14 2. The COUNTY agrees that the Health Services it 15 provides to the residents of the CITY shall be provided 16 on an equal basis with the residents of the r•6, 17 unincorporated areas of Pinal County. 18 3. The COUNTY agrees that the County Health 19 Department will handle complaints for the services that 20 COUNTY provides. 21 4. The CITY agrees that it will have the 22 responsiblity for all other health services not provided 23 for by the COUNTY as listed above. The CITY will have 24 the responsibility for all other health problems and 25 compliants not identified above as within the COUNTY' s 26 jurisdiction. The CITY ' s responsibility includes , but is not limited to, garbage disposal , manure disposal and storage, and insect control. 1 5. The CITY agrees to adopt applicable portions of 2 the Pinal County Sanitary Code as part of its municipal 3 ordinances and regulations with regard to those 4 Environmental Health Services it has requested COUNTY to 5 provide. The COUNTY, through the County Health 6 Department, agrees to enforce said regulations with 7 regard to the services COUNTY provides. 8 6. The COUNTY, through the County Health 9 Department, agrees to assist and cooperate in the 10 enforcement and prosecution of violations of CITY 11 regulations involving Environmental Health Services that 12 COUNTY provides. The CITY agrees that it has primary 13 responsibility for the enforcement and prosecution of 14 violations, that all prosecutions will be in City Court, 15 and that they will be the reponsibility of the City 16 Attorney. 17 7. The COUNTY specifically reserves the right to 18 refuse to provide Septic Tank System services where the 19 CITY ' s setback requirements for septic tank systems 20 vary from those in the Pinal County Sanitary Code. 21 8. The CITY agrees to condition the issuance of 22 building permits on COUNTY approval of plans for all 23 construction for which the COUNTY, through the County 24 Health Department will have plan review and inspection 25 responsibilities. 26 1 1AI Ilk• OW 1 9. The CITY agrees to withhold business licences 2 for new and remodeled restaurants and bars until written 3 approval to operate is received from the County Health A . 4 Department. This provision shall apply only where the 5 CITY has requested Non-Temporary Food and Drink 6 Services. 7 10. The CITY agrees to withhold business licenses 8 for temporary food and drink (special event) vendors 9 until the County Health Department approves the vendor 's 10 operation. This provision shall apply only where the 11 CITY has requested Temporary Food and Drink Services. 12 11. The COUNTY agrees that no charges or costs 13 will be assessed the CITY for the services that COUNTY 14 has agreed to provide, nor shall any fee or charge be 15 imposed on any CITY resident in an amount different from 16 that imposed upon a resident of the unincorporated oi.a, 17 portion of Pinal County. 18 12. The parties to this Agreement agree that its 19 term shall be for one year, beginning on July 1, 1985, 20 and ending on June 30, 1986. Either party may terminate 21 this Agreement upon thirty ( 30 ) days written notice. 22 13. The parties to this Agreement agree to contact 23 each other not less than ninety (90 ) days prior to June 24 30 , 1986 and indicate whether they intend to renew this 25 Agreement and on what terms. 26 1 14. This instrument, together with any written 2 requests by the CITY for Environmental Health Services, 3 shall constitute the entire agreement between the 4 parties. 5 No statements, promises or inducements made by either 6 party, or by an agent of either party, that is not 7 contained in this written agreement shall be valid or 8 binding. This agreement may not be enlarged, modified 9 or altered, except in writing, signed by the parties and 10 enforsed hereon. 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered this 12 Agreement the day and year mentioned above. 13 14 PINAL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 15 16 17 BY: 18 HAIRMAN 19 ATTEST: 20 21 ,104 L' / ' 22 Clerk, Pinal County Board of 23 Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: 24 r ' 25 V(A,-4/ Q__- 26 Pinal County Attorney 1 2 CITY COUNCIL 3 Am. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM 15 16 17 CITY CLERK City Attorney 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 p i ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET • / NOTES ,� ��' /6 .V 0) i ') / / a/ I c 1 V k il b ITEM # ii MEETING OF (), okm MOTION BY : 4 SECONDED BY: YES/ NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON V/ COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MAYOR HILL / UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL C7- ITEM NO. 17 I MOVE THAT THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND PINAL COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES, FOR SPECIFIC HEALTH SERVICES BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. (7.7--iie\CH6a r 2 c a . U 5 ;41 P=`4 Z t . y '1Rizallo' `Way o� , ipache � ct unzon i. July 10, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER tJ611i. FROM: CITY CLERK r" SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF INTERIM CODE OF CONDUCT The City has recently been informed that one the the requirements for being a recipient of federal funds is to have an adopted written code of conduct to include provisions pertaining to a conflict of interest. It is vital that the City have such a code at this time in order to avoid any delay in receiving the CDBG funds for the Senior Center. The Office of Economic Planning and Development has provided the city with a bulletin that would permit the Council to adopt the League of Arizona Cities and Towns publication "YOU AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL" as an official Code of Conduct in conjunction with the CDBG Bulletin. Both of these documents are attached. The Council may wish to adopt these on an interim basis until an ordinance speaking to the specific code of conduct and procedures as requested by the Council is completed. It is imperative that the Council immediately have some code of conduct in effect so as to not jeopardize federal funding. Please contact me is you have any questions. kmc Approver for Agenda / -- pate/ Item # First Reading //�</ : ./7-- Second Reading Public Hearing Old Business ✓New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 OEPAD CDBG INFORMATION BULLETIN CDBG I.B. #10 2/85 #10. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST CODE OF CONDUCT A. OEPAD Policy It is OEPAD Policy that public programs shall be operated in an equitable fashion following written procedures, and public funds shall be spent in a fair, efficient, and effective manner. Therefore, even in instances where no clear, direct or substantial conflict of interest can be etablished, OEPAD encourages the grantee to make every effort to assure the public that no such conflict exists , via clear written pro- cedures to prevent such conflicts , statements to that effect, disclo- sure of business or other interests and abstention from voting, as appropriate. B. Legal Requirements . The implementing regulations to the Community Development and Housing Act, as amended, and OMB Circular A-102, Attachment 0, #7, require that recipients of federal funds have a written code or a standard of con- duct which governs the performance of their elected officers, employees, or agents engaged in the award and administration of contracts supported in whole or in part with Federal funds. The Circular states that "No employee, officer or agent of the grantee shall participate in the selection or in the award or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds, if a conflict of interest, real or apparent, would be involved." -1- CDBG I.B. #10 2/85 In addition, the Arizona Revised Statutes, 38-501 through 38-511, speak to the issue of conflicts of interest for public officials . The League of Arizona Cities and Towns has a publication, "You As A Public Official," that discusses the Arizona laws as they pertain to conflicts of interest. (A copy of that publication is enclosed.) C. Written Code. Each grantee must adopt a written code of conduct to include conflict of interest provisions. This code can be in the form of an ordinance, manual, handbook or policy statement. Grantees should consult with their legal counsels in the development of such a code to ensure that it is in compliance with ARS. Grantee should also carefully review the State statutes and the League publication regarding the list of remote interests as well as additional restrictions placed on public officers and employees relating to the use of confidential information for per- sonal gain or the use of a position to obtain something of value which would normally not be received in the performance of that position. If the grantee does not have such a written code, it may adopt the League publication in conjunction with this Bulletin as its official Code of Conduct, as its relates to any activities funded in whole or in part with CDBG funds . This code must apply to all aspects of CDBG funded activities to include: procurements, selection of recipients for housing rehabilitation or for economic development loans . D. Definitions : Who is Covered The Arizona Revised Statutes state that all public officials and em- -2- CDBG I.B. #10 2/85 ployees of incorporated cities and towns and of counties are covered by the Arizona conflict of interest law. This includes the Chief elected official, other elected officials , members of appointed boards and commission, the manager, his/her appointees, all consultants , full , part-time and contractual employees of the grantee. The law also applies when the private interest of a public official 's relative are under consideration. The law defines a relative as: hus- band or wife, brother or sister, parent, grandparent, child or grandchild, as well as to the following in-laws : brothers , sisters, parents as well as child of a spouse. All other relatives, whether by blood or marriage, are not subject to the restrictions of the law. E. Conflicts of Intrests : Remote vs. Substantial A conflict would arise when: a) the employee, officer or agent of the grantee b) any member of his/her immediate family AMES c) an organization which employs or is about to employ any of the above has a financial or other interest in a firm or person selected to receive a CDBG funded contract or subcontract, or to receive a loan or other services provided by the CDBG contract. The League publication states that the law distinguishes between - "remote" and "substantial" interests . "Remote" interests are so minor that they do not constitute illegal conflicts of interest. Any -3- CDBG I.8. #10 2/85 interest which is not remote, as detailed in the state law, is defined as "substantial ." F. Examples. If a council member is employed by or owns a lumberyard that wishes to sell to the grantee, a conflict of interest may exist. On the other hand, if the council member is the lawyer of the lumberyard, or leases the land to the lumberyard, no conflict exists . Further, a public officer or employee of the grantee may sell equip- ment, materials, supplies or services to the grantee if this is done through an award of a contract after public competitive bidding. However, that person must not be able to influence the bidding process in any way, and must make known such an interest in the grantee's offi- cial written records. The person shall also disqualify him/herself from participating in the selection process in any way, for example, by abstaining from a vote on the selection of a bidder even if the pro- curement process involved sealed bids, or abstaining on a vote regard- ing an economic development loan. G. Substantial Conflicts : Required Actions. When a substantial conflict exists , the public officer or employee must: 1) refrain from voting or in any way influencing the decision of the governing body or agency. 2) declare the conflict of interest, either at a public meeting or by having it entered in the minutes of the public meeting and/or by -4- CDBG I.B. #10 2/85 providing a letter to the town/city/county manager declaring that such a conflict exists and stating that he/she must refrain from par- ticipating in the decision. A copy of such a written declaration must be maintained in the appropriate CDBG contract or other file, in addi- -- tion to being placed in a special file labeled "Conflict of Interest" maintained by the town/city/county clerk . H. Additional Standards. 1) The grantee's written code shall incorporate the following standards. The grantee's officers , employees and agents shall not: a) solicit or accept gratuities, favors or anything of monetary value from contractors, potential contractors , parties to subagreements or parties interested in obtaining any of the ser- vices to be provided by the CDBG grant (such as loans, rehabilita- tion, etc.) b) unless such financial interest is not substantial or the gift(s) is/are unsolicited and of nominal intrinsic value (worth less than $10.00 during any three month period) or an amount established by the grantee's code of conduct. 2) The grantee's code may also provide for penalties, sanctions or other disciplinary actions for violations of such standards , in addition to those stated in the Arizona law. - I. Nepotism. ARS Section 38-481 is also the state's anti -nepotism statute and -5- COBG I.8. #10 2/85 clearly defines when a public official may or may not appoint a rela- tive to a position. It states that any executive, legislative, ministerial or judicial officer cannot appoint or vote for the appoint- ment of a person that is related by blood or marriage "within the third degree" which includes the following, whether by blood or marriage: wife, husband, brother, sister, parent, child, grandparent, great grandparent, grand and great grandchild, uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece. J. Penalties. The Arizona law identifies the following penalties for its violation. A public officer or employee who intentionally or knowingly conceals or fails to disclose any substantial interest or engages in any of the activities prohibited by ARS Section 38-503 through 38-505 is guilty of a Class 6 felony and upon conviction will automatically forfeit office. A public officer or employee who negligently or recklessly violates the conflict of interest law by failing to disclose a substantial interest or engaging in activities prohibited by the law is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person affected by a decision of a public agency where a conflict of interest is alleged, may bring suit in Superior Court, and the Court may order appropriate reimbursement including attorney's fees to the prevailing party. Grantees may adopt any additional penalties as deemed appropriate. -6- CDBG I.B. #10 2/85 K. Legal Opinions . A grantee's request for an opinion by its legal counsel on a conflict. of interest is confidential . However, the formal final opinion is a matter of public record and must be filed with the grantee's clerk. -7- "1/4 YOU AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL ... • OPEN MEETINGS • CONFLICT OF INTEREST • INCOMPATIBILITY OF OFFICES • NEPOTISM `tip N A CI Tf MAY, 1983 0 \? S INTRODUCTION location to cover all regular meetings taking place during a specified period of time. The notice must indicate the period The purpose of this report is to assist you in avoiding some of of time for which the notice will be valid. the legal pitfalls of local office. The report discusses four State laws which affect all public servants, both elected and Except when an actual emergency is found to exist, no public appointed - open meetings, conflict of interest, incompatibility meeting or executive session may be held with less than 24 of office and nepotism. hours notice to the members of the public body and the general public. However, a meeting may be recessed and resumed with The life of a public official is not an easy one. State laws, like less than 24 hours notice if public notice of the initial session of the four highlighted in this report, continually affect the the meeting was properly given; and if, prior to recessing, decision making process. Good intentions help - "but I didn't notice is publicly given as to the time and place of the mean to violate the law." However, good intentions are not resumption of the meeting, or the method by which public sufficient for today's elected or appointed official. It is notice for the resumption of the meeting is to be given. necessary for you to be familiar with these laws governing your conduct in public office. Violations of each of these laws carry Notice must also be given for any executive session of the stiff penalties. public body. The notice must cite the specific provision of law authorizing an executive session (see A.R.S. 38-431.02). Whoa') We hope you will take the time to read this report and retain it an executive session is held, at least 24 hours notice must I for future reference. Most importantly we hope this report will given to the members of the governing body and the general " prompt you to discuss each of these laws with your city or town public. attorney. This report is not intended to replace the need for you to discuss these laws with your local attorney; it's really The only exception to these provisions for public notice is in the only a starting point for discussion of your particular situation case of an emergency when a meeting can be called with notice in your city or town. appropriate under the circumstances. AGENDAS OPEN MEETING LAW In addition to notice of the time, date and place of the meeting, the open meeting law requires that the public body provide an GENERAL PROVISIONS(1) agenda of the matters to be discussed, considered or decided at the meeting. For a public meeting, the agenda must list the The operation of government and specifically the activities of "specific matters to be discussed, considered or decided." This government officials have become popular topics of interest for does not permit the use of agenda items such as "new business" the general public. Although there are many reasons for this or "old business", unless the specific items of new and old movement toward public awareness, there seems to be one business are listed. distinct message delivered by the public: THE PUBLIC'S BUSINESS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN PUBLIC! A useful guide in determining how much specificity must be included in the agenda can be found in the legislative The open meeting law provides very simply that, with a few declaration of policy which states in part that agendas should limited exceptions, all meetings of a public body shall be open "contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform to all persons desiring to attend. The law defines a "meeting" the public of the matters to be discussed or decided." as "the gathering of a quorum of members of a public body to Accordingly, public bodies may include in their agendas items propose or take legal action, including any deliberations with such as "call to the public" to designate that part of the respect to such action." meeting at which members of the public may address the public body, since the public body will generally not know what This means that all regularly scheduled and special meetings, "specific" matters will be raised. The more difficult question all work or study sessions and all other meetings or gatherings involves whether the public body, in addition to "considering" at which a quorum of the public body is present to discuss or the public comment, may take action on the matters raised. decide the public body's business must comply with the notice, The open meeting law provides that the public body may agenda and minute requirements specified in the law and, discuss, consider or decide only "matters listed on the agenda except where an executive session is expressly authorized, be and other matters related thereto." Although this language open to the public. If the public body or its presiding officer may be read technically to permit the public body to act on appoints a committee or subcommittee to study a particular matter raised under "call to the public", the better and safe issue, the meetings of the committee or subcommittee are also approach to take is to reschedule the decision for a later governed by the law. This is true regardless of the composition meeting and list it specifically on the agenda. If it is essential of the committee or subcommittee. that the body act immediately, it should declare an emergency and take action in accordance with the emergency procedure The open meeting law applies to more than just the meetings of prescribed in A.R.S. Section 38-431.02. the legislature, the board of supervisors and city council. It applies to any "public body." This means that planning and Agendas for executive sessions must contain a "general zoning commissions, boards of adjustment, library boards, description of the matters to be considered" but should not school boards, special district boards, and their respective contain information that "would defeat the purpose of the standing, special and advisory committees and subcommittees executive session." must all comply with the provisions of the law. The agenda may be made part of the public notice, or, if the PUBLIC NOTICE OF MEETINGS notice advises the public as to how they can obtain an agenda, it can be distributed separate from the notice In either case, The open meeting law requires public notice to be given for all the agenda must be made available at least 24 hours before the public meetings and executive sessions In giving notice, the meeting, unless an actual emergency is found to exist. first step is to file with the city or town clerk or mayor's office a statement identifying where public notices of the meetings of EXECUTIVE SESSIONS - the public body will be posted. Once this statement has been filed the law requires that the public body post notice of each The open meeting law permits an executive session (closed of its meetings in accordance with this statement and "give meeting) of a public body to be held for discussion and such additional notice as is reasonable and practicable" Any consideration of seven specified subjects. The public may public body that intends to meet for a specified calendar period properly be excluded from an executive session. Before an on a regular day or date and at a regular place and time may executive session may be held, 24 hours notice of the executive post public notice of these meetings at the beginning of this session must be given, and a majority of the public body must period of time For example, a notice of regularly scheduled vote in public to hold the executive session. For example, if meetings of a city council may be posted once at the proper the need for an executive session arises during the course of a Om"- regular meeting, the public body may vote to hold the session 2 The rnem.,ers of the public body recorded as either but the executive session cannot be held at that time, unless present or absent. prior notice (at least 24 hours in advance) of the executive session had been given. 3. A general description of the matters discussed or considered. Executive sessions may be held during a public meeting if the 4. An accurate description of all legal actions proposed, proper notice of the executive session is posted as part of the public meeting notice or as a separate notice. If the need for discussed or taken and the names of members who propose an executive session arises at a time other than during a each motion. meeting, a notice calling a special meeting and an executive 5. The names of persons, as given, making statements or session must be posted. The special meeting must be convened presenting material to the public body and a reference to to vote on holding an executive session, and then upon a the specific legal action addressed by the person. majority vote in a public meeting the public body may adjourn into executive session. 6. If the discussion in the public session does not adequately disclose the subject matter and specifics of the action NO EXECUTIVE SESSION MAY BE HELD FOR THE PURPOSE taken, the minutes of the public meeting at which such OF TAKING ANY LEGAL ACTION INVOLVING A FINAL VOTE action was taken should contain sufficient information so 4.1% OR DECISION. that the public may investigate further the background or specific facts of the decision. The law specifies the purposes for which an executive session may be called. These are narrowly defined in the law as 7. In the event that matters not on the agenda were follows: discussed or decided at a meeting because of an actual emergency, the minutes must contain a statement setting 1. Discussion or consideration of employment, assignment, forth the reasons necessitating the discussion, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, consideration or decision without the matter being placed disciplining or resignation of a public officer, appointee or on the agenda. employee of any public body, except that with the 8. Finally, if a prior act is ratified, the minutes must contain exception of salary discussions, an officer, appointee or a copy of the disclosure statement required for employee may demand that such discussion or ratification. consideration occur at a public meeting. The public body must provide the officer,appointee or employee with such The minutes of executive sessions must contain the information notice of the executive session as is appropriate but not described in paragraphs 1, 2,3 and 7 above. less than 24 hours for the officer, appointee or employee to determine whether such discussion or consideration The minutes or a recording of any meeting, except for the should occur at a public meeting. minutes of executive sessions, must be open to public inspection 2. Discussion or consideration of records exempt by law no later than three working days after the meeting. Minutes must be taken in executive sessions and must be kept from public inspection. confidential except from the members of the public body which met in executive session or officers, appointees or employees 3. Discussions or consultation for legal advice with the who are the subject of discussions. If the public body wishes to attorney or attorneys of the public body. exclude all staff from attending the executive session, then the 4. Discussion or consultation with the attorneys of the public minutes should be recorded by a member of the public body. body in order to consider its position and instruct its A 1983 amendment to the open meeting law allows the attorney attorneys regarding the public body's position in pending general or the county attorney access to executive session or contemplated litigation. minutes under certain circumstances.(2) First a written complaint must he submitted alleging a violation of the law as 5. Discussions or consultations with designated it relates to executive sessions. Secondly, the attorney general representatives of the public body in order to consider its or the county attorney must issue an investigative request for position and instruct its representatives regarding the minutes of the executive session. Upon receipt of the negotiations with employee organizations regarding the request by the public body, including a city or town, the public salaries, salary schedules or compensation paid in the body may comply with the request or, upon a majority vote, form of fringe benefits of employees of the public body. apply to a superior court in the county for a protective order directing that the minutes of the executive session not be 6. Discussion, consultation or consideration for international disclosed. The court then determines whether or not the and interstate negotiations. minutes of the executive session are relevant to the complaint and can order them released if "justice so requires." At the 7. Discussions or consultations with designated public body's option, it may also simply disclose the minutes to representatives of the public body in order to consider its the attorney general or the county attorney. position and instruct its representatives regarding negotiation for the purchase or lease of real property. In addition to written or recorded minutes of the meeting, the law provides that any part of a public meeting can be recorded You should establish, with the assistance of your attorney, a by any person in attendance by means of a tape recorder, clear procedure to use when holding an executive session. camera or other means of sonic reproduction as long as there is Improper use of the executive session provision is the most no significant interference with the conduct of the meeting. common type of open meetings violation Remember the law only permits an executive session in these instances, it does not SANCTIONS require an executive session. If any business of a public body is conducted in violation of the MINUTES provisions of the open meeting law, the actions taken at such a meeting are null and void. In addition, any person affected, the All public bodies, except subcommittees and advisory attorney general or the county attorney for the county in which committees, must provide written minutes or a recording of all an alleged violation occurred may file an action and obtain civil meetings. The minutes or recording of all public meetings must penalties, attorneys fees and court injunctions against the include, at a minimum, the following. public body or public official If the court finds that a public 1 The date, time and place of the meeting officer intentionally violated the law, the court may remove him from office and assess him personally with the attorneys fee award 2 RATIFICATION 2. The landlord or tenant of a contracting party. For example, a councilman may lease office space to a party A public body may ratify legal action previously taken in which has a private interest in a public matter without it violation of the law. Ratification is appropriate when the resulting in a conflict of interest. public body needs to retroactively validate a prior act in order to preserve the earlier effective date of the action. For 3. An attorney of a contracting party example, some public bodies are required by law to approve their budgets by a certain date. If the public body then 4. A member of a non-profit cooperative marketing discovered after the statutory deadline that its earlier approval association doing business with the city or town. was void due to a violation of the open meeting law, it could face serious legal problems In this situation, it would be 5. The owner of less than three percent of the shares of a appropriate for the public body to meet and ratify its prior corporation doing business with the city or town, provided action in order to preserve the initial effective date of the that: action. A. Total annual income from dividends, including the Ratification merely validates the prior action, it does not value of stock dividends, does not exceed five eliminate liability of the public body or others for injunctive percent of the officer's or employee's total annu:A relief, penalties and fees. The procedure for ratification is income; prescribed in A.R.S. 38-431.05.B. B. Any other payments made to the officer or employee by the corporation do not exceed five CONFLICT OF INTEREST percent of the officer's or employee's total annual income. One of the most misunderstood phrases in the media today is 6. Reimbursed only for actual and necessary expenses conflict of interest.(3) The phrase carries such negative incurred in performance of official duties. connotations, and yet it is only natural, in our system of part- time citizen legislators, for elected and appointed officials to 7. Receiving municipal services on the same terms and face potential conflict of interest situations. It is not "bad" to conditions as if not an officer or employee of the have a conflict of interest, but it is illegal to fail to declare a municipality. Thus, when a councilman who owns a substantial conflict of interest under our Arizona law or to business within the city or town votes for or against an participate or otherwise be involved in discussions on issues or increase in the business license tax, a conflict would not contracts where such a conflict exists. exist because this action would apply to all businesses in the corporate limits. This portion of the report will assist you in determining the potential areas of your conflicts of interest and how you avoid 8. An officer or employee of another political subdivision, a violations of this State law. The conflict of interest law is one public agency of another political subdivision or any other of the most complicated laws on the books. Your very best public agency unless it is the same governmental entity approach to understanding its effect on your actions is to and is voting on a contract or decision which would not discuss the law and your particular situation with your own confer a direct economic benefit or detriment upon the private attorney or the city or town attorney. FIND OUT officer. Thus, a councilmember who is a school teacher AHEAD OF TIME WHAT YOUR CONFLICTS ARE! may vote to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the school district, unless such agreement would APPLICABILITY confer some direct economic benefit, such as a salary increase, upon the councilmember. All public officers and employees of incorporated cities and towns are covered by the conflict of interest law. This includes 9. A member of a trade, business, occupation, profession or the mayor, councilmen and members of all appointed boards and class of persons and has no greater interest than the other commissions (parks, planning and zoning, libraries, etc.); the members of similar trades, businesses, occupations, city manager, his appointees and all consultants; and full-time, professions or classes of persons. For example, a plumber part-time and contractual employees of the city or town. who serves on a city council may vote to increase or, decrease plumbing inspection fees since the effect of thi: The conflict of interest law is also applicable when the private decision will be equal on all plumbers within the city. interests of a public official's relative are under consideration.(4) The law defines a relative to be a husband or Substantial interest is defined indirectly in State law as any wife,brother or sister,parent, grandparent, child or grandchild. pecuniary or proprietary interest other than those which ace In addition, the provisions apply to the following in-laws - remote. In general,a conflict of interest will most often result brothers, sisters, parents as well as the child of a spouse. All when an officer or employee of a city or town is involved in other relatives, whether by blood or marriage, are not subject substantial ownership or salaried employment with a private to the restrictions of this law. corporation doing business with the city or town. For example, if a councilman owns or is employed by a lumberyard selling to CONFLICT OF INTEREST DEFINED the city, a conflict may exist. On the other hand, if the councilman is the lawyer of that lumberyard, or if the The conflict of interest law distinguishes between interests councilman leased land to the lumberyard, no conflict may which are"remote"and those which are"substantial." exist. Essentially what it says is that remote conflicts are so minor A public officer or an employee may sell equipment, material, 4 that they do not constitute illegal conflicts of interest, and that supplies or services to the municipality in which the officer or any interest which is not remote, as detailed in State law, is a employee serves if this is done through an award or contract let substantial interest. If you have a remote interest in a matter after public competitive bidding.(5) However, the city or town before the council then you can vote and participate in the officer or employee would not be able to influence the bidding discussion. Here is what the law defines as a remote interest. process in any way and must make known such interest in the official records of the city or town. Remote interests exist when the public officer or employee or a relative is. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS I. A non-salaried officer of a non-profit corporation doing The conflict of interest law also contains the following business with the city or town. Thus, being a non-salaried restrictions on the activities of public officers and employees officer of a non-profit health agency would not constitute which should be reviewed with your city or town attorney a conflict. 3 Amok i. When a public officer or iployee has exercised activities p iited by Section 38-503 through 38-505, A.R.S. "administrative discretion" in an issue, that officer or is guilty of .. class 1 misdemeanor which is punishable by employee cannot receive compensation if representing imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of not more than another person before an agency of the city or town on $1,000. Any person affected by a decision of a public agency the same issue. This restriction extends to twelve months where a conflict of interest is alleged may bring suit in superior after termination of office or employment with the city court, and the court may order appropriate reimbursement or town. including attorneys fees to the prevailing party. In addition, 2. A public officer or employee cannot use confidential any contract made in violation of the law may be voided by action of the city or town. WHEN IN DOUBT ASK YOUR information obtained during the term of office or ATTORNEY! employment for personal gain. 1 3 A public officer or employee of a city or town cannot receive any compensation for performance of services in INCOMPATIBILITY OF OFFICES any case, special proceeding, application or other matter pending before any agency of the city or town. This does not apply, however, 'to activities such as filing or On many occasions, local officials have asked the League to amending tax forms, applying for permits, licenses or research the question of whether a public official can hold two 0111116, other documents. or more public offices at one time. In response to these requests, we have compiled information in this report which 4. A public officer or employee of a city or town cannot use may prove helpful in determining when two or more public his or her position to obtain anything of value which would offices may be incompatible. normally not be received in the performance of official duties. Something is considered to have "value" when it EARLY CONCEPTS OF INCOMPATIBLE OFFICES i exerts a "substantial and improper" influence on the . duties of the public official. Arizona's law prohibiting the holding of incompatible offices can be traced, in large part, to early English common law. I i Another restriction has been placed on local elected officials Offices were said to be incompatible or inconsistent in common in the law profession by the State Bar Association. The law if: Association ruled that attorneys on city or town councils cannot represent clients in the city or town's courts.(6) 1. The main duties of the two offices could not be carried ' out with care and ability; or DECLARATION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2. One office is subordinate to and interferes with the other When a substantial conflict exists, the public officer or office and leads to the conclusion that the duties of the employee must. two offices cannot be performed at the same time with "impartiality and honesty." 1. Refrain from voting or in any way influencing a decision of the governing body or agency of the city or town; and, Very few laws, if any, have been based upon the first principle. Apparently, it has been difficult to determine when an 2. Make this conflict of interest known in the official individual fails to execute the duties of two public offices with records of the city or town. For a member of the council, "care and ability." The second principle mentioned above has this can be done by declaring at a council meeting that a been the basis for most Arizona law on the incompatibility of conflict of interest exists and having this declaration public offices.(7) officially entered in the minutes. It is not necessary to explain the conflict which exists. For an employee who ARIZONA LAW faces a conflict of interest situation, the employee should file a letter with the manager or clerk declaring in From the State Constitution, State and Federal statutes, State writing that a conflict exists and that he must refrain Attorney General opinions and the League's General Counsel, from participating in the decision or issue. we have compiled a list of legal provisions focusing on the issue of incompatible public offices OPINIONS Arizona State Constitution ,' 1 If you ask your city or town attorney for an opinion on conflict —`— ———_— ——_ of interest, the request is confidential. However, formal final 1. The State Constitution provides that no member of the opinions are a matter of public record and must be filed with Legislature is eligible to hold any other office or be the city or town clerk. This filing requirement does not apply employed by the State, county,city or town. There is one to verbal communications between a mayor or councilman and exception to this provision - a legislator can also be a the city/town attorney. school board member or a teacher.(8) 2. The State Constitution prohibits an incumbent of a FILING OF DISCLOSURES salaried elective office from "offering himself" for nomination or election to any salaried local, state or The clerk must maintain a special file for all disclosures of federal office.(9) conflict of interest. One method to comply with this requirement would be to place a copy of the council meeting 3 The Constitution does allow justices of the peace to hold minutes when a conflict is declared in a special file labeled the additional position of police magistrate in "Conflict of Interest Disclosures." incorporated cities and towns.(10) Justice of the peace and magistrate courts are not courts of record and would PENALTY not be subject to the restriction of Article VI, Section 28 of the Constitution. A public officer or employee who intentionally or knowingly conceals or fails to disclose any substantial interest or engages State Statutes in any of the activities prohibited by Sections 38-503 through 38-505, Arizona Revised Statutes, is guilty of a class 6 felony, 1. Under State law, mayors, aldermen or councilmen cannot and upon conviction will automatically forfeit office. A class 6 receive any compensation from the city or town during felony carries a penalty of 1Y: years imprisonment or a the term of office for which they were elected in addition maximum fine of $150,000. A public officer or employee who to the compensation paid to them as elected officials.(11) negligently or recklessly violates the conflict of interest law by As a result, city and town elected officials cannot hold failing to disclose a substantial interest or engaging in the any other paid public office with the city or town. This 4 Amok State law provision also prevents a iyor or councilman 6. The Attorney General ruled that the positions of school from resigning office and accepting another compensated board member and councilman could be held by the same position with the municipality prior to the end of the term individual because the school board position was of office for which the person was elected, in the opinion uncompensated.(22) of our League General Counsel. 7 A teacher may not serve on the school board of trustees 2. Public defenders employed by the county may also serve of the same district in which he was employed. The as public defenders for a city or town. State law requires Attorney General ruled that the two positions are the city or town to reimburse the county for the public mutually exclusive.(23) defender's services.(12) 8. An elected county official has to resign county office in 3. As a rule, mayors, aldermen or councilmen are not order to run for state office.(24) eligible for nomination or election to any office other than the one presently being held. In one particular case, 9. A legislator may not assume an elective office in a the Attorney General ruled that an individual could charter city during the legislative term for which he was simultaneously hold the elected offices of councilman and elected.(25) school board member because the position on the school board was uncompensated. An elected official in the final 10. A legislator is prohibited from accepting a gubernator year of the term of office can, however, seek nomination appointment during his term of office even if he resigi,_ to another elected office.(13) his legislative seat.(26) 4. Members of the State Personnel Board and most state 11. The duties of a county supervisor are not inherently employees cannot be candidates for nomination or be inconsistent with the duties imposed on a member of the elected to any paid public office, nor can they take part Arizona Board of Regents.(27) in managing a political party or political campaign.(14) There are certain State employees exempted from these League General Counsel Opinions restrictions, and we suggest that you discuss these individual cases with your city or town attorney. In The League's General Counsel has been requested on a number connection with this law, the Attorney General has of occasions to issue opinions on possible instances of specifically ruled that a state employee subject to the incompatible offices. The following is a list of these opinions: State Personnel Commission cannot hold a position of city councilman, vice mayor or mayor of an incorporated city 1. The General Counsel is of the opinion that one individual or town when the individual receives compensation for the in a non-chartered city cannot hold the positions of mayor elected office. and police judge at the same time.(28) 5. Members of the State Personnel Board are required to 2. The two compensated positions of city alderman and resign their positions if they become candidates for volunteer fireman could not be held at the same time by nomination or election to a public office.(15) one individual since aldermen can only receive the specific compensation designated by law for their service Applicable Federal Law as aldermen.(29) Employees of the executive branch of the federal government 3. It was permissible for a police judge, during absence from may not take an active part in political management or his post, to request another police judge or justice of the political campaigns. They may, however, run for local peace from a neighboring city or town to serve in his post. government offices if the elections are non-partisan.(16) The city or town should, however, adopt an ordinance authorizing this arrangement.(30) City Charter Provisions 4. The General Counsel of the League also suggests that the If you are holding office in a charter city, there may be offices of town manager and police magistrate not be held additional limitations placed on your ability to hold other public by one individual. offices. We suggest you consult the charter or your city attorney on any such provisions. Before an employee accepts another public office, locro"ik ordinance provisions and personnel rules and regulations shout State Attorney General Opinions be consulted. For particular employees there may be departmental regulations which also govern such activities. 1. A constable with two years left in his term had to resign from office when he filed nomination petitions for the office of county sheriff.(17) NEPOTISM 2. The Attorney General is of the opinion that a justice of the peace cannot seek another elected judicial office unless serving in the last year of the present term.(18) As a city or town official, caution must be exercised when relatives are being considered for appointment to offices or 3. The positions of justice of the peace and high school board positions of employment with the city or town. Arizona State member could be held by one individual since the duties of law contains a provision preventing public officials from the two offices do not conflict.(19) appointing relatives to offices or positions of employment compensated from public funds. This provision is called the 4. State employees, except those in exempt positions, are anti-nepotism statute and involves a fairly concise means of prohibited from serving as deputy registrars or election defining when a public official may or may not appoint a board workers when these positions represent a political relative to a position.(31) party State law specifically prohibits this type of political activity.(20) The law specifically states that any executive, legislative, ministerial or judicial officer cannot appoint or vote for the 5. The Attorney General ruled that state employees subject appointment of a person that is related by blood or marriage to the State Personnel Commission could not hold the "within the third degree" Public officers of a city or town position of city or town councilman, if the council subject to this restriction would include mayors and position is compensated. The Attorney General further councilmen, appointed officials and department heads. This ruled that the State Personnel Commission's jurisdiction restriction also extends to anybody who would work for, extends to all state offices and positions except those suggest, arrange or be a party to the appointment of a relative specifically exempted by law.(21) to a paid office or position of employment 5 As mentioned above, the law only prohibits the appointment of relatives by blood or marriage "within the third degree." To apply this law accurately, there is a method to compute FOOTNOTES whether a person is related within what is legally defined as the "third degree." In summary, this method of computation would 1. See Sections 38-431 to 38-431.09, A.R.S. for provisions of prohibit a public officer from appointing or participating in the State open meeting law. The information resented in appointment of in-laws or blood relatives which include a P this summary husband or wife, brother or sister, a reprintof a pamphlet prepared by the parent child, great AttorneyyGeneral ral in July, 1982 with exception of grandparents, grandparents, grandchildren, greatt grandchildren, P uncles or aunts and nephews or nieces.(32) reference to 1983 amendment. ' 2. Section 38-431.03, A.R.S.as amended by Laws of 1983. Because the law involves a fairly concise means of determining when individuals are subject to these restrictions, relatively 3. See Sections 38-501 to 38-511, A.R.S. for provisions of few legal opinions and court cases have centered on this State conflict of interest law. statute. Among the legal clarifications that do exist is a State Attorney General's ruling that the wife of a justice of the peace 4. See Attorney General Opinions 80-139 and 82-004. could be appointed by her husband to perform the function of 5. See Attorney General Opinions 70-5, 79-067, 79-133 and setting bail.(33) This ruling was based in part on the fact that General Counsel Opinion May 17, 1979. the public official's wife was not compensated for these duties. In another State Attorney General's opinion a justice of the 6. State Bar Ethics Opinion, 74-28. peace could not appoint his wife's sister to a compensated position of clerk without violating this law.(34) 7. McQuillin on Municipal Corporations Volume 3, Section 12.67. See also Attorney General Opinion 76-41. One important question is whether a city or town employee can 8. Article IV, Part 2, Section 5, Arizona State Constitution. continue employment after a relative within the third degree has assumed a position on the city or town council or some Attorney General Opinion 77-221. other position with appointment authority. In addressing a 9. Article XXII, Section 18, Arizona State Constitution. See situation of this nature, the General Counsel of the League was also Section 38-296, A.R.S. and Attorney General Opinion of the opinion that an employee could continue employment 82-001. even though a relative was elected to the city or town council.(35) However, if a situation arises where the 10. Article VI,Section 32,Arizona State Constitution. employee's appointment or reappointment is placed before the council, the relative on the council should not take part in that 11. Section 9-304,A.R.S. decision.(36) 12. Section 11-585,A.R.S. The council/manager form of government or the existence of a 13. Section 38-296, A.R.S. merit system also affect the application of the nepotism law since the law does not prohibit the appointment or employment 14. Section 41-772, A.R.S. of a relative but rather governs the participation of the related public official in the decision making process. If there are 15. Section 41-781, A.R.S. questions which relate to nepotism we suggest that you discuss these with your local city or town attorney. In most instances, 16. Title 5, U.S. Code, Sections 7326 and 7327. questions of nepotism can be clarified quickly due to the 17. Attorney General Opinion 58-33. precise nature of this law. CONCLUSION 18. Attorney General Opinion 58-97. 19. Attorney General Opinion 59-30. Accepting a position as a public official may introduce a number of complex and confusing legal situations into an 20. Attorney General Opinion 69-1. individual's life. This report was intended to shed some light on 21. Attorney General Opinion 71-32-L. selected areas of State law that place restrictions on the activities of public officials in Arizona cities and towns. If the 22. Attorney General Opinions 72-20-L and 80-061. report has raised questions, please do not hesitate to contact the League office. However, we emphasize the importance of 23. Attorney General Opinion 75-2-L. 1 consultation with your attorney or the city or town attorney on specific questions regarding all of the subjects discussed in this 24. Attorney General Opinion 78-37. report. 25. Attorney General Opinion 77-221. 26. Attorney General Opinion 77-216. 1 27 Attorney General Opinion 80-019. 28. General Counsel Opinion December 10, 1965. 29. General Counsel Opinion November 2, 1966. 30 General Counsel Opinion May 26, 1970. 31. Section 38-481, A R.S. 32. See Attorney General Opinion 77-115. 33. Attorney General Opinion 63-75-L. 34 Attorney General Opinion 63-9. See also Attorney General Opinions 54-26, 65-6-L 35. General Counsel Opinions June 24, 1968 and January 19, 1977. See also Attorney General Opinion 78-71. 36. See Attorney General Opinion 77-138. 6 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 914, / Ahr ITEM it D MEETING OF 1 /(' 1 � MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: r' YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZt/d, COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN _EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL V UNANI"SOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL c — e=21;1- ITEM NO. 18 I MOVE THAT THE LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS BULLETIN "YOU AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL" BE ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH CDBG INFORMATION BULLETIN NO. 10 AS THE OFFICIAL CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT A CITY ORDINANCE ON CONDUCT IS ADOPTED. p Ps ACHE✓ 6( '4,-,p;' :V°, U ; ; r z ili -1RiZoW" `Oity 4 pache &unction July 8, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: ACTING CITY MANAGER a) FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING: 4TH AVENUE, EAST OF IRONWO D DRIVE (AGENDA ITEM) On May 2, 1985, a letter was sent to the Lowensteins advising that 4th Avenue would be required to be opened within 60 days. On July 2, 1985, Mrs. Lowenstein addressed the City Council and request an extension of 90 days in order to provide her time to make certain corrections to the offsite improvements and install landscaping. Attached is a motion for your consideration. Approver for Agenda /Z(i Date Item # First Reading ....,pate r9 Second Reading - Public Hearing RWB:sh — Old Business _!G New Business - Consent Agenda File 100.051 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Aft, Oak ✓(§ACHE k 0 '--- '011 5 'rih: z y- "9'PIZONP (70 itj O izcIe cunction July 15, 1985 MEMORANDUM'I TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER GLYAM'' FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING: CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 16, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. 19 This office just received correspondence from Mrs. Lowenstein in regard to her request for a 90-day extension for opening 4th Avenue. As this item is scheduled for consideration, this memo is forwarded to your attention for consideration. I�ICHflRD � wo an - n C N-Q ,4--r', I G LIC WORKSLec ..4,2raaee 740 -r�4//O —Dear l ►c►j ff , rsd u(y to ,w,/Ias our d e, date ar,d Ray1(^^t'e) 5ae4 we ha4, t hea ar,y �4- n,, -V-ri, .,., -H couoci1 on Our. t,c€tr,5ior . .1ale beer worrys a7o4t if since I tc-P+ At. and woulb ��yy1 like � 5E+ i+ resolved. S. ckecKell. wI'}h ;knee. co.,,party on 34k. =k', no+ as s.r..ple as rnos.+ btcausQ 4t+eres Cer.,er\* curb where -}-he: s..Ppori- yos+ 911mutd be, bv.4 it ca.n be done. The eStiw.w}ed cost oloo..t t I GOB which wouldr.t break one,-6,,t I L...ldnt have owlassararee -111o4 I wo..ldnt be served ano*er 60 dal notice -Vo remove +ha biy g *e the liifle Could o,�, -I-a.11< -h, gave �1eycay.der o6.u{' cieke4',✓,i3 -fh..f **1 60 do y no+tee W I. ►ns+gll a c {e? d 5-1-,11 be covered by 60 deLy riot ce R was esicnded ere 1987, M.:1 in 4ouck tWi'I•h Ray c 171A21C Laurse» at' +ke park every week 50 r+.y w,a.11 se+t-t- 4-u 1.151 "S.. Sronw•oei w111 reach 'Me or 0.h4-1-4.-►:... OmI.or-}a„t -Eho.4 need-4 my 5+jna .re ec.v, be serf± -1-s 14eti ile,c 117 , Clerl< Cork ,Sao,. 83$II 'Rik)/ w'i I I +:fy .)o,,. oil +-he con+ractor doin3 -4he *ace ° reralr on curbs et rei-en i On. ThanK you - -Do„«.., L•ewens+ein 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 O Qom. r i ROLL CALL VO SHEET / bbi( ,r "DOTES d i A ' 6-rit' pil 1 0 /( ,/i, 7 ir:1 3 ° , , , i ,lip, 1 oli r , rix,ITEM # / q i MEETING OF /MOTION BY; 11,m. SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER [/ COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ ...."` COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO !/ VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL v COUNCILMAN EIDSON J MAYOR HILL J/ UNANIr1 US , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ' a a ITEM NO. 19 I MOVE THAT THE REQUEST FOR A 90 DAY EXTENSION TO OPEN 4TH AVENUE TO THE PUBLIC, BE (APPROVED/DENIED) . ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 0 ITEM #I o 6MEETING 0 /16 / MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: ILL: • YES NO ABSTAINED t7 ' COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V V COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V COUNCILMAN BALJO V VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL i 1 i UNANIM1 US , IN FAVOR i OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 20 I MOVE THAT A SPECIAL MEETING BE HELD ON JULY 29, 1985, AT 7:00 P.M. , IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINAL BUDGET ADOPTION; AND THAT A WORK SESSION BE HELD ON AUGUST 5, 1985, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD ON AUGUST 6, 1985, AT 6:00 P.M. , IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 04 O ,Er z .1CCi. izONP ` il unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 9, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: N.ppsk. BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: cy ,td CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached please find copies of the Board of Adjustment Minutes from their regular meeting of June 10, 1985. Please have the original Minutes filed in the "Minutes Book" in the City Clerk's Office. CRN:mas 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 nr BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA JUNE 10, 1985 7.00 P M MINUTES Present Absent Guests Mr Carter Mr. Berry Mr. and Mrs. Frazier Mr Schmidt Mr Morrison Mayor Hill Mrs. Blatterspiel Vice Mayor Bakkedahl Mrs. Luddy Councilman Jimenez Mr Gardom, Chairman Mr. Nakagawa, Staff Mr. Newcomer, Executive Secretary Mrs LeCount, Recording Secretary Synopsis Agenda dated June 10, 1985 - approved as published Minutes dated February 11, 1985 - approved BA-23-80 (Boso) - request for special use permit extension no longer needed BA-2-85 (Vergason) Appeal withdrawn 1 Roll call Five members present with two absent as noted above 2 Luddy/Schmidt M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the Agenda dated June 10, 1985, be approved as published." The motion passed unanimously 3 Carter/Blatterspiel M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the Minutes dated February 11, 1985, be approved." The motion passed unanimously 4 Chairman opened the public hearing on BA-23-80 and asked for staff briefing 5 Mr Nakagawa briefed the Board on the case 6 Mr Frazier said that pursuant to Ordinance No. 350, he has determined that Mr Boso's auto repair business at 1536 W Roundup Street to be a nonconforming use because it was an established land use on March 14, 1985. He said the applicant will be advised to confer with the Zoning Administrator as to what restrictions and rights he has as a nonconforming use regarding expansion, discontinuance, and destruction of buildings rc-rfl Oak Oak Page Two - Board of Adjustment Minutes - June 10, 1985 7. Carter/Schmidt M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that Mr Boso's auto repair operation at 1536 W Roundup Street be referred to the Zoning Administrator for determination as a legal nonconforming use without the need for any further extensions of his Special Use Permit " /"k The motion passed unanimously. I 8. Chairman announced the next case on the Agenda was BA-2-85 (Vergason) He asked for staff briefing. 9. Mr. Nakagawa stated that Mr Vergason had ceased operation of the kiln and pottery operation on his premises and withdrew his appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision filed with the Board of Adjustment 10. Chairman read a letter from Mr. Vergason withdrawing his appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision filed with the Board of Adjustment. He asked if there was anyone who wished to speak on this case. There was no one. 11. Board There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7 12 p m Respectfully submitted ( ,1/ r I- / 1/6 Or'4 ies R. Newc ter Executive Secretary APPROVED ''''<4'/; / -641111/ am Gardom, C airma -/-9 2216:-/1 1 O y0� ' O ,Itt Z 'IP/ZON?� i o� � ace �unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 26, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: bj M BILL McDANIEL, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: IX CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached please find copies of the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes from their regular meeting of June 11, 1985. Please have the original Minutes placed in the "Minutes Book" in the City Clerk' s Office. CRN:mas 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 0114, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA JUNE 11, 1985 7 00 P M MINUTES Present Absent Guests Osi Mr Heermans Mr. Betzner List in Planning Office Mr. Hoaglin Mr Jorgensen Mr Taylor Mr. Vehon, Acting Chairman Mr Newcomer, Executive Secretary Mr Nakagawa, Staff Mr. Class-Erickson, Staff Mrs. Samuelson, Recording Secretary Synopsis Agenda dated June 11, 1985 - approved as submitted. Minutes dated May 28, 1985 - approved as submitted PZ-28-85 (Proposed Ordinance No 388) - recommended for approval PZ-29-85 (Proposed Ordinance No 389) - recommended for approval. PZ-21-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 380) - recommended for approval. PZ-22-85 (Proposed Ordinance No 381) - recommended for approval PZ-24-85 (Proposed Ordinance No 384) - recommended for approval PZ-25-85 (Proposed Ordinance No. 385) - recommended for approval. Discussion and staff report on status of land split provisions 1 Roll call five members present with one absent as noted above. 2. Taylor/Hoaglin M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the Agenda dated June 11, 1985, be approved as submitted " The motion passed unanimously. 3 Taylor/Jorgensen M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the Minutes dated May 28, 1985, be approved as submitted " The motion passed 3-0-2, with Mr. Hoaglin and Mr Heermans voting "present " 4 Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-28-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 388, and asked for staff briefing. 5. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Commission stating that the current Zoning Ordinance has a number of technical errors and that corrections should be made to avoid any misinterpretation that may arise as a result of these errors He added that a correction in wording in one section is necessary to conform to the Arizona Revised Statutes. 6 Chairman there being no one to address the issue, closed the public hearing 7 Jorgensen/Heermans M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that PZ-28-85, Proposed Ordinance No 388, correcting technical errors and legal wording in the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance, is recommended to the Apache Junction City Council for approval The reasons for this recommendation are stated in the recommendation." Page Two - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1985 The motion passed unanimously 8 Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-29-85, Proposed Ordinance No. 389, and asked for staff briefing 9. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Commission regarding the case stating that the current Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, contains an error and has an omission �\ 1- 10 Chairman there being no one to speak on this issue, closed the public hearing 11. Heermans/Hoaglin M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that PZ-29-85, Proposed Ordinance No 389, correcting an error and adding an omission on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, is recommended to the Apache Junction City Council for approval The reason for this recommendation is that this will correct the error and add the classification omitted on the map." The motion passed unanimously 12. Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-21-85, a rezoning from GR to TH in Section 18, and asked for staff briefing 13. Mr Nakagawa briefed the Commission regarding the case 14 Chairman asked the applicant to speak. 15. Jim Brinkman stated he would answer questions 16 Chairman there being no questions and no one to speak in favor, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition 17 Lindell Goad stated that he owns property to the west and wanted to know what the purpose of the rezoning was. He added that he purchasedhis property for the view and country life-style 18. Mr Taylor said that the application states that the applicant wants to put in one more unit on the north section. 19. Mr. Goad commented that an additional mobile home will block his view of the mountain and that the condos to the north brought improvements with them. 20 Cindy Goad stated that more than one mobile home on the parcel would not be beneficial 21 Chairman asked for staff comments and recommendations 22 Mr. Nakagawa said the rezoning would be compatible and recommended roadway dedications and that no mobile home or recreational vehicle park be developed on the property unless otherwise permitted by the City. 23 Chairman asked if there was any rebuttal 24. Mr. Brinkman showed the location of the wash in relationship to his property and said he could only get one more mobile on the lot 25 Mr. Goad asked about densities. 26. Mr Nakagawa explained densitites Amk Ark Page Three - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1985 27. Chairman closed the public hearing. 28 Mr. Taylor commented on present situation in the TH district and the probable changes coming 29 Heermans/Jorgensen M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-21-85, also known as Proposed /I'm\ Ordinance No 380, application of Jim and Linda Brinkman for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations 1 The applicants dedicate the south and west thirty-three feet (33') and the north twenty-five feet (25') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-offs at intersections 2 This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City The reasons for this recommendation are. The request is in compliance with the General Plan's Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity designation for the site." 30. Mr Taylor asked if it would be appropriate to stipulate that the parcel could not be converted to a subdivision 31. Mr. Newcomer replied that the creating of a subdivision would automatically call for improvements 32 Commission the motion on PZ-21-85 passed unanimously. 33. Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-22-85, a rezoning from GR to TH in Section 18, and asked for staff omikk briefing 34. Mr Nakagawa briefed the Commission regarding the case 35. Chairman asked the applicant to speak. 36 Martha Burkinshaw stated she would like to split the 1; acre parcel. 37. Mr. Hoaglin asked if there were any washes on the property 38. Mr. Brinkman replied that Cedar Drive has a wash going through it, and a little goes through the property, but not enough to hinder development. 39. Chairman there being no one to speak in favor or opposition, asked for staff comments and recommendations. 40. Mr. Nakagawa stated that the rezoning would be consistent with the General Plan provided only homesites are provided. He recommended stipulations to the rezoning. 41. Chairman closed the public hearing 42 Jorgensen/Hoaglin M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-22-85, also known as Proposed r Page Four - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1985 Ordinance No. 381, application of Keith and Martha Burkinshaw for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations. 1 The applicants make all the recommended !I{ dedications required by the Planning Department. 2 This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. The reasons for this recommendation are 1. The requested rezoning is consistent with the Medium/High Density Residential Opportunity General Plan designation for the site. 2. It seems to be a good use for the property at this time " The motion passed unanimously 43. Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-24-85, a rezoning from GR to TH in Section 17, and asked for staff briefing. 44. Mr. Nakagawa briefed the Commission regarding the case 45 Chairman asked the applicant to speak 46. Blanche Hardisty stated she wants to rezone to Trailer Homesite. 47. Chairman there being no one to speak in favor, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition 48 Lillian Castro said she is not really opposed, but wants to know what is planned for the parcel. 49. Ms. Hardisty stated she wants to place two mobiles on the land. om\ 50 Ms Castro commented about vacant land that has been ravaged A discussion followed 51. Chairman asked for staff comments and recommendations 52 Mr. Nakagawa stated the rezoning would be consistent with the General Plan designation for the site He recommended stipulations to the rezoning. 53 Chairman there being no rebuttal, he closed the public hearing. 54. Taylor/Heermans M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-24-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No 384, application of Blanche Hardisty for her property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations 1 The applicant dedicate the east thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes. Ark Ark Page Five - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1985 2. This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City. 3. This parcel not be developed into a subdivision without the required improvements. The reasons for this recommendation are 1. The request conforms with the General Plan 2 It is basically in conformance with surrounding property." The motion passed unanimously 55. Chairman opened the public hearing on PZ-25-85, a rezoning from GR to TH in Section 21, and asked for staff briefing. 56. Mr Nakagawa briefed the Commission regarding the case. 57. Chairman asked the applicant to speak 58. A.E. Sullivan, Jr represented the applicants who are selling the property contingent on the rezoning. He said he was told the mother will take one-third of the property, with the remaining two-thirds being held or sold 59 Chairman there being no one to speak in favor or opposition, asked for staff comments and recommendations 60 Mr Nakagawa stated that the rezoning would be consistent with the General Plan designation for the site He recommended stipulations to the rezoning 61. Chairman closed the public hearing. 62. Mr Jorgensen asked if there was any reason for the rezoning given on another application filed by the applicants 63. Mr. Nakagawa replied that he had spoken with the potential buyers and they informed him that they intend to split the parcel for relatives. 64. Mr. Taylor asked staff to encourage the applicants to complete the rezoning application fully 65. Chairman noted that staff had not given any formal recommendation for approval or denial on any of tonight's cases. 66 Mr Newcomer stated that staff will state what is in the best interest of the City if it is a special case 67. Taylor/Hoaglin M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-25-85, also known as Proposed Ordinance No 385, application of Rex and Grace Boice through A.E. Sullivan, Jr for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to TH Trailer Homesite Zone, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said application with the following stipulations• 1. The applicants dedicate the east and south thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with a twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cut-off at the intersection of South Cactus Road and East 4th Avenue 3 Page Six - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - June 11, 1985 2 This parcel not be developed into a mobile home or recreational vehicle park unless otherwise permitted by the City 3 This parcel not be developed into a subdivision without the required improvements. The reasons for this recommendation are 'll\ According to the City of Apache Junction's Gener Plan, this is the best use of the property to be rezoned from this holding pattern of General Rural to Trailer Homesite. It complies with all the density requirements of the City of Apache Junction " The motion passed unanimously. 68. Chairman there being no one to speak under Call to the Public, asked for the report on the status of land split provisions. 69. Mr. Nakagawa stated that research is under way and that a request had been made at the last meeting to go through the hearing process 70 Mr Newcomer commented that a date cannot be set until all research is completed. A discussion followed 71 Chairman expressed his regrets for losing the Chairman by resignation There being no further business, he called for a motion to adjourn 72. Taylor/Jorgensen M/S to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8.00 p.m Recorded and transcribed by Marge uelson, Recording Secretary Respectfully submitted, • arles R N comer, Executive Secretary APPROVED Tony Vehon, Acting hairman Planning and Zoning Commission it i•. ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 6))(r..ilvi)10, - 4 ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON AN 14. COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANIM S IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL 4=77- ITEM NO. 22 I MOVE THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT P.M. ... ... ROLL CALL Ti5k ii Gv .7/3- 7h, ROLL CALL ! PRESENT ABSENT 1 .....: —- l W. W.S. kk ( MAYOR HILL ! VICE—MAYOR BAKKEDAHL f / / COUNC I LMAN JIMENEZ ! / / COUNC I LwoMAN T_AYLOR ► / V ' / . 4JOMAN ARDNER COUNCIL COUNCI LMAN Biuo ! ✓ //. a COUNCILMAN EIDSON / TOTAL 1 7 I — 7 /J-- ,/�STAFF PRESENT W.S. v` MICHAEL J. MCNULTY MANAGER CITY CLERK Kathy Connelly / FINANCE CONTROLLER Keith Lewis i ✓ (\,.�,, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Chuck Newcomer /*. . DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFTEY Bill McDaniel DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS Rich Broman v CITY ATTORNEY Mr. Alexander/Mr. Hirsch ,/" . ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST John Schoeph v / / • / / as. CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK Ji n1 n NAME: `I 1 (1 l V��dS� DATE: I -I '" ADDRESS: /1 p , vrt( RpctaC sue, AGENDA ITEM: C� 1 ``0 Tom_ V0bUC- , CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST_ TO SPEAK f)- NAME: f` Lr�'� -' �- DATE: 7-r E7 - 7---c .74 ADDRESS: 02 U J 6 wt�-^ AGENDA ITEM: