Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 12.03 City Council Regular Agenda PQACNE � ..;,/,---7---- 4/;\\ (7---- ,�N- 'F,. ;`ik„IZ --/ ---f TV: 'QRIzoNP 5it o �4pClche C 7ty1ctio71 APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS '..,. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 DECEMBER 3, 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 Regular Meeting of November 19, 1985 INTRODUCTION OF DISTINGUISHED VISITORS AND GUESTS AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 451 , PZ-65-85, Application by Leslie L. and Margaret Minich to rezone a 19,760 square foot parcel , located on the east side of South Grand Drive approximately 770 feet south of Apache Trail, from CR-3 Single Family Residence to CR-4 Multiple Family Residence. 4. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 455, PZ-66-85, Application by R.E. and Lillian Christensen and Keith and Kathryn Stachar to rezone 32,875 square feet, located about 220 feet west of the northwest corner of the intersection of North Ironwood Drive and Superstition Boulevard, from CB-1 Local Business to C-3 General Commercial. 5. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 400 , 449, and 450, Three options for a Council initiated amendment to Article 3 of the Apache Junction Subdivision Regulations, which proposes to set forth standards, procedures and requirements for the division of land into two or three parcels (Land Splits). 6. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 452, TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (With the Emergency Clause) 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 454, Amending the Apache Junction City Code, Chapter 2, Section 2-4-6 Order of Business (With the Emergency Clause) OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS 8a. CONSULTANT SELECTION FOR WATER QUALITY, SEWER, AND STORM DRAIN STUDIES 8b. REPAIRS TO MOTOR GRADER 9. ACCEPTANCE OF STREETS FOR MAINTENANCE IN SIERRA ENTRADA UNITS 1 AND 2 10. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-51, AB-85-12, Proposed Abandonment of Cedar Drive, from Shiprock Street to Manzanita Street. 11 . APPEAL OF ASSESSMENT, CITY CODE ARTICLE 9-2, CHRISTENSEN 12. SELECTION OF DATES FOR WORK SESSIONS 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, DECEMBER 16, 1985 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, DECEMBER 17, 1985 CALL TO THE PUBLIC Alookik 14. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) REQUESTS OF COUNCIL 15. ADJOURNMENT "THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR TAKING AN INTEREST IN YOUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE COME AGAIN AND BRING YOUR FRIENDS." "ink oft. Chambers pursuant to the notice CIrequiredTY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 19, 1985 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on November 19, 1985, at the Apache Junction City Council by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hill called the meeting to order at 7.02 p.m. INVOCATION Councilwoman Gardner gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Cub Scout Pack 580 led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present: Councilman Baljo, Councilman Jimenez Councilwoman Taylor, Councilwoman Gardner, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Councilman Absent. Councilman Eidson it Staff Present City Manager Michael J. McNulty City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Deputy City Clerk Lori Clark Controller Keith Lewis City Attorney David Alexander Representing Director of Public Safety, Lieutenant Reed Cox Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer Associate Planner Jim Nakagawa oriN Director of Public Works Rich Broman Economic Development Specialist John Schoeph Others Present: Ms Barbara Gordon 2287 Broadway Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Ms Sandy Smith, President Chamber of Commerce Mr Keith Stachar 6301 E. Roundup Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Mr. Ray Hooker 565 W. 16th Avenue Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Ms Midge Conway 902 S. Ocotillo Dr. Apache Junction, AZ 85220 r► Amok Mr. John Granillo, Jr. 400 W. 23rd Avenue Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Mr. Roy Hudson 2884 W. 9th Avenue Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Mr. Ray Barton, President Mobar Investments, Inc. 2058 E. LaGuna Tempe, AZ Ms Claudia Don Scott , 4928 E. Rawhide Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Ms Cora Blatterspiel 760 E. Mesquite Avenue Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Mr. Jerry Michaels 715 E. Linda Apache Junction, AZ 85220 ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried. Introduction of Distinguished Visitors and Guests Mayor Hill recognized Chamber of Commerce Chairman, Sandy Smith and State Representative Roy Hudson. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS ^� Lieutenant Reed Cox, Chairman of the Committee for the Cub Scouts, introduced Cub Scout Pack 580, acquainted the Council with many of their activities and explained that attending this meeting will assist the Scouts in earning their Citizenship Merit badges. Ms Barbara Gordon, 2287 Broadway, Apache Junction, introduced herself as an applicant for the vacancy on the Library Board and answered questions from the Council regarding her application. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Michael J. McNulty showed a video tape on the progress of the Library and the Prospector Park. Chamber of Commerce Chairman, Sandy Smith, presented a video tape which took fourth place, consisting of a trophy and $350, at the Arizona State Fair. Mr. McNulty presented the City's annual audit, which concluded that the auditors had no criticisms of the operations of the City. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 2 OF 16 PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NOS. 400, 449, AND 450, PZ-36-85, LAND SPLITS Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer, briefed the Council on the three alternatives addressing a land split regulation process and outlined the objectives. Associate Planner Jim Nakagawa explained each of the three alternative draft ordinances and the differences. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposal. Mr. Keith Stachar, 6301 E. Roundup, Apache Junction, addressed the Council with many concerns of the effects of this ordinance to development in Apache Junction. Mr. Ray Hooker, 565 W. 16th Avenue #3, Apache Junction, expressed opposition to various aspects of the proposed ordinance, and that the restrictions addressed in this ordinance are already covered by Pinal County requirements and procedures prior to obtaining a building permit. Ms Midge Conway, 902 S. Ocotillo Drive, Apache Junction, a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission, requested that staff read the Commission recommendation in it's entirety, and suggested that a sample map be given to the applicants for completion. Mr. John Granillo, Jr., 400 W. 23rd Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the Council in opposition to the land split ordinance, and asked how it would be possible to enforce this. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak on this item. There being no one else wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 400 OR 449 OR 450, BE POSTPONED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND STUDY WITH NO DEFINITE DATE TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. City Attorney David Alexander advised that if a definite date is not indicated the proposal will be terminated. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. Councilman Baljo commented that this ordinance would unfavorably effect the landowners of Apache Junction. Councilman Jimenez explained that about three months ago this proposal was begun and that there have been many meetings on this issue, this ordinance being necessary to curtail illegal subdivisions. Councilman Jimenez stated that the real estate industry has been successful in terminating this proposal and further, that this ordinance is viable and fair and should be implemented at this time, not postponed. Councilwoman Taylor asked how many illegal lot splits are presently existing. Mr. Newcomer replied that there are none and any in the past have been caught at building permit stages. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 3 OF 16 Vice Mayor Bakkedahl stated that there should be a land split ordinance, but that the proposed ordinance is too extensive. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl asked the Director of Planning which draft of the ordinance was the most feasible. Mr. Newcomer replied that Draft No. 7, because it does not require, in all cases, preparation by a registered land surveyor. In Favor. Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Baljo Opposed. Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill The motion failed. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 450, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED, WITH THE ORDINANCE AMENDED TO ELIMINATE REFERENCES TO THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor: Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Baljo Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilwoman Taylor Since this vote was not unanimous, it is required that the City Clerk read the entire ordinance. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read Ordinance No. 450 in it's entirety. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 450, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: WITH THE ELIMINATION OF REFERENCES TO THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. Councilwoman Taylor stated that the purpose of reading the entire ordinance was to make the point that the ordinance is very well prepared and complete, but that to implement this ordinance would eliminate growth in the community. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl amended the motion to delete Section 3-05-03 as not necessary, and Section 3.05.04 as not necessary, Section 3.07.03 needs revisions, Section 3.07.04, No. 12 (deleted), No. 13 (needs revision), No. 17 (delete), No. 19 (reduction of Planning Director), No. 21 (greatly reduced), Section 3.07.07 (question on County Health Department requirement), Section 3.07.08 (Subdivision Committee), Section 3.07.11 (reduced). Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. Councilman Jimenez asked if these amendments affect the enforcement of the ordinance. Mr. Roy Hudson addressed the Council stating that with these amendments, this becomes a different ordinance, which should require a public hearing for public comment. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl withdrew the amendments to the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL EIMINRIS NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 4 OF 16 m. .r Councilwoman Gardner withdrew the second to the amendments to the motion. Councilman Baljo amended the motion as follows. Section 3.02.01 Land Splits "the division of improved or unimproved land which area is 2 1/2 acres or less into two or three tracts of parcels of land for the purpose of sale or lease" be deleted; Section 3.05.01 "The regulation contained in this ordinance shall apply to all divisions of land created for sale or lease within the corporate limits of Apache Junction, Arizona, defined by this ordinance to be a land split" be deleted; Section 3.05.02 "It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership or legal entity to sell or lease any parcel that is subject to the re- quirements of this ordinance until an improved land split map complying with the provisions of this ordinance has been recorded in the recorders office of the County herein or in the platted area lies" be deleted; Section 3.05.05.03 "The division of any property into 2 or more parcel if a new street is involved, shall proceed through the subdivision process" be deleted, Section 3.05.06 "The creation of two (2), or three (3) units, having a right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, or similar project shall proceed through the land split map process" be deleted; Section 3.06. "Sections 6.12, 6.13, and 6.14 shall apply" be deleted, Section 3.07.03 Application Requirements delete the entire section. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. City Attorney Alexander stated that the amendments are deleting items from the entire ordinance as it was discussed publicly, and if the Council wishes further public discussion they may do so, but there is no necessity since there is no new subject matter. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE HEARING BE REOPENED TO THE PUBLIC Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. Mr. Roy Hudson, 2884 W. 9th Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the Council in opposition to the ordinance, stating that this proposal is unconstitutional. Councilman Jimenez stated that as an elected official, to say that this ordinance is unconstitutional is inappropriate, since the attorneys and staff have done a lot of work to prepare this ordinance and they would not violate anyone's rights. Mr. Hudson responded that this is his opinion. Mr. Granillo further addressed the Council opposing the ordinance Ms Conway gave the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation of denial of the ordinance, and stated that the Council should listen to the Commission. Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE REOPENED. Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 5 OF 16 VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. Mr. Stachar addressed the Council, again opposing the ordinance. There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. �^ VOTE (On amendments to the motion). In Favor. Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Taylor Opposed. Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill The amendments to the motion failed. Councilman Baljo MOVED TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS PREVIOUSLY READ BY VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion. Councilwoman Taylor stated that the items read by Vice Mayor Bakkedahl previously had been too vague for an enforceable motion. Councilman Baljo MOVED TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION, THAT ALL SECTIONS AS READ BY VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL, BE DELETED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the amendment to the amendment to the motion. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl stated that this should be studied for at least two weeks before taking action. All motions, amendments and seconds were withdrawn. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 400 OR 449 OR 450 BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE REGULAR COUNCIL /oft. MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1985 Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill recessed the meeting. Mayor Hill reconvened the meeting at 9.52 p.m. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE CONTINUED UNTIL ALL BUSINESS IS COMPLETED. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 6 OF 16 0"1".nr Mayor Hill requested that Item No. 12 be considered at this time. CORRECTION TO PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED COUNCIL ACTION Councilman Jimenez explained that the action taken at the previous Council meeting regarding the 10 acres of olomik BLM land, requires some modification and correction. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL MOTION OF NOVEMBER 5TH BE CORRECTED AND THAT THE NEW MOTION READ AS FOLLOWS- THAT THE REQUEST FROM THE APACHE JUNCTION AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR THE SUBLEASE OF 10 ACRES OF BLM LAND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HUMAN SERVICES COMPLEX BE APPROVED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. Councilman Baljo stated that the objections he expressed at the November 5th Council meeting in regards to this matter, still apply. VOTE• In Favor: Councilman Jimenez, Councilwoman Gardner, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Taylor The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 443, PZ-62-85, OPEN SPACE Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Mr. Newcomer explained that this is a proposed amendment to the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, dealing with Planned Development, amending the current requirement that all Planned Developments contain 20% open space, and this amendment would allow the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council flexibility to increase Alm\ or decrease that requirement. 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. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 443, 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. 443, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION 19.0106 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, PARAGRAPH 3 USABLE OPEN AREA; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 7 OF 16 drinr Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 443, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. Councilman Jimenez expressed his opinion that this ordinance would cause political decisions to accomodate individual developers and would, in effect, cause the City to not have an open space requirement. /.14, Councilman Baljo and Councilwoman Taylor expressed their feeling that this will result in being flexible. VOTE: In Favor: Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Taylor, Councilwoman Gardner, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilman Jimenez The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 444, PZ-63-85, MOBAR INVESTMENTS, INC. ) Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for rezoning of 6 1/2 combined lots of 5.5 acres from GR General Rural to C-2 Local Commercial District Mr. Ray Barton, 2058 E. LaGuna, Tempe, President of Mobar Investments, Inc., requested approval of the rezoning, and stated that development plans may be a retail, speciality plaza. 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 recommendations approval with stipulations and that the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommends approval, also with stipulations. ommik Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 444, 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. 444, 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-63-85 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO C-2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 8 OF 16 3 Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 444, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baijo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. A/o\ PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 445, PZ-64-85 PELLEGRINE AND LAWIEN ) Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Council on the request for rezoning of 2 parcels from TH Trailer Homesite to CR-3 MH/PD Single Family Residence by Planned Development. Mr. William Pelfrey, representing the applicants, explained that the purpose for the rezoning is to develop a mobile home subdivision, and 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. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill called upon the Director of Planning for recommendations. Mr. Newcomer stated that staff and Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval with stipulations, and both feel that this rezoning will allow a much more desireable project than the existing Trailer Homesite zoning. Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 445, 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. 445, 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 CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-64-85 FROM TH TRAILER HOMESITE ZONE TO CR-3 MH/PD SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 445 AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE- Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 9 OF 16 oak PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 448, AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF CITY CODE Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner explained that this proposed ordinance amends Chapter 3 of the City Code, by providing that in the absence of the City Manager, the City Clerk would become Acting City Manager, rather than the Director of Public Safety or the Director of Public Works. Councilwoman Gardner also stated that in the instance of the prolonged absence of the City Manager, the Council may appoint any person as Acting City Manager. Councilwoman Taylor stated that there didn't seem to be a problem with the existing chain of command. Councilman Jimenez replied that this change results from the City Clerk being appointed Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, and also permits the City Manager to appoint anyone as Acting City Manager should the City Clerk be absent. Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 448, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor: Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed. Councilwoman Taylor The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read Ordinance No. 448 in it's entirety. Councilman Jimenez MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 448, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the Amok motion VOTE. In Favor. Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilwoman Taylor The motion carried. APPLICATION FOR PERSON TRANSFER OF SERIES 6 LIQUOR LICENSE, GEORGE'S STEAK HOUSE Ms Connelly informed the Council that due to the possible sale of George's Steak House, the present owner requests that recommendation for the Person Transfer of a Series 6 Liquor License be postponed until the Regular Meeting of December 17, 1985 Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICATION FOR PERSON TRANSFER OF A SERIES 6 LIQUOR LICENSE, SUBMITTED BY MR. JERRY E. BURGESS AGENT FOR GEORGE'S STEAK HOUSE, BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 1985. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 10 OF 16 Amok .i. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. Councilwoman Taylor asked why this applicant was exempt from bonding Ms Connelly explained that Series 6 /mmik„ Liquor Licenses are not required by the State to be bonded. APPLICATION FOR SERIES 7 LIQUOR LICENSE, KOVACS KORNER ) Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Ms Claudia Don Scott, 4928 E. Rawhide, Apache Junction, requested a recommendation of approval for the application. 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 closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A SERIES 7 LIQUOR LICENSE, SUBMITTED BY MS CLAUDIA DON SCOTT AGENT FOR KOVACS KORNER, BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-47, ROAD ABANDONMENT POLICY „oak, Director of Public Works, Rich Broman explained that this establishes a policy to be used as a guideline for abandonments. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-47, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING A POLICY TO BE USED AS A GUIDELINE FOR THE ABANDONMENT OR VACATION OF ROADS, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-46, DIRT ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND REALIGNMENT ) Mr. Broman explained that this is a proposed policy to be used as a guideline for developing new dirt roads and realigning existing dirt roads. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 11 OF 16 oak oft. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-48, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING A POLICY TO BE USED AS A GUIDELINE FOR DEVELOPING NEW DIRT ROADS AND REALIGNING EXISTING DIRT ROADS, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. AWARD OF BID FOR USED CITY TRANSIT BUS (Postponed Item) City Manager McNulty recommended that the bid submitted be refused and suggested that staff use the budgeted funds to renovate the existing bus, due to the fact that the bus offered in the bid is older than the existing bus, and there is no way to know for sure what repairs it may need. Councilman Jimenez added that there was no assurance of a warranty on the bus and possibly in the future a new bus may be purchased. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT THE BID FOR "USED CITY TRANSIT BUS" BE REJECTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,148.00. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: unanimous The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 85-50, 1/2 CENT SALES TAX Councilman Baljo stated that the Committee to present the sales tax to the voters has requested endorsement . by the City Council in the form of a resolution. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT PUBLIC COMMENT BE ALLOWED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. Ms Sandy Smith, President of the Chamber of Commerce, distributed a pamphlet depicting the benefits of the 1/2 cent sales tax for Apache Junction. State Representative Roy Hudson, explained the procedures through the Legislature for approving the 1/2 cent sales tax bill, and requested approval of the resolution endorsing that bill. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 12 OF 16 r-s Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-50, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, SUPPORTING PASSAGE OF THE ONE-HALF CENT SALES TAX BY APACHE JUNCTION AND PINAL COUNTY VOTERS TO BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING, IMPROVING AND MAINTAINING STREETS AND ROADS, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. WATERLINE EXTENSION FOR LIBRARY Mr. McNulty explained that in order to obtain both the domestic and fire protection water for the new Library, it is necessary that the water main be extended from the current terminus to the site, and the estimated costs are $14,351.00. Mr. McNulty further explained that it is the water companies policy of not putting in a line for fire protection with a dead end, and will require that the City extend the line to the next main, but this cost can be postponed until the next fiscal budget year. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN TO EXPEND $14,351.00 FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION LIBRARY WATER LINE; AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE GIVEN AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE NECESSARY AGREEMENTS. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS AND APPEAL OF LITTER NOTICES Ms Connelly stated that three individuals have requested extensions to clean their property, and Amok additionally, two requests for appeals to clean the property in question. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE GRANTED TIME EXTENSIONS TO BRING PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 9-2 OF THE CITY CODE: GERWIN FOR 45 DAYS HERZOG FOR 45 DAYS SILVERLY FOR 45 DAYS Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. Councilwoman Taylor asked how many times these property owners had been notified to clean their property. Ms Connelly replied that this is the second year Mr. Mabeus has been contacted, and this is the first time Ms Talaga has been notified of a violation. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 13 OF 16 erm•Mr• Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT LAVERLE MABEUS BE GRANTED A 45 DAY EXTENSION IN WHICH TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 9-2 OF THE CITY CODE. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor: Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Mayor Hill "IrkOpposed: Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl The motion carried. Ms Connelly stated that the property owned by Ms Talaga had construction materials placed by neighborhood children, but was otherwise clean. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT ORNELLA TALAGA BE GRANTED APPEAL OF NOTICE. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REPEAL OF ACTION LIMITING LENGTH OF COUNCIL MEETINGS Ms Connelly stated that action was taken in 1979 to limit Council meetings to 2 1/2 hours, and it appeared to be the consensus of the Council at the November 4th work session that this action be repealed. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN IN 1979 TO LIMIT COUNCIL MEETINGS TO TWO AND ONE-HALF HOURS IN LENGTH BE REPEALED AND THAT ALL FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS CONTINUE UNTIL ALL BUSINESS HAS BEEN COMPLETED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE. In Favor: Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Amok, Councilwoman Taylor, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilman Jimenez The motion carried. RESIGNATION FROM AND APPOINTMENT TO ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TEAM ) Economic Development Specialist John Schoeph recommended that Dr. John Niebling be appointed to the Educational Category of the Economic Opportunities Action Team. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT THE RESIGNATION OF MR. TOM JOHNSON FROM THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TEAM, BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET; AND THAT DR. JOHN T. NIEBLING BE APPOINTED TO THE EDUCATIONAL CATEGORY OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TEAM. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 14 OF 16 s Afornik VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. RESIGNATION FROM AND APPOINTMENT TO THE LIBRARY BOARD Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT THE „ormik RESIGNATION OF MR. CHARLES RUSSELL FROM THE LIBRARY BOARD, BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET; AND THAT BARBARA BEZAK/GORDON BE APPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY BOARD, SAID TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1987. Councilman Jimenez seconded the motion. VOTE: In Favor: Councilwoman Taylor, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilman Jimenez, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, Mayor Hill Opposed: Councilman Ba1Jo The motion carried. WORK SESSION, EXECUTIVE SESSION, DECEMBER 2, 1985 WORK SESSION, EXECUTIVE SESSION, DECEMBER 3, 1985 Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M. AND A WORK SESSION AT 7.00 P.M., ON DECEMBER 2, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M., ON DECEMBER 3, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms Cora Blatterspiel, 760 E. Mesquite Avenue, Apache Junction, asked if there was any way to control use of alleys by unauthorized vehicles. Mr. Jerry Michaels, 715 E. Linda, Apache Junction, made a complaint against the Southwest ambulance drivers actions in a particular incident. Mr. Ray Hooker, 565 W. 16th Avenue, Apache Junction, asked if there would be a Work Session for discussion on the Land Split Ordinance. Mayor Hill replied that it would be discussed at the December 2nd Work Session. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) Councilman Jimenez informed the Council that there would be a meeting on November 21st in the Chamber of Commerce building, for the purpose of discussing allocations of funds to the City of Apache Junction for Epicenter, and also a BHACA Board meeting the same night. Councilwoman Taylor reported that there would be an Economic Opportunities Action Team meeting on November 20th in the Community Services Activity Room. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 15 OF 16 s oak, Amok REQUESTS OF COUNCIL None. ADJOURNMENT Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 11:28 P.M. 11- Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. *Consent Agenda Items are as follows: *1. Acceptance of Regular Meeting Agenda. *2. Acceptance of Minutes from the Regular Meeting of November 5, 1985 ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF , 1985, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. Norman S. Hill Mayor I ATTEST- Kathleen Connelly omm,„, City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PAGE 16 OF 16 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES �' I ,„„ 1' 1 ' ,,,,, ,,,,,,ri CL ITEM # MEETING OF MOT I ON BY: SECONDED BY: 1(4'UL YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER il COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ V IL M Y COUNCILMAN BALJO AO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON t MAYOR HILL V UNANPOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL C— ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 I MOVE THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AFTER DELETING ITEM NO. 8b FROM THE REGULAR AGENDA. tea. ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 I MOVE THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 BE AMENDED BY DELETING ITEM NO. 8a FROM THE REGULAR MEETING AGENDA, AND THAT ITEM NO. 2 OF THE CONSENT AGENDA BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 1985. ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 I MOVE THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 451 , PZ-65-85 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 Pea cNF✓o o \o ►► a t 1O ,a_ r v 'lR/ZpNP cOity o Cpache 2unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NovemberAgenda Approved by 21 , 1985 .••. Date item M Consent Agenda MEMORANDUM •{, HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Public Hearing y� ' THROUGH: �M CHAEL J. MCNULTY, CITY MANAGER jk Old Business FROM: 64 MUCK NEWCOMER, PLANNING DIRECTOR New Business PREPARED BY: JULIE A. REID, ASSISTANT PLANNER JA Postponed Item f' SUBJECT. AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 3, 1985 PZ-65-85 (ORDINANCE 451 ) BACKGROUND Applicant: Leslie L. and Margaret Minich Current Zoning: CR-3 Single Family Residence Proposed Zoning: CR-4 Multiple Family Residence General Plan Designation: Medium/High Residential Opportunity Number of Parcels. One (1 ) Combined Size of Parcels: 19,760 square feet Location. On the east side of S. Grand Drive approximately 770 feet south of Apache Trail Current Land Use• A single family house, a motor home, a travel trailer, a garage and a ramada which houses a boat . The premise is being used as a residential care facility for the elderly. Surrounding Land Use: North - mobile home South - single family home East - single family home West - single family homes Surrounding Zoning: North - CR-3 single family residence zones South - CR-3 single family residence zones East - CR-3 single family residence zones West - CR-3 single family residence zones 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 Agenda Item - Dece, _er 3, 1985 PZ-65-85 Page Two Neighborhood Characteristics: The neighborhood is a mix of single family homes, many with secondary residences (travel trailers and cottages) behind the primary residences. While the zoning in the neighborhood does not allow two (2) residences on a lot, it is presumed that these were constructed prior to the City's incorporation and were placed with or without county permits and have become non-conforming uses. Protests. There are written valid protests on file that constitute more than the 20% required. These protests have the effect of requiring a favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the City Council to become effective. Additional protests have been received from outside the 150' protest perimeter but generally within the area. PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS There is a companion special use permit on file, with which applicant proposes to maintain the initial residence as a residence for eight elderly people. The rezoning request would allow applicant to construct a second residence for family members. The request to C-4 Multiple Family Residence would comply with the General Plan designation for the area. While this use would comply with the General Plan, a spot zoning of multiple family classification in the middle of a large neighborhood zoned for single family would not be appropriate and could set a precedent for multiple residence zoning in this area. Any increase in density in this neighborhood would not be appropriate due to the nature of traffic patterns in this area with entrance and exits located one- ,.milk half mile apart. Approval of this rezoning request would only compound the problem of nonconforming uses in this neighborhood. Staff therefore respectfully recommends denial of this rezoning request. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of November 12, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion. (M/S Taylor/ Jorgensen 5-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-65-85, application of Leslie L. and Margaret Minich for their property described as, a matter of public Agenda Item - December 3, 1985 PZ-65-85 Page Three record, requesting rezoning from CR-3 Single Family Residence to CR-4 Multiple Family Residence, that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the denial of said application. The reason for this recommendation is: 1 . The area, even though it has multiple residences which are by the reason of grandfathering prior to 1979 when the City came into effect, then this .•. zoning to multiple family zoning at the present time to this neighborhood would be spot zoning and not in the best interests of the neighborhood and the City of Apache Junction." PZ-65-85 REZONE FROM CR-3 TO CR-4 111 Protests filed (PP Protest Petition, PL - Protest List) _ APACHE TRAIL I - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - -— I I 1 i I I I FIRST AVENUE-- _ ___ __ _1 1 I PL I i I — — — CR- — _1 I Ir I CR-5/PD I 1__ _ - - - -_ -_ - I PL I I 11 — — — f�f I = PL =e— __,_ .- - -- - - J I - I PP I PL - - - - --i CR-5 I ! — — I I 1 PP PL I PP .... I PP PP — 1' I I I rR-1 I I I` — - - - - - -- PP PL I L PP --- - -_i I HPPL pp — I I V/X Anna -- - - — I I PP I ——— I I CR-5/PD I a 1 I I _ -- I I INDIAN SUMMER-- I PL j --( ESUBJECT SITE LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) SCALE: t I 1 0 200 900 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1. I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification from: Parcel No. 1 From �'�' -3- To C /�� 71' 5 f //}k U 5- 2 3 4 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? / 5; 7/{ f A, t f l 3. Size of your property: C, `7 (o 0 [ ] acres j3Q square feet 4. What is built on your property now?/.-fa- (Xc/,,.) .e l//N G 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? / North / Film; ff �f�U>e,///4/ South 1 — f"Arz / ( ��o.e_ ((/// East / r-,�c / y P&p//;k West / 4 �� �+� P /�v �S 6. Legal description f the propert proposed to be rezone I D ± f 4er N (/6) / P 1 lfC CJIZ� /P- �"o i ��/o !�,c � 7� j�� cG XI) / N��IP o'r1c6{ e' C 7-e d o u- /f /e �o� /7 e f P/ C o zc r Pe/ 7, a.)Ail Section % / , Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7. What is your County Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? )7 lP B- 8. Why are you requesting this s rezoning? ,4 N° f(P2 i//e ,e 6e h,ti , /5fi,, /j'e5 /sc4a,/ e Fo ,e ) Y' /lv� kf fe p 'P .S/ , �0 1.� S e �?'ts7 y /'e Si e/e,vc e e-xi f s-e o ">C tt o tIsr,e* P /q(-e / (Please Complete Reverse Side of Form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case Number 7Z-(,5 B 5 Proposed Ordinance No. Date Filed 9'45-c9S Application Receive by: J421e_ Receipt No. e6'9,47' Fee Amount 2 Page 1 of 2 Revised 4/25/85 PROTEST PETITION C C C z.- 0 as A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 65-85 where a zone change is proposed o ,_ o from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand a' (location) Q u L a .n Q... 1. p L uO r— O C v `C 0 � 2 7 B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in .,r _ 0 8 the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any v n u _� side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite .0 C > �- 6 - thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. 0 v U Locod_2 C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse �- CC Co side of this petition. 4 v' CC as `..-° 0 D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers ',18,1- or d must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. v u g-:8 t7 iC E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: - `o�,._ d .tA2 .• 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property. — >- 1...-, L LC. 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. O t•+ C.U .0 " C ,, S C) L a 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the V 6 O ✓-• O C o `.yEd v� 4 rear of this property,so they can convert their dwelling into a nursing home. o vvc a O. C C U* l,, o E O �I3 V fit) : i 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. COUNTY ASSESSOR'S i ✓ NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. . M R y c, . G.NuprR `21/ C'. t- ` .h' 10I - io - 1030 .' ,,, * _ o ! IC old 3. - - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. 2nd. day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal by Mary C. Gruper OFFICIAL SEAL • MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public— State of AZ PINAL COUNTY /A.i My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 �N TA PURL C MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this Pinal ) SS. 2nd, day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF ) by Ruth E. Cummings OFFICIAL SEAL • MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public— State of AZ o PINAL COUNTY L' ,�C4 La-g--0 (-cik12-Q My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 NOTARY PUBLI MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 PROTEST PETITION _=u € 7, A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ-65-85 where a zone change is proposed E u from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand a• o t oL ; (location) C31t c2 B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in Zf tES d the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any q side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite t.K C>^ Cl V thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. 4.4 Li 0® 2 t C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse -• „ side of this petition. .0 C e V • C o .VV'f.'“j71 D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband .0• 00 a and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers o must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. • IF E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: C N• C.. • 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property. — �.. • vu of :Vguo N 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. L= NiI 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the a<g 6.6 N a ie�tz ur (hi5 prupeii,y, u they uaii curzvCii, (,licit dwelliu6 iiil.0 a iiu�slrig home. QM • O V V= u 4. ,-� g � <�� This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. i+vaov CJ� COUNTY ASSESSOR'S NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. `✓`1. wile c. /10 /�! / / 0: - - VV2. Pa /le h C - I!dOS /0/ - /0 - /z0 5 3. - - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this Pinal ) SS. 3rd. day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF ) by Wiley C. Hobbs & Darlene E. Hobbs OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public—State of AZ L ° PINAL COUNTY r (�3k- V My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 t RY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar. 18, 1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this Pinal ) SS. day of , 19 COUNTY OF ) by NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: PROTEST PETITION C C € 7 A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 65-85 where a zone change is proposed _� from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand . (location) C 4 ur �• ' 2L 2 B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in v D" % L• "Y `os the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any a • q side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite £acid 2 thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. • v 2 L5.v v C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse • e►- C A N side of this petition. 61'O C 0 6 V RRV 0- L _ 0JD. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband o and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers Es or must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. �+v E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: OM1+ u 0 �� q2d . °= 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property. CW V/0I M01.1 0 AN 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. •'� "`Zs 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the 4 E.'7.- O C "' rear of this property,so they can convert their dwelling into a nursing home. d a --C J 4J 4. 0E.TN C C nII ors o � 41fi 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. COUNTY ASSESSOR'S // NA E (PRINT D) SIGNATURE\ BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. V v 1 . e la L cr. 101 10 (o l OCp ✓� - 3. - - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this ) SS. 2nd day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by `Lelia R. Warner OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public—State of AZ ° W � �� PINAL COUNTY T PUBLIC' My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. 2nd, day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Marian Dugger OFFlcw SEAL MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public—State of AZ PINAL COUNTY My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 RY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 PROTEST PETITION C C 6 LLiVY J A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 65-85 where a zone change is proposed o � a from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand a O... O.+ - y_ y L y .r. (location) C).. L O.L. U O .- O.0- ur- ^4vt o B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in = °2Y `o the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any 1 C L O O . os °' q side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite .0 C>^ o = thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. a� _� vo �_ � C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse ��� C > d side of this petition. V.- V 3 V L D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband L C >..0 .- = 0� L O. and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers E�8 0V O 2 d r. must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. .�v a � io-5; L E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: otn— a 0 L N C.•• 0� q = v� '= 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property. .. CC.-- O.- .• ,... 7 Y CO)C L. 4 � 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. O.0 4.-..... uU L� O. "�. C 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the a O F•-•.— C i= rear of this property,so they can convert their dwelling into a nursing home. o •-_ E a. d . 4. E ra T O N C C.+ ... an 2. d2 <I6 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. COUNTY ASSESSOR'S t/iNAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. fI o Y y} Q a�lr 2• isTHEe W©olse-k . • W e /o/ - /O - .5 3• RoD .rA' L \.ja 5,1, ,tell7t4/AyT /0/ - /u - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me tiO _ ) SS. 2nd. day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Florence R. Weinheimer OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL A. BELL , Notary INAL C—OUNNT�Y of AZ IV o ct pae My Comm.Expires Mar. 18, 1989 c(N --'CN9 A Y P BL I C • MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this ) SS. 2nd. day of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Esther J. Woolsey & Robert L. Woolsey OFFICIAL SEAL • MICHAEL A. BELL • !wry Public— State of AZ / n� PINAL COUNTY �/ My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 4‘)/ (2k,OASk. N��T, 'Y UBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 PROTEST PETITION _=y € V-.-V o V A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ-65-85 where a zone change is proposed t o E -0 from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand '7 1 (location) G L N V O .- O C .. V M- = ' ""2 17: B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in q�ZSS the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any Ll • 2� L side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite .0• c >a' wa s thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. �b>_o ., `SO7 2 �t y0V_ C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse e F- u .. N side of this petition. V V C 0 V u- V V 7 L. • 80 t D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband l'' `'"`�'L o and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers 28 of a L must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. < jgf,N L E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: - O N v V 0 Ss °r 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property ... C.C.. >.- 0... L.•,y ~ L C r p oz t 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood •0 4., C 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the LQ rear of this property,so they can convert their awe.�ling into a nursing home. V O ££ V V . /� - O ut)G G �, !_- 0a- tii 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. u u m u COUNTY ASSESSOR' S k NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. LAI • friarc,a (1i;/fQ711,-/cK /o� - /v /ago/ • �f��j< 6r,6e_L L 10 / 1G� - 1Z �d3 4. �� �a�/s ALL /O / - /3 - / 2703 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this ) SS. 28th day of October , 19 85 , :OUNTY OF Pinal ) by Clinton K.Killatrick & Marcia C.Kilpatrick OFFICIAL SEAL . MICHAEL A. BELL H'I0Q4/ Notary Publ —Stats of AZN. Litr (2_,Q �M 8 1989 � ARY PUBLIC Irty Comm.tacpi MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar. 18, 1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this ) SS. 28th day of -October , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Jack G. Bell & Gladys Bell �/ � r) 1//i ( )) 7i ti OFFICIAL SEAL 1 /'� �1 f _.�� ANITA M. FILM NOTARY PUBLIC Notary F•sblic — State of AZ �,� MARICOPA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: COUNTY My Comm. xL,res Ma 18, 1989 PROTEST PETITION C c2� € g A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 65-85 where a zone change is proposed g; y from CR - 3 to CR - 4 at 259 South Grand no o.. (location) G^.. a L. a .. O V O t. CI L.. O.C v. 0)1-. °'_2 B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in I, U OS a the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any _� • side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite C.00 C >) n thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. ..1.0 A-C - a 0C 3 >rGJ; � y C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse ;,a►- a' q d side of this petition. D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband G O O. L II__= L a and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers Eis or a d must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. `go$fd o E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: c ,,— c .�. c �� Cll. '= 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property 7.+ V V C a o"' L "L ' 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood V cacao wok.. c..— au .C— C V q.. , .0 E '- 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the .2 ip rear of this ro ert ,so theycan convert their' a a .. p p ydwelling into a nursing home. pg.', c C- �., 4. E M N 5 a -.i� : ""W"g" ra 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. COUNTY ASSESSOR'S NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. ` , 1 . @o/V,�- ...Z; �Tl-. ./p s� S GG� - - o ✓/1 : idôc ca" SSA No i es # 1 0 i - 10 - IRORB ...a. iii..4 10 i -___IL)___- 1 R O A R 4. STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this COUNTY OF Final ) SS. 28th day of October , 19 85 , by Cora I. Pettersson OPFOCSAL SEAL • MICHAEL A. BELL NodryMAL Public of AZ Y'llk-f\ �� � My Comm. Expires Mar. 18 1989 0 ARP PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar. 18, 1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. 28th day of October , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pik ) by Jesse Hobbs & Mildred Hobbs OFIRCIAL SEA MICHAEL A. BELL NotaryP1NAL COUNTY J 4,c),,Q' ,/� .C2-Q M Y C mm.Explres Mar. 18 1989 NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar. 18, 1989 PROTEST PETITION . C E g a La1/2.2 a A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 6 5-1S where a zone change is proposed ••28E a from cR -3 to e r'Q- 4/ at 259 South Grand E. (location) E. a L a W L p L C PCC.- aF- "oa=2 B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in � � .;rdos , the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any 0._- L. side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite -< " '• thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. 0 v — c 7: 2t 1, C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse as� E ; d side of this petition. u_ a7a L �� D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband ``�� o and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers ,'S of . must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. v a , J8 f,~ L E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: a,,,_ a 0 zL • my a v . a.- 1 . CR - 4 will decrease the value of our property .. C.C_ >- P- L 7 y ' L C C 0. - ma .L O. M . N 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood oc.• u .— a — C 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the O S 0 6•,-- CC "' r= rear of this property,so they can convert their dwelling into a nursing home. 4 •io --Aa a4, . n>.c�v C C. n.a 8-.,�'. 'o E O < 6 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. COUNTY ASSESSOR' S NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE l , BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO.. G/d l . Aisl I? / rvid'T 12t1-'"DarfjS ' 41a � ,,,. 01 - 10 - JW j 3. — - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. 29th day of October , 19 85 , SOUNTY OF Pina1 ) by Marie Quint Rundquist OFFICIAL SEAL. • MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public—State of AZ o P _ / L, , PINAL COUNTY P My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 rARY PURL C MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me thhis ) SS. 29th day of October , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Gilbert McGary OFFICIAL SEAL. MICHAEL A. BELL Notary Public—OU State of AZ ji ° Q ap / ` '�Q p1NAL ► OT--Ai, R PU LI My Comm. Expires Mar. 18, 1989 {� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY 111741L,wF IO-O.4.115 1. Principal gives and grants to Attorney-in-Fact full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing whatsoever requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as it might or could do if personally present. Principal ratifies and confirms all that Attorney-in-Fact shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of this special power of attorney. 2. This Special Power of Attorney shall not be affected by disability of the Principal. 3. This Special Power of Attorney may be revoked by the Principal giving actual written notice to anyone dealing with the attorney-in-fact or by recording a Revocation of Power of Attorney with the County Recorder of County . If this Special Power of Attorney is not revoked within 6 months from its effective date by recording a Revocation, it shall b considered to be renewed and effective for additional 6 months periods until either revoked by recordin a Revocation of Power of Attorney or expired pursuant to the expiration date. The failure of the Principal to record this Revocation shall be construed as a renewal of the Power of Attorney WARNING TO PERSONS EXECUTING THIS SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY This is an important legal document. It creates a durable power of attorney. Before executing this document, you should know these important facts. 1. This document may provide the person you designate as your attorney-in-fact with broad powers to dispose, sell, convey, and encumber your real and personal property 2. These powers will exist for an indefinite period of time unless you limit their duration in this document. These powers will continue to exist notwithstanding your subsequent disability or incapacity. 3. You have the right to revoke or terminate this durable power of attorney at any time by (a) recording a revocation in the public office designated for that purpose on this Special Power of Attorney and (b) directly notifying your attorney-in-fact and anyone who may be dealing with your attorney-in-fact with respect to your property or other matters Signatures of Witnesses Signatures of Principal STATE OF Arizona r Acknowledgement. On this date, before me, a Notary ( Signature of Notary Public Public, p rsoQall c d: COUNTY OF Maricopa ss Jack G n. PBel SS. OFFICIAL SEAL known to me or satisfactorily proven to be the person whose d Date of this acknowledgement nameissubscribcd to this instrument and acknowledged that j�*ptar�F3t --�X he executed the same. If this person's name is subscribed in f��tt{oU bTt'C of AZ Nov.01,1 s a representative capacity, it is for the principal named and 9 5 in the capacity indicated. MARICOPA COUNTY 1my or r r,1.re, tA•ar ts? 'qP,9 STATE OF Arizona Acknowledgement. On this date, before mc, a Notary Signature of Notary Public ss aQYS Public, pass 1y111� ; pe; ceclll ss COUNTY OF Maricopa • known to me or satisfactorily pro‘cn to be the person whose OFFICIAL SEAL Date of this acknowledgement nameissuhscrihed to this instrument and acknowledged that Notary fib t.IFE t..1X he executed the same If this person's name is subscnbed in Nov.01.1985 a representative capacity, it is for the principal named and Notary Public — Ste of AZ in the capacity indicated. MARICOPA COUNTY 11*. 111 1 1:34 J This instrument was recorded at regL P The recording official is directed to return this instrument or a copy to the above person. Space Reserved For Recording Information DURABLE SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY R-17©LawForms 10-83, 4-85 Effective Date: Expiration Date: County and State. Nov.04,1985 Continous until Revoked Pinal County , Arizona PRINCIPAL (Name, Address'and Zip Code) ATTORNEY-IN-FACT-(Name, Address and Zip Code h el A $ell Jack G. Bell & Gladys P. Bell 288 South Grand Drive Apac5e `ct Az. 85220 Apace Junction , AZ. 85220 Principal constitutes and appoints Attorney-in-Fact to act as its true and lawful attorney for and in its name, place, and stead to perform the following acts and things: Michael A. Bell has full power to act on our behalf in regards to any and all matters that concern our best interest as he sees fit. Our only specific wish is that on November 12,1985 we ask that Michael attend the City Zoning meeting at 7:OOP.M. ,and as requested he is to voice his opinion and oppose on our behalf the re-zoning of CR-3 to CR-4 for lot 259 S. Grand ; If applicable see the protest petition dated Oct.29,1985 It is our intent that Michael is to be ATTORNEY-IN-FACT- and shall remain as the representive for both of us until this document is revolked by either of us. We don't want this to limit Michael in any way or regard to act on our behalf. Jx46 G. Bell l L 1- f��_ �_ . Gladys P,1 Bell /I' nn.r rrnd nrr Ravprc,. CIdPI PROTEST PETITION C C a€ , A. We hereby protest rezoning case PZ- 65-85 where a zone change is proposed �6•i O L from CR-3 to CR-4 at 259 South Grand • ' C� �' (location) O• L O L u O P C.- WI-. = Yt 2 -- B. We certify that we are the real property owners of the lots included in the proposed change or of those immediately adjacent in the rear or any �= Y • q side thereof extending 150 feet therefrom, or of those directly opposite c. c a thereto extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots. T q 7—V •, =iu 5. C. We have read Zoning Ordinance Section 13.0108 which is printed on the reverse o Y - do � ; side of this petition. t2 . 54 L li ;"; - D. We understand that if we own the property as joint tenants, both husband o aa�L z _ L o and wife must sign. If we are contract buyers, both buyers and sellers o� must sign. If we are partners, all general partners must sign. E. We are protesting this rezoning for the following reasons: yc •• u O yf." Y 0 c— ~ ` _ ` • °= 1 . CR-4 will decrease the value of our property. •-• .+ Y C CO1 C Y � dCdo 2. A nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. OL-+ • Yu L— .0 G I E. 3. We feel the said party shouldn't be allowed to live in a mobile home in the 71.4 C a _o L. 4. rear of this property,so they can convert their dwelling into a nursing home. O uvC o. O.,�N C C••• /uaov=2 ' '43 <IE 5. This zoning will set a precedent that will be undesirable to we the residents. v COUNTY ASSESSOR' S NAME (PRINTED) GN TUBE BOOK-MAP PAGE-PARCEL NO. 2. / /0/ - /0 - //r' 3. - - 4. - - STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. 7th #y of November , 19 85 , COUNTY OF Pinal ) by Did OFFICIAL SEAL MICHAEL A. BELL �� " �ilry Pubiic—State of AZ W� PINAL COUNTY OTAO'f PU I My Comm• Expires Mar. 18, 1989 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 STATE OF Arizona ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this SS. day of , 19 COUNTY OF Pinal ) by • • NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Mar.18,1989 November 09,1985 City Of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Rd. / r r ; Apache Jct. , Az. 85220 --�,,1 I I I Re: PZ-65-85 from CR-3 to CR-4. - Dear City Council Members, .... We the undersigned.are in protest of the rezoning of CR-3 to CR-4 at the location of 259 South Grand. We,in conjunction with the other residents who signed a protest petition,feel that this nursing home shouldn't be permitted in a single family neighborhood. Z% • @ L5-0 5‘01/1-ii_ va 'a as -c7. . : 2 • @,/-5 , --(/. .00%/ /ivz5 //3, . @ /31', i-. ' , .-Q, 4, . /+- ' l , (Lz . @ 13 .J` `s�K�.�i / C /7L----271= (" /.,�v,--( ,�T. .r. 6 01 • @ /2 I' ! 7 og,L d.' u�� . @ /eX) 5, C(�.e gi.' 01 1 C. 62,-' ia."2___,() q-"-Le_ -:-, ti . @ a 3 S_ Q-1-60.---X__c\i„c , %.:"3"-- v w (iLit-;E ty, tom,, . @ 0,3 g (,� I 0�^� n pa_4,a_o_ . @ / 7 0 .hric4 Q},T. 1 V.0--,--,7-z..„7---- 1 ? O -53 a.,-, 10--cr--4(--- , @ a ((4,„ 7J,d, C___r_,,,97- /) 6( 1)7?'1 r vu% . @ 25(c cQji)cu4C L\ . . y - ,I.,( . @ II 2 0 5 6' It! P g . . @ %IS. (..,- Qp11, • p p Page 2 City of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Rd. Apache Jct. Az. 85220 RE: PZ-65-85 from CR-3 to CR-4 "Protest Petition" / . dkii( ////cle . /.14d„d&K-,- . . .1Z0 4nLA • (2 'AA/ • @ .)� S, -a lit cl Dv- ` AT, 01-7110_)--b-4 r_5- DR,) 4 -3, . ems/ gz.d . @ raj ),, @ • • @ • • @ • • @ • Ask ORDINANCE NO. 451 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-65-85 FROM CR-3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO CR-4 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE; REPEALING ANY CONFLICT- ING 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 parcels of land described as. Lot Sixteen (16) Grandview Place, according to the plat of record in the Office of the Recorder of Pinal County, Arizona, in Book 5 of Maps, page 2, except the South three feet (3') and the East eighty feet (80') thereof, in Section 19, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona be and hereby is amended from CR-3 Single Family Residence to CR-4 Multiple Family Residence. 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 portion thereof PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 AO\ Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. David F. Alexander City Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # .0Aj2jMEETING 0 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER (� COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ V frAkfiN,MWrOlikiNT4YM COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET i NOTES ir \ ‘ Am. i0 . \ \19f )ti( 4,,, ITEM # _ MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: /1(34.9 YES NO ABSTAINED 6J�U1'�V�A'4V�R _ COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER 4 COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MAYOR HILL17 UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 451 , BE Step 1 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. 451 BY TITLE ONLY. I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 451 , AS S 3 READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 451 , AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 • FOR ORDINANCE NO. 455, PZ-66-85 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 r,:i) �✓ACH n, U '1.. $iW- z '9PIZONP' 'Oily o pace 2unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT November 27, 1985 Agenda Approved by /� Date Item�►., MEMORANDUM T • i i THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Consent Agenda �T._,_ THROUGH: ', /MICHAEL J. McNULTY, CITY MANAGER g /�`�� - Public Hearn FROM. (CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Old Business PREPARED BY:� JULIE REID, ASSISTANT PLANNER si/W New Business SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 3, 1985 Postponed Item PZ-66-85 BACKGROUND- Applicant: R.E. and Lillian Christensen and Keith and Kathryn Stachar Representative: Keith Stachar Current Zoning: CB-1 Local Business Proposed Zoning: C-3 General Commercial General Plan Designation: Local Commercial Combined Size of Parcels: 32,875 square feet Location: About 220 feet west of the northwest corner of the inter- section of N. Ironwood Drive and Superstition Blvd. Current Land Use: Commercial building and parking lot under construction Surrounding Land Use: North - self storage units South - single family and mobile homes East - vacant ..014. West - single family home Surrounding Zoning North - General Busines Zone by Planned Development South - CB-1 Local Business Zone and General Rural East - CB-1 Local Business Zone West - General Rural Site Characteristics: flat topography PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The requested zoning classification would not comply with the General Plan. The General Plan designation for this location would be for neighborhood or local commercial uses. Several uses within the C-3 classification would not be appropriate for this area. The type of traffic gererated by some C-3 uses as well as changes to entrance and exit locations for the adjoining self storage development would be detrimental to the residential uses in close proximity to this development. Staff does not recommend this rezoning request. 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 O�!77111 U [' MikOO* amity o� &oipache C2UteOn DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 25, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: MICHAEL J. MCNULTY, CITY MANAGER FROM: ` 4./CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 3, 1985 PZ-66-85 The attached information on PZ-66-85 is incomplete due to the fact that the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 12, continued their public hearing on the case until November 26, to allow the applicant the opportunity to submit a site plan of the property and a list of C-3 uses he does not want permitted on the property. The action of the P & Z Commission and any revision in the staff recommendation will be provided to the Council prior to December 3. 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 PZ-66-85 REZONE FROM CB-1 TO C-3 GREASEWQOD STREET I I - TH TRAILS END PARK S IRONWOOD SELF STORAGE F I CB-2/PD — 1 I — —- - VAC N VAC CB-1 — I SUPERSTITION BLVD. SF I SF I of CB-1 SF SF ICB-1 J MH SF SF I I II 1 I _ _CB-4_ — L CR-5 I I CB-1 a � C ESUBJECT SITE 1-1 I i LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) L__J f I I 0 200 400 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA REZONING APPLICATION 1. I/We hereby request a change of zoning classification from: Parcel No. 1 From ( :,13 ! To d-3 2 3 4 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? L A,//0/rr f (9 p r r�1`v iJ& 3. Size of your property: 3� n95 [ ] acres j square feet 4. What is built on your property now? j& 52 2 (J 5. What has been built on the property next to yours. North "Aixi. j 5 fii,- y& South ale o4c -1.4-/f'c; T U s-c4 cdC East pArdif West z elE/f‘)/is �,�a p` GW5C, 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned: f 1 /43%`�O�JcI� .,i.P �, PrL�<c11:rry 1F.Sr-71716- of ri'X��' S,a S£ S" EKe ltlFS/`" /DD r�T� Section /1 , Township 1 North, R nge 8 ast, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. 7. What is your County Assessor's Tax Parcel Number? /QQ-3S -Q xs 8. Why are you requesting this rezoning? - , rv, /7F CCU SseU1('cS - (Please Complete Reverse Side of Form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case Number Proposed Ordinance No. Date Filed Application Received by: Receipt No. Fee Amount Page 1 of 2 Revised 4/25/85 9. I/We do hereby cer _y 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 truthfully 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 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 and that the Ordinance establishing the rezoning, if approved, will not become effective until all required quit claims are received and recorded. e. I/We being t owners of the roperty in this rezoning application have appointed ci /i'5 /��Z 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, Arizona. (Representative is to complete Item #10 ofAtthh s a pli,cat on form.) (1) R C s- �s h� / ' "-�. 'J Print ✓ '` 1. ( r s Na e) •,.(Signature) y(Ma!ng'Adddr` ��()s �- 2��?. yak . �/�' � 1�/Y 9A0 p� (Phone Nunbe� (city, hate, Zip Code) 0 (2) Z/6/9 at) P (`' ri 5'7s 55A) ,,/C�-d 2 At.tii--f/_-1-0-tzi (Print Owne 's Name " L(�_j!d (Signature) (Mailing ddress/ J p' 1 �4.' Z . 9`!CX �CitR f 'U� c'1 v� (Phone Number} Y. State, ZIP Code) (3) 'Print n k2 �i 'Print O+ner's Name -,� 9c ignature ing Ad ref jC�fl �/L /� /�� Fes` n .2_ 22 P one Number) ity, St te, ip Code) (4) ( rP int � sme�1 J l7`�'C- WC C.' ........ rl / �+ � � n G 1 9n ure —r �cr g Addr ss (Ph timber) ( ra cPs�2o ( t State, ip code STATE 0_y—, The foregoing instrument as a ged before COUNTY OF _ , _.e.---) SS. me s ��Q acknowle , 19 S, .-Z da o by My Commission Expires: ../0„9i1L 2 L, t—_- (.vyycz—,—_:__J NOTARY PU8L!C 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 reque ki7( 1‹ �- ��2q .p f nt r presentativec Hama') _V-, r, r�n 02�'� �J P ve (Mel n age J�C?l7 d/ (Phone Aunb 77 erli? Z OFFICIAL - ' ip o e ROBERT VW f�y� r �1 ) The foregoininstrument was acknowledged be ( I�dI '`)LCU „raONA_L SS. me this �.� day of 19 �, lk]`frl�+�tby: A'r s r• 9, ' My Cotriaigmtsshion1409 k f:...1 ems/ NOTARY PUBLIC Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item - Decemr 3, 1985 PZ-66-85 Page Two STIPULATIONS IN THE ORDINANCE 1. The permitted uses allowed in Section 16.052 shall be restricted and that the following uses will not be permitted for the subject site: a. Ambulance services b. Agricultural/horticultural sales and services c. Nurseries (outdoor display permitted) d. Animal sales and services; veterinary (large animals) ; kennel e. Automotive and light equipment: cleaning; repairs; storage of auto- mobiles, recreational vehicles, and boats; sales/rentals of auto and light equipment, including motorcycles. f. Eating, drinking, and entertainment establishments (sales of alcoholic beverages permitted, and includes drive-in types) g. Participant and spectator sports: indoor h. Radio and television stations (excluding transmission towers) i . Gasoline dispensing stations j. Liquor stores k. Transient habitation; hotels; motels 2. All other provisions of Section 16.052 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Apache Junction shall apply. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of November 26, 1985, after public hearing, voted to approve the following motion- (M/S Jorgensen/Heermans 4-0-0) "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that rezoning case PZ-66-85, application of R.E. and Lillian Christensen and Keith and Kathryn Stachar for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from CB-1 Local Business to C-3 General Commercial that the Commission recommends to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of said applica- tion. Any stipulations or recommendations are. 1 . That there be limited use under C-3 with the total elimination of the use of the 10 articles that Mr. Stachar has submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department with the addition of the elimination of the Ambulance Services. 2. All other provisions of the C-3 Zone will apply. The reason for this recommendation is that: 1 . With the development progressing along Superstition Blvd. this type of construction seems quite in line with what is occurring. 2. Will be to the best interest of the city of Apache Junction." ORDINANCE NO. 455 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-66-85 FROM CB-1 LOCAL BUSINESS TO C-3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL, 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 1 The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcels of land described as- The South 115.21 feet of the following described property: The South of the Southeast i of the Southeast i of the Southeast i of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, except the West 100 feet thereof, and except the South 50 feet and the East 50 feet thereof, and except the South 195 21 feet of the East 270 feet thereof 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 CB-1 Local Business to C-3 General Commercial 2. The permitted uses allowed in Section 16.052 shall be restricted and that the following uses will not be permitted for the subject site• a. Ambulance services b. Agricultural/horticultural sales and services c Nurseries (outdoor display permitted) d Animal sales and services, veterinary (large animals), kennel e. Automotive and light equipment: cleaning, repairs, storage of auto- mobiles, recreational vehicles, and boats, sales/rentals of auto and light equipment, including motorcycles. f. Eating, drinking, and entertainment establishments (sales of alcoholic beverages permitted, and includes drive-in types) g Participant and spectator sports indoor h Radio and television stations (excluding transmission towers) i. Gasoline dispensing stations j. Liquor stores k Transient habitation, hotels, motels 3. All other provisions of Section 16 052 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Apache Junction shall apply 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 portion thereof PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 1:2111111r6 .00k, Agars Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST: /0"N Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David F. Alexander City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. 455 PAGE TWO I ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES r !)4‘ )1 ITEM # MEETING MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON o"k COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ 1 COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES AIM ka, ))/(61r°. (/ .1‘V°11 ITEf1 # MEETING OF 0 MOTION BY: (jdkj SECONDED BY: Y . NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ U r. COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER I MAYOR HILL , UNANI1OUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE ET r NOTES / (0 , V) )rilA A jP Ai /5 *0(b ' , i riy 04' ' ' ''' r ' )/ \ \ ii\D Pi j 1v ITEM ## - MEETING F i MOTION BY: ICr) SECONDED BY: YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ A R MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED . ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES / )/( '9/\:)( ); , „it, rip (.1\ ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANI"1OUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED . ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 4 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 455, BE Step 1 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. 455 BY TITLE ONLY. I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 455, AS Step 3 READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 455, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NOS. 400, 449, OR 450 2 . WILL THE DIRECTOR OF PI ANNING 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 O 0; U , ern. ,ii- z v 1- "9R/ZONPP cOity o C pache 09unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT November 22, 1985 Aomik MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH 'MICHAEL J. MCNULTY, CITY MANAGER FROM: G, CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 3, 1985 LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NUMBERS 400, 449, 450) At the November 19 City Council meeting this item was continued for further study and numerous comments were made by Council members concerning possible revisions. Rather than try to re-draft the ordinance to include possible revisions, it would be more efficient to decide upon the basics of a pre-approval land split process than draft the proper terminology in ordinance form. I believe that the presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council confused the intent of the ordinance with the specific details of implementation in ordinance form. This misinterpretation by members of the public during the hearings was also very obvious. A pre-approval land split regulation, is in concept, very simple and cheap. The complexity arises, as with any regulations, in the degree to which all possible situations and problems are anticipated in the ordinance. In other words, the simpler the application requirements, the easier it is for the land splitter to comply but the more chance for error in the review process for unusual situations. A simple, hand-drawn map on an 82 x 11" sheet based on the legal description of the property may be sufficient for a cursory review of a majority of the land splits. All of our drafts, thus far, have been based on insuring that an adequate review could be accomplished not only for the simple cases but also for the problem cases; existing structures, flood plains, imprecise location and dimensions of the property and splits, topographical problems, etc. The attachment to this memo breaks down a land split ordinance into its componenets and depicts alternative means of implementation and degrees of complexity. Quite simply, what is required is: Agenda Approved by 1 . A map of the proposed splits Date Item * 2. A review process and reviewing agency Consent Agenda T.,.— —7- 3. An appeals process i„_ _SC z\ PubhQ Hearing Old Business New Business Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 Agenda Item - Decemb= 3, 1985 Land Split Ordinance Page Two STAFF RECOMMENDATION We do believe a serious problem exists with our current land split review process (or lack thereof) . If through your review of the attachment and draft ordinances you could give staff direction on the basis of a land split ordinance you would be willing to consider, we can draft a revised ordinance for your consideration. Also, direction on the degree of risk you believe is acceptable to the City in not catching all the potential problems with all land splits would help us in drafting an ordinance where complexity is commensurate with the acceptable risk level . OUTLINE OF LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE DEVELOPED IN QUESTIONNAIRE FORM (Section numbering based on seventh draft - Ordinance No. 450) YES NO SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATION Shall definitions and the citation from state statutes authorizing this ordinance be included? SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS Shall this ordinance be related to other city ordinances and policies? SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY Shall this ordinance identify the situations to which it would apply? In all drafts of this Ordinance thus far, this section was included to aid the applicant in determining if this process is applicable to his situation. it is not essential that it be put in the ordinance, but helpful . SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT Shall this ordinance refer to the enforcement provisions of the Subdivision Regulations? SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCESS Shall the items listed in the proposed ordinance be required? Application form Map Filing fee $ Drainage report if required Medium of presentation? - # of copies? - SECTION 3.07.04 Shall the property information listed in the proposed ordinance be required on the map? Title Scale North Arrow Legal description of property Legend of symbols used Streets Easements YES NO Adjacent subdivisions or land splits identified by data (does not require drafting of adjacent lots) Topography if required by City Engineer Flood hazard areas Horizontal property regimes Location of existing structures Who to prepare map? A) Surveyor/Engineer B) Applicant * NOTE: if surveyor prepared map the bearings, dimensions, angles, etc. would be shown on the map. Shall the suggested certificates be required on the map? The degree to which these certificates are necessary is variable - if map is to be recorded will need to be in proper form, otherwise most of the certificates are unnecessary and the same results can be achieved by requiring proof of ownership and acquiring quit claims for the roadways instead of dedication. SECTION 3.07.04 (21 ) DRAINAGE AND RETENTION COVENANTS Not necessary but some applicants may want to make use of them. SECTION 3.07.07 Who to review map? SECTION 3.07.08 Who to make decision on map? Planning Director Subdivision Committee SECTION 3.07. 10 City Council to consider appeals? SECTION 3.07. 11 EVALUATION CRITERIA Is all evaluation criteria necessary to explain in the ordinance SECTION 3.07. 12 Should an approved land split map be recorded? CHE tt1J,q 'r ilk Z '�RIZONP `6ity o 07vache c&unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Agenda Approved by Date tterA, November 13, 1985 Consent Agenda Public Hearing MEMORANDUM T : THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL old euszness THROUGH: ;c MICHAEL J. MCNULTY, CITY MANAGER New Business -- FROM: ,A 'CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Postponed Item PREPARED BY: JIM NAKAGAWA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR/ASSOCIATE PLANNER SUBJECT. `% PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM - NOVEMBER 19, 1985 PZ-36-85 (LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE) ORDINANCE NOS. 400, 449, 450 BACKGROUND The request for a Land Split Ordinance was prompted by the number of land splits that have been occurring on recently rezoned property. The typical site has been parcels zoned Trailer Homesite that are eventually split into four or more parcels. The street improvements were not provided, which gave the neighborhood an unattractive appearance, and the Planning and Zoning Commission began to suspect that the subdivision regulations were being circumvented. City and State subdivision regulations require a subdivider to go through the sub- division process and, thereby, provide street improvements if he is creating more than three parcels. If a land divider is only creating two or three parcels, the activity is referred to as land splitting. Currently in Apache Junction, a land split is accomplished by the land owner who files the necessary deeds with the County Recorder. Oftentimes, he is assisted with the legal description or the paperwork by a real estate broker, a title company or a land surveyor. Surveying and possibly preliminary grading would be the most that a land splitter can expect in terms of cost. In terms of time, the process currently takes from three days to three weeks. The setbacks, lot sizes, and access is not reviewed until the building permit stage, which sometimes is too late. No research into the ownership history of the parcel is done to see if the land divider is just splitting property or is creating a subdivision by creating a fourth lot. The proposed Land Split Ordinance seeks to address these problems. An earlier draft of the Land Split Ordinance provided for a preliminary map and a final map review stage. Additionally, full street improvements would have been 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 Honorable Mayor and City Council P&Z Agenda Item PZ-36-85 Page Two required for land splits. The review process was estimated to take from four to nine months and the improvements was estimated to cost about $10,000 per acre. On August 1 , 1985, at the Subdivision Committee meeting, a "compromise" alternative was suggested when real estate representatives objected to the time and expense involved with the proposed ordinance. The new residential zones (Ordinance No. 382) would only allow lot sizes below 11 ,000 square feet if they were created through the subdivision process and lots 11 ,000 square feet or greater may still be created through the land split process, which does not require street improvements, if the applicant qualifies to go through the process. The fourth draft of the ordinance provided for a one map review stage and no require- ments for street improvements. The requirement for a "chain of title" was in the ordinance to determine if a fourth parcel was being created by the same person. The process was estimated to take from six weeks to four months. The process was designed to review splits for conformance with lot size, setback, and access require- ments. The topographic data would have been reviewed to see that practical building sites and practical access would be provided. Decisions on splits would be made by the Subdivision Committee with the right of appeal to the City Council . The Planning and Zoning Commission held a work session on October 29, 1985, to discuss this draft of the ordinance. Members of the real estate industry still objected to the ordinance because: 1 . The process, they believed, would still take too long. 2. The survey requirement would be too expensive which is estimated to be from $250 to $800. 3. The title information would be difficult to obtain. 4. They believed that the City should not assume a major role in protecting the consumer in the land sales market. They suggested that a simpler process be available for land splits that were not complicated. ... PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a proposed amendment to Article III of the City Subdivision Regulations which proposes to set forth standards, procedures, and requirements for the division of land into two or three parcels (land splits) . The fifth draft of the Land Split Ordinance provides for: 1 . A concept Land Split Map review process that would enable the Planning Director to approve simple cases, not required to be based on survey data. 2. A more elaborate Land Split Map review process for more complex cases that might involve steeper slopes, setback problems due to existing development, the creation of irregularly-shaped lots, or access problems. 3. Staff to research title information if they suspect an instance of a cir- cumvention of the subdivision regulations. Honorable Mayor and City Louncil P&Z Agenda Item PZ-36-85 Page Three The sixth draft of the Ordinance resembles the fourth draft except that the title research would be done by staff and the health certification would be deleted. It would still require a map based on a survey to be submitted and approved by the Subdivision Committee before the split is recorded. The seventh draft of the Ordinance is similar to the sixth draft except that either the Planning Director or the Subdivision Committee may approve land splits. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fifth draft version of the Ordinance would be the least costly and time-consuming for the applicant, and would be a major improvement over our current process but would be difficult to administer because: 1 . Applicants would most likely submit a drawing too crude to interpret ac- curately, and 2. Too much time would be spent reviewing poorly drawn maps or too much time would be spent going through a two-stage review process when one review would have sufficed. The Planning Department recommends approval of the sixth draft or the seventh draft of the Ordinance. A review based on a map prepared from survey results is the only accurate means of determining exact property location, size, location of existing structures, existing easements and rights-of-way. A land split review process is necessary in Apache Junction due to our unusual pattern of land ownership in which most lots are being created through land splits instead of the subdivision process. As a result, neighborhoods are developing in a chaotic manner, with the following problems identified which would be alleviated through a land split ordinance. double frontage lots, inappropriate placement of access, creation of non-conforming setbacks, lack of coordinated private-public planning of streets, creation of difficult building sites, creation of excess lots fronting on arterial roadways, creation of lots with no respect for neighboring /•••• lot orientation, and individuals intentionally violating subdivision laws. Staff recommends a filing fee of $75.00 to held defray the administrative costs of implementing the ordinance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of November 12, 1985, after public hearing, passed the following motion: (M/S Taylor/Conway 5-0-0) "I move that PZ-36-85, the fifth, sixth, and seventh drafts of the Apache Junction Land Split Ordinance be recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission for denial to the Apache Junction City Council . Honorable Mayor and City Council P&Z Agenda Item PZ-36-85 Page Four REASONS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION 1 . The small lot problem has been resolved with the passage of the new resi- dential zones. 2. The 11,000 square foot lot requirement took away the profit incentive. 3. The current problems can be handled by existing means. 4. The proposed ordinance may add a 10 to 30 percent increase in costs. 5. The City has not been enforcing the current subdivision regulations. 6. The City may require a site plan at the time of rezoning." CRN:JAN:jo ORDINANCE NO. 400 LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE (Fifth Draft) AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING ARTICLE III OF THE APACHE JUNCTION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS BY SETTING FORTH STANDARDS, PROCEDURES, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND SPLITS; 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 Article III (Administrative Subdivisions - Land Splits) of Chapter 2, (Subdivision Regulations) of Volume II (Land Development Code) of the Apache Junction City Code be amended as follows ARTICLE III SECTION 3.00 ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS - LAND SPLITS SECTION 3 01 SHORT TITLE SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATION SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS SECTION 3 05 APPLICABILITY SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES SECTION 3.08 LAND SPLIT MAP REQUIREMENTS SECTION 3.09 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS I SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance may be referred to and cited as the "Apache Junction, Arizona, Land Split Ordinance." SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.02.01 LAND SPLIT the division of improved or unimproved land whose area is two and one-half (2-1/2) acres or less into two (2) or three (3) tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of sale or lease. SECTION 3.02.02 SUBDIVISION see Section 7.03.19 SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATIONS The regulations contained in this Ordinance are authorized pursuant to A R.S Section 9-463.01(L). Such authority refers to the determination of division lines, area and shape of the tracts or parcels, and does not include authority to regulate the terms or condition of the sale or lease, nor does it include the authority to regulate the sale or lease of tracts or parcels not the result of land splits as defined in A.R.S. Section 9-463. ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 1 OF 10 oft. Allow SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS Section 3 04.01 A land split map shall conform to all applicable policies of the Apache Junction, Arizona, General Plan. Section 3.04.02 A land split map shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance. Section 3.04.03 A land split map shall conform to the Street Classification Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 38 and any amendments thereto. Section 3.04.04 All public improvements if required under this Ordinance shall conform to the Apache Junction, Arizona, Development Guide. SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY Section 3.05.01 The regulations contained in this Ordinance shall apply to all divisions of land created for sale or lease within the corporate limits of Apache Junction, Arizona, defined by this Ordinance to be a land split. Section 3.05.02 It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, or other legal entity to sell or lease any parcel that is subject to the requirements of this Ordinance until an approved land split map complying with the provisions of this Ordinance has been recorded with the recorder's office of the county wherein the platted area lies. Section 3.05.03 The division of any property into two (2) or more parcels, if a new street is involved, shall proceed through the subdivision process i..� Section 3.05 04 The division of any property, the boundaries of which have been fixed by a recorded subdivision plat, into more than two (2) parcels shall proceed through the subdivision process. Section 3 05 05 The creation of four (4) or more units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, cooperative, comunity apartment, townhouse, or similar project, shall proceed through the subdivision process. Section 3.05.06 The creation of two (2) or three (3) units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, or similar project, shall proceed through the land split map process. ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 2 OF 10 Section 3.05.07 Boundary adjustment plats and deeds, where the land taken from one (1) parcel is added to an adjacent parcel, need not be filed with the City of Apache Junction, provided that the proposed adjustment does not 1. Create any new lots. 2. Render any existing lots substandard in size or shape �\ 3. Render substandard the setbacks of existing development. 4. Impair any existing access, easements, or public improvements. SECTION 3 06 ENFORCEMENT Sections 6.12, 6.13, and 6.14 shall apply SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Section 3.07.01 The division of land defined by this ordinance to be a land split requires the approval of a Concept Land Split Map by the Planning Director or the approval of a Land Split Map by the Subdivision Committee or the City Council. Section 3.07.02 The purpose of the review is to determine the appropriateness of the access and lot design with respect to the contours of the land, to determine if the setbacks of existing development are being rendered nonconforming with the creation of new lot lines, to determine if a subdivision is being created, and to determine whether or not the proposed land split conforms with City policies and ordinances. Section 3.07.03 Application Requirements Applicants requesting concept land split map approval shall submit the following to the Department of Planning: 1 A completed application form. 2. A nonrefundable $ filing fee to offset the costs of Amok investigating and processing the application. 3. A Concept Land Split Map Section 3.07.04 Concept Land Split Map Requirements The Concept Land Split Map shall legibly show graphically or by note on plans at a standard engineering scale on a 8-1/2" x 11" sheet the following information: 1. A title to read "Apache Junction Concept Land Split Map (case number)." 2. Graphic scale and north indicator. 3. Legal description of the property. 4. Location and dimensions of existing and of existing and proposed parcel lines ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 3 OF 10 Orm•nr Alsk oak 5. Name, location and dimensions of existing and proposed streets and easements. 6. The location of existing structures. 7. The location of drainage. 8. Name, address and telephone number of the property owner(s) 9. Certificate of Approval Amok "This is to certify that this map complies with the requirements of the City of Apache Junction and that this Concept Land Split Map is hereby approved on this day of 19 By Director of Planning Section 3.07.05 The Planning Director shall review the application and the Concept Land Split Map and shall consider the criteria listed in Section 3.08.09 when making a decision on a Concept Land Split Map. The Director may investigate the chain of title for the property in order to determine if a subdivision is being created or has been created Section 3.07 06 The Planning Director may require the applicant to go through the Land Split Map procedure (Section 3.08 et seq) if 1. The Concept Land Split Map cannot be interpreted accurately enough to render a decision. 2. Existing development may pose setback problems 3. The topography of the site may pose development problems. 4. The parcels are of unusual shape or size. 5. Access may pose a problem 6. The proposal does not appear to conform to City policies and regulations. Section 3.07.07 The applicant shall submit the deeds which describes the split to the Planning Department for review. The Department shall review the deeds for conformance to the approved Concept Land Split Map. Section 3.07.08 The Department shall have the deeds recorded and returned to the applicant after recordation. ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 4 OF 10 Section 3 08 LAND SPLIT MAP REQUIREMENTS Section 3.08.01 Applicants shall submit. 1. Sixteen (16) blueline or blackline prints folded into a 9" x 12" size and three (3) mylars (which may be submitted later) of the land split map. 2 A preliminary drainage report in accordance with the Apache Junction Development Guide if required by the City Engineer Section 3.08.02 The land split map shall be submitted on a transparent reproducible polyester film drawn with India Ink at a scale large enough to show all details clearly (normally 1" = 100' or larger) on a sheet 18' x 24", or 24" x 36". A line shall be drawn around the sheet leaving a margin of one inch (1"). The land split map shall show or contain the following information: 1. A title to read "Apache Junction Land Split Map (case number)." 2. Graphic and written scale, north indicator, and date of preparation. 3. Legal description of the property. 4 Location and description of existing and proposed monuments to which all bearings, dimensions, angles, and similar data shall be referenced. Such data shall be tied to the City datum system. 5. Boundaries of the property fully balanced and closed showing all bearings and distances (in feet and decimals thereof) determined by an accurate survey in the field. 6. By note or a legend, identify any symbols used on the map. 7. Bearings and dimensions of all parcel lines with each parcel identified by letter and indicating the net area in square feet of each parcel. 8. Name, course, length, and width of existing and proposed street dedications. 9 Course, length, and width of existing and proposed private access, utility, public service, and drainage easements. 10 The identification of adjacent subdivisions and land split maps by record data. 11. Delineation on the map of any areas identified on the flood insurance rate map as special flood areas. 12. For condominiums and similar projects, the dedication shall declare the property to be submitted to a Horizontal Property Regime. The map shall show the location and size of each unit and other exclusive use and common use areas. 13. If required by City Engineer the topography of the site shown at one foot (1') contour intervals if the site slopes less than five percent (5%), two foot (2') contour intervals ORDINANCE NO 400 PAGE 5 OF 10 Ask Aso. if the site slopes at least twenty percent (20%), and five foot (5') contour intervals if the site slopes more than twenty percent (20%) 14. The location of existing structures 15. Owner's certificate Dedication State of Arizona ,^ /— County of Know all men by these presents that) S.S. as owner(s) and as Trustree have divided (under the name of )a portion of the 1/4 of Section , Township , Range , Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, County, Arizona, as shown mapped hereon and hereby publish this land split map and hereby declare that this map sets forth the location and gives the dimensions of the parcels or units and streets and easements constituting same and that each parcel and street shall be known by the letter and name given to each respectively on this map. We hereby dedicate to the public the streets as shown on this map and included in the above-described premises Easements are hereby dedicated for the purposes shown hereon. In witness whereof: as owners, have caused its name to be signed on this map, this day of ,19 By: In witness whereof as Trustee, has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 , as Trustee By. Its• 16. Acknowledgement State of Arizona ) SS County of On this the day of , 19 before me the undersigned officer appeared who acknowledged themselves to be as owners, and also appeared before me who acknowledged himself to be a Trust Officer of , as Trustee, and that they, being duly authorized to do so, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained. ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 6 OF 10 amirnir 0016., In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 17. Title company certificate This is to certify that the parties who executed the owner's certificate (dedication) are the parties having record title interest in the land to be divided or are the trustees of the land held in trust. In witness whereof, Title Insurance Company of has caused its corporate name t�— signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 By: Its 18. Engineer's or surveyor's certificate: This is to certify that the survey and the map of the division of land described herein was accurately done under my direction and that all lots are staked or will be staked and all monuments are set or will be set within one (1) year after recordation. I Signature Date Registration No Seal 19. Certificate of Approval: This is to certify that this map complies with the requirements of the City of Apache Junction; that on behalf of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, the streets offered for dedication by this map are accepted, and that this land Assmk split map is hereby approved on this day of , 19 By Chairman, Subdivision Committee By Mayor (if approved by the City Council) Attest• City Clerk (if approved by the City Council) 20. Reserve space for the recorder's certificate in the upper right hand corner of the map. ORDINANCE NO 400 PAGE 7 OF 10 Auk 21. Drainage and retention covenants (if required by the City Engineer). An easement for the disposal of storm water runoff subject to the following terms and conditions is hereby provided over, under, and across the property described as follows' Amok The owner(s) of the property containing "Drainage and Retention Easements" shall not at any time hereafter fill, alter, or deviate from the grades shown on the approved improvement plans on file at the office of the City Engineer, or reduce the volume of storage required within the easements, unless written authorization is granted by the City of Apache Junction. The owner(s) shall not at any time hereafter block, obstruct, or impede in any manner the flow of water to, across, or through the drainage and retention easements. Owner(s) shall not cause or suffer to be erected on the drainage and retention easements any building or structure. In the event damage to any property results from violating these Covenants, said owner(s) agrees to repair at his own expense all such damage. The owner(s) shall have a perpetual obligation to maintain the retention facilities and/or structure(s) as approved by the City of Apache Junction in accordance with conditions as required for development of the original project. This covenant shall be conveyed and continued with the transfer of title or ownership of said property to any and all assigns 22. A note: Private deed restrictions shall be subordinate to City ordinances Section 3.08.03 The Planning Director may approve alternative wording in the certificates. Section 3.08.04 The Planning Department shall review the application and make a determination as to its completeness. The Planning Department shall advise the applicant of deficiencies if the application is determined to be incomplete. Section 3.08.05 Upon determining that an application is complete, the Planning Department shall distribute copies of the application and maps to the following agencies for their recommendations: 1 The Subdivision Committee. 2. Building Official. 3 Fire Chief. 4. County Health Department 5 County Engineer and County Planning Director, if applicable. 6. Arizona Department of Transportation, if applicable. ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 8 OF 10 7. Utility companies. 8. Any other relevant agency Section 3.08.06 The Subdivision Committee shall render a decision on the proposed land split. Section 3.08.07 Notices of the decision shall be sent to the applicant advising him that he may appeal the decision of the Committee to the City Council. Section 3.08.08 An appeal of the Committee's decision must be filed with the City Clerk's Office within thirty (30) days of the date of decision. The City Council shall consider the appeal no earlier than fourteen (14) days nor later than forty-five (45) days from the date of the filing of the appeal. Section 3.08.09 The Subdivision Committee and the City Council, in evaluating and making decisions on land split proposals, shall consider the following criteria• 1. The land split proposal's consistency with the City's General Plan. 2. The proposal's conformity to the City's Zoning Ordinance. 3. The proposal's conformity to Article III and IV (Subdivision Design Principles and Standards) and other applicable sections of the City's Subdivision Regulations. 4 The proposal's conformity with the City's Street Classification Plan. 5. The proposal's lot size and design with respect to the site's topography. 6. The identification of any setback problems with respect to any existing development on the property and the new parcel boundaries to be created. 7. A determination from the title information and lot/street design that a subdivision is not being created. 8. That the signatures on the land split map have been affixed with India ink for recordation. 9. Other pertinent criteria. Section 3.08.10 One (1) approved mylar each shall be distributed to: the County Recorder, the Director of Planning, and the applicant; and one print each to the Building Official/Zoning Administrator, and to the City Engineer. ORDINANCE NO 400 PAGE 9 OF 10 Section 3 09 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS None required. 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 7 avi exa r City attorney ORDINANCE NO. 400 PAGE 10 OF 10 ORDINANCE 449 LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE (SIXTH DRAFT) AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING ARTICLE III OF THE APACHE JUNCTION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS BY SETTING FORTH STANDARDS, PROCEDURES, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND SPLITS, 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: �1 SECTION I IN GENERAL Article III (Administrative Subdivisions - Land Splits) of Chapter 2, (Subdivision Regulations) of Volume II (Land Development Code) of the Apache Junction City Code be amended as follows: ARTICLE III SECTION 3.00 ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS - LAND SPLITS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATION SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES SECTION 3.08 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance may be referred to and cited as the "Apache Junction, Arizona, Land Split Ordinance." SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.02.01 LAND SPLIT the division of improved or unimproved land whose area is two and one-half (2-1/2) acres or less into two (2) or three (3) tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of sale or lease. SECTION 3.02.02 SUBDIVISION: see Section 7.03.19 SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATIONS The regulations contained in this Ordinance are authorized pursuant to A.R.S. Section 9-463.01(L). Such authority refers to the determination of division lines, area and shape of the tracts or parcels, and does not include authority to regulate the terms or condition of the sale or lease, nor does it include the authority to regulate the sale or lease of tracts or parcels not the result of land splits as defined in A.R.S. Section 9-463. SECTION 3 04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS Section 3.04.01 A land split map shall conform to all applicable policies of the Apache Junction, Arizona, General Plan. ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 1 OF 9 Section 3.04.02 A land split map shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance. Section 3.04.03 A land split map shall conform to the Street Classification Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 38 and any amendments thereto. /ilk Section 3 04.04 All public improvements if required under this Ordinance shall conform to the Apache Junction, Arizona, Development Guide. SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY Section 3.05.01 The regulations contained in this Ordinance shall apply to all divisions of land created for sale or lease within the corporate limits of Apache Junction, Arizona, defined by this Ordinance to be a land split. Section 3.05.02 It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, or other legal entity to sell or lease any parcel that is subject to the requirements of this Ordinance until an approved land split map complying with the provisions of this Ordinance has been recorded with the recorder's office of the county wherein the platted area lies. Section 3.05.03 The division of any property into two (2) or more parcels, if a new street is involved, shall proceed through the subdivision process. Section 3.05.04 The division of any property, the boundaries of which have been fixed by a recorded subdivision plat, into more than two (2) parcels shall proceed through the subdivision process. Section 3.05.05 The creation of four (4) or more units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, cooperative, community apartment, townhouse, or similar project, shall proceed through the subdivision process Section 3.05.06 The creation of two (2) or three (3) units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, or similar project, shall proceed through the land split map process. Section 3.05.07 Boundary adjustment plats and deeds, where the land taken from one (1) parcel is added to an adjacent parcel, need not be filed with the City of Apache Junction, provided that the proposed adjustment does not: ORDINANCE NO 449 PAGE 2 OF 9 11r=""" r Aft. Aso. 1. Create any new lots 2. Render any existing lots substandard in size or shape 3. Render substandard the setbacks of existing development. 4. Impair any existing access, easements, or public improvements. SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT Sections 6 12, 6.13, and 6.14 shall apply SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Section 3.07.01 The division of land defined by this ordinance to be a land split requires the approval of a land split map by the Subdivision Committee or the City Council. Section 3.07.02 The purpose of the Land Split Map review is to determine the appropriateness of the access and lot design with respect to the contours of the land, to determine if the setbacks of existing development are being rendered nonconforming with the creation of new lot lines, to determine if a subdivision is being created, and to determine whether or not the proposed land split conforms with City policies and ordinances. Section 3.07.03 Application Requirements Applicants requesting land split map approval shall submit the following to the Department of Planning. 1. A completed application form. 2 A nonrefundable $ filing fee to offset the costs of investigating and processing the application. 3. A preliminary drainage report in accordance with the Apache Junction Development Guide if required by the City Engineer. 4. Sixteen (16) blueline or blackline prints folded into a 9" x 12" size and three (3) mylars (which may be submitted later) of the land split map. Section 3.07.04 Land Split Map Requirements The land split map shall be submitted on a transparent reproducible polyester film drawn with India Ink at a scale large enough to show all details clearly (normally 1" = 100' or larger) on a sheet 18' x 24", or 24" x 36". A line shall be drawn around the sheet leaving a margin of one inch (1") The land split map shall show or contain the following information* 1. A title to read* "Apache Junction Land Split Map (case number)." 2. Graphic and written scale, north indicator, and date of preparation. ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 3 OF 9 i. oar 3. Legal description of the property. 4. Location and description of existing and proposed monuments to which all bearings, dimensions, angles, and similar data shall be referenced. Such data shall be tied to the City datum system 5. Boundaries of the property fully balanced and closed showing all bearings and distances (in feet and decimals thereof) determined by an accurate survey in the field 6. By note or a legend, identify any symbols used on the map. 7. Bearings and dimensions of all parcel lines with each parcel identified by letter and indicating the net area in square feet of each parcel. 8. Name, course, length, and width of existing and proposed street dedications. 9. Course, length, and width of existing and proposed private access, utility, public service, and drainage easements. 10. The identification of adjacent subdivisions and land split maps by record data. 11. Delineation on the map of any areas identified on the flood insurance rate map as special flood areas 12. For condominiums and similar projects, the dedication shall declare the property to be submitted to a Horizontal Property Regime The map shall show the location and size of each unit and other exclusive use and common use areas. 13. If required by City Engineer the topography of the site shown at one foot (1') contour intervals if the site slopes less than five percent (5%); two foot (2') contour intervals if the site slopes at least twenty percent (20%); and five foot (5') contour intervals if the site slopes more than twenty percent (20%). 14. The location of existing structures. 15. Owner's certificate: .^ Dedication State of Arizona ) S.S County of Know all men by these presents that as owner(s) and as Trustree have divided (under the name of )a portion of the 1/4 of Section , Township , Range , Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, County, Arizona, as shown mapped hereon and hereby publish this land split map and hereby declare that this map sets forth the location and gives the dimensions of the parcels or units and streets and easements constituting same and that each parcel and street shall be known by the letter and name given to each respectively on this map. We hereby dedicate ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 4 OF 9 sus to the public the streets as shown on this map and included in the above-described premises. Easements are hereby dedicated for the purposes shown hereon In witness whereof• as owners, have caused its name to be signed on this map, this day of ,19 By In witness whereof: /.k, as Trustee, has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 , as Trustee By. Its: 16. Acknowledgement State of Arizona ) S.S. County of On this the day of , 19 , before me the undersigned officer appeared who acknowledged themselves to be as owners, and also appeared before me who acknowledged himself to be a Trust Officer of , as Trustee, and that they, being duly authorized to do so, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 17 Title company certificate This is to certify that the parties who executed the owner's certificate (dedication) are the parties having record title interest in the land to be divided or are the trustees of the land held in trust. In witness whereof, Title Insurance Company of has caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 By Its ORDINANCE NO 449 PAGE 5 OF 9 4111 Aft, ANNik 18. Engineer's or surveyor's certificate: This is to certify that the survey and the map of the division of land described herein was accurately done under my direction and that all lots are staked or will be staked and all monuments are set or will be set within one (1) year after recordation. Signature Date Registration No. Seal 19. Certificate of Approval: This is to certify that this map complies with the requirements of the City of Apache Junction; that on behalf of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, the streets offered for dedication by this map are accepted, and that this land split map is hereby approved on this day of , 19 By: Chairman, Subdivision Committee By: Mayor (if approved by the City Council) Attest City Clerk (if approved by the City Council) 20. Reserve space for the recorder's certificate in the upper right hand corner of the map. 21. Drainage and retention covenants (if required by the City Engineer): An easement for the disposal of storm water runoff subject to the following terms and conditions is hereby provided over, under, and across the property described as follows The owner(s) of the property containing "Drainage and Retention Easements" shall not at any time hereafter fill, alter, or deviate from the grades shown on the approved improvement plans on file at the office of the City Engineer, or reduce the volume of storage required within the easements, unless written authorization is granted by the City of Apache Junction. The owner(s) shall not at any time hereafter block, obstruct, or impede in any manner the flow of water to, across, or through the drainage and retention easements. Owner(s) shall not cause or suffer to be erected on the drainage and retention easements any building or structure In the event damage to any property results from violating these Covenants, said owner(s) agrees to repair at his own expense all such damage. The owner(s) shall have a perpetual obligation to maintain the retention facilities and/or structure(s) as approved by the City of Apache Junction in accordance with conditions as required for ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 6 OF 9 it +• s development of the original project This covenant shall be conveyed and continued with the transfer of title or ownership of said property to any and all assigns. 22. A note: Private deed restrictions shall be subordinate to City ordinances Section 3.07.05 The Planning Director may approve alternative wording in the certificates. Section 3.07.06 The Planning Department shall review the application and make a determination as to its completenes. The Planning Department shall advise the applicant of deficiencies if the application is determined to be incomplete. The Department may investigate the chain of title for compliance with the Subdivision Regulations. Section 3.07.07 Upon determining that an application is complete, the Planning Department shall distribute copies of the application and maps to the following agencies for their recommendations 1. The Subdivision Committee. 2. Building Official. 3. Fire Chief. 4 County Health Department 5. County Engineer and County Planning Director, if applicable I6. Arizona Department of Transportation, if applicable. 7. Utility companies. 8. Any other relevant agency Section 3 07.08 The Subdivision Committee shall render a decision on the proposed land split Aloft Section 3.07.09 Notices of the decision shall be sent to the applicant advising him that he may appeal the decision of the Committee to the City Council. Section 3.07.10 An appeal of the Committee's decision must be filed with the City Clerk's Office within thirty (30) days of the date of decision The City Council shall consider the appeal no earlier than fourteen (14) days nor later than forty-five (45) days from the date of the filing of the appeal. ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 7 OF 9 Ink "NW Section 3.07.11 The Subdivision Committee and the City Council, in evaluating and making decisions on land split proposals, shall consider the following criteria: 1. The land split proposal's consistency with the City's General Plan. 2. The proposal's conformity to the City's Zoning Ordinance. -\ 3. The proposal's conformity to Article III and IV (Subdivision Design Principles and Standards) and other applicable sections of the City's Subdivision Regulations. 4. The proposal's conformity with the City's Street Classification Plan. 5. The proposal's lot size and design with respect to the site's topography. 6. The identification of any setback problems with respect to any existing development on the property and the new parcel boundaries to be created 7. A determination from the title information and lot/street design that a subdivision is not being created. 8. That the signatures on the land split map have been affixed with India ink for recordation. 9. Other pertinent criteria. Section 3.07.12 One (1) approved mylar each shall be distributed to: the County Recorder, the Director of Planning, and the applicant, and one print each to the Building Official/Zoning Administrator, and to the City Engineer Section 3.08 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS None required. 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 ORDINANCE NO. 449 PAGE 8 OF 9 41”30 Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM kDavik.0)C F. Alexander City Attorney ( I I ORDINANCE NO 449 PAGE 9 OF 9 s ORDINANCE NO 450 LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE (Seventh Draft) AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING ARTICLE III OF THE APACHE JUNCTION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS BY SETTING FORTH STANDARDS, PROCEDURES, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND SPLITS; 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 Article III (Administrative Subdivisions - Land Splits) of Chapter 2 (Subdivision Regulations) of Volume II (Land Development Code) of the Apache Junction City Code be amended as follows ARTICLE III SECTION 3.00 ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS - LAND SPLITS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATION SECTION 3 04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES SECTION 3.08 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance may be referred to and cited as the "Apache Junction, Arizona, Land Split Ordinance." SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3 02 01 LAND SPLIT: the division of improved or unimproved land whose area is „Amok two and one-half (2-1/2) acres or less into two (2) or three (3) tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of sale or lease. SECTION 3.02.02 SUBDIVISION see Section 7.03.19 SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATIONS The regulations contained in this Ordinance are authorized pursuant to A.R S Section 9-463.01(L). Such authority refers to the determination of division lines, area and shape of the tracts or parcels, and does not include authority to regulate the terms or condition of the sale or lease, nor does it include the authority to regulate the sale or lease of tracts or parcels not the result of land splits as defined in A.R.S. Section 9-463. SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS Section 3.04.01 A land split map shall conform to all applicable policies of the Apache Junction, Arizona, General Plan ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 1 OF 9 At ^ Section 3.04.02 A land split map shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance. Section 3 04.03 A land split map shall conform to the Street Classification Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 38 and any amendments thereto Section 3.04.04 All public improvements if required under this Ordinance shall conform to the Apache Junction, Arizona, Development Guide SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY Section 3.05 01 The regulations contained in this Ordinance shall apply to all divisions of land created for sale or lease within the corporate limits of Apache Junction, Arizona, defined by this Ordinance to be a land split. Section 3 05.02 It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, or other legal entity to sell or lease any parcel that is subject to the requirements of this Ordinance until an approved land split map complying with the provisions of this Ordinance has been recorded with the recorder's office of the county wherein the platted area lies. Section 3.05 03 The division of any property into two (2) or more parcels, if a new street is involved, shall proceed through the subdivision process Section 3 05.04 The division of any property, the boundaries of which have been fixed by a recorded subdivision plat, into more than two (2) parcels shall proceed through the subdivision process. Section 3.05.05 The creation of four (4) or more units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, cooperative, community apartment, townhouse, or similar project, shall proceed through the subdivision process Section 3 05 06 The creation of two (2) or three (3) units having the right of exclusive occupancy coupled with an undivided interest in the land, such as in a condominium, horizontal property regime, or similar project, shall proceed through the land split map process. Section 3.05.07 Boundary adjustment plats and deeds, where the land taken from one (1) parcel is added to an adjacent parcel, need not be filed with the City of Apache Junction, provided that the proposed adjustment does not• ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 2 OF 9 1. Create any new lots. 2 Render any existing lots substandard in size or shape. 3. Render substandard the setbacks of existing development. 4. Impair any existing access, easements, or public improvements. SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT Adgmk Sections 6.12, 6.13, and 6.14 shall apply SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Section 3.07.01 The division of land defined by this ordinance to be a land split requires the approval of a land split map by the Planning Director, Subdivision Committee or the City Council Section 3.07.02 The purpose of the Land Split Map review is to determine the appropriateness of the access and lot design with respect to the contours of the land, to determine if the setbacks of existing development are being rendered nonconforming with the creation of new lot lines, to determine if a subdivision is being created, and to determine whether or not the proposed land split conforms with City policies and ordinances. Section 3.07.03 Application Requirements Applicants requesting land split map approval shall submit the following to the Department of Planning: 1. A completed application form 2. A nonrefundable $ filing fee to offset the costs of investigating and processing the application 3. A preliminary drainage report in accordance with the Apache Junction Development Guide if required by the City Engineer 4. Sixteen (16) blueline or blackline prints folded into a 9" x �.� 12" size and three (3) mylars (which may be submitted later) of the land split map. Section 3.07.04 Land Split Map Requirements The land split map shall be submitted on a transparent reproducible polyester film drawn with India Ink at a scale large enough to show all details clearly (normally 1" = 100' or larger) on a sheet 18' x 24", or 24" x 36". A line shall be drawn around the sheet leaving a margin of one inch (1"). The land split map shall show or contain the following information 1. A title to read: "Apache Junction Land Split Map (case number)." ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 3 OF 9 4111m"_z 2. Graphic and written scale, north indicator, and date of preparation. 3. Legal description of the property 4. Location and description of existing and proposed monuments to which all bearings, dimensions, angles, and similar data shall be referenced. Such data shall be tied to the City datum system. 5. Boundaries of the property fully balanced and closed showing all bearings and distances (in feet and decimals thereof) determined by an accurate survey in the field. 6. By note or a legend, identify any symbols used on the map. 7. Bearings and dimensions of all parcel lines with each parcel identified by letter and indicating the net area in square feet of each parcel. 8. Name, course, length, and width of existing and proposed street dedications. 9. Course, length, and width of existing and proposed private access, utility, public service, and drainage easements. 10. The identification of adjacent subdivisions and land split maps by record data. 11. Delineation on the map of any areas identified on the flood insurance rate map as special flood areas 12. For condominiums and similar projects, the dedication shall declare the property to be submitted to a Horizontal Property Regime. The map shall show the location and size of each unit and other exclusive use and common use areas 13. If required by City Engineer the topography of the site shown at one foot (1') contour intervals if the site slopes less than five percent (5%); two foot (2') contour intervals if the site slopes at least twenty percent (20%); and five foot (5') contour intervals if the site slopes more than twenty percent (20%). 14. The location of existing structures. 15. Owner's certificate: Dedication State of Arizona ) S.S. County of Know all men by these presents that as owner(s) and as Trustree have divided (under the name of )a portion of the 1/4 of Section , Township , Range Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, County, Arizona, as shown mapped hereon and hereby publish this land split map and hereby declare that this map sets forth the location and gives the dimensions of the parcels or units and streets and easements constituting same and that each parcel and street shall be known by the letter and name ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 4 OF 9 4110"=1' given to each respectively on this map. We hereby dedicate to the public the streets as shown on this map and included in the above-described premises. Easements are hereby dedicated for the purposes shown hereon In witness whereof• as owners, have caused its name to be signed on this map, this day of ,19 By. In witness whereof: as Trustee, has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 , as Trustee By: Its: 16. Acknowledgement State of Arizona ) S.S. County of On this the day of , 19 , before me the undersigned officer appeared who acknowledged themselves to be as owners, and also appeared before me who acknowledged himself to be a Trust Officer of , as Trustee, and that they, being duly authorized to do so, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 17 Title company certificate: This is to certify that the parties who executed the owner's certificate (dedication) are the parties having record title interest in the land to be divided or are the trustees of the land held in trust. In witness whereof, Title Insurance Company of has caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 By: Its ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 5 OF 9 awnor .., 18. Engineer's or surveyor's certificate. This is to certify that the survey and the map of the division of land described herein was accurately done under my direction and that all lots are staked or will be staked and all monuments are set or will be set within one (1) year after recordation. Signature Date Registration No Seal 19. Certificate of Approval. This is to certify that this map complies with the requirements of the City of Apache Junction; that on behalf of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, the streets offered for dedication by this map are accepted, and that this land split map is hereby approved on this day of , 19 By: Chairman, Subdivision Committee or Planning Director By: Mayor (if approved by the City Council) Attest: City Clerk (if approved by the City Council) 20. Reserve space for the recorder's certificate in the upper right hand corner of the map 21 Drainage and retention covenants (if required by the City Engineer): An easement for the disposal of storm water runoff subject to the following terms and conditions is hereby provided over, under, and across the property described as follows: /►. The owner(s) of the property containing "Drainage and Retention Easements" shall not at any time hereafter fill, alter, or deviate from the grades shown on the approved improvement plans on file at the office of the City Engineer, or reduce the volume of storage required within the easements, unless written authorization is granted by the City of Apache Junction. The owner(s) shall not at any time hereafter block, obstruct, or impede in any manner the flow of water to, across, or through the drainage and retention easements Owner(s) shall not cause or suffer to be erected on the drainage and retention easements any building or structure. In the event damage to any property results from violating these Covenants, said owner(s) agrees to repair at his own expense all such damage. The owner(s) shall have a perpetual obligation to maintain the retention facilities and/or structure(s) as approved by the City of Apache ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 6 OF 9 OPP"nr Junction in accordance with conditions as required for development of the original project. This covenant shall be conveyed and continued with the transfer of title or ownership of said property to any and all assigns. 22. A note: Private deed restrictions shall be subordinate to City ordinances. Section 3.07.05 The Planning Director may approve alternative wording in the certificates Section 3.07.06 The Planning Department shall review the application and make a determination as to its completenes. The Planning Department shall advise the applicant of deficiencies if the application is determined to be incomplete. The Department may investigate the chain of title for compliance with the Subdivision Regulations. Section 3.07.07 Upon determining that an application is complete, the Planning Department shall distribute copies of the application and maps to the Subdivision Committee and may distribute materials to the following agencies for their recommendations: 1. Building Official 2. Fire Chief. 3. County Health Department 4 County Engineer and County Planning Director, if applicable. 5. Arizona Department of Transportation, if applicable. 6. Utility companies. 7. Any other relevant agency. Section 3.07.08 The Planning Director shall render a decision on the proposed land split. The Director may relinquish the decision-making on a particular proposal to the Subdivision Committee. Section 3.07 09 Notices of the decision shall be sent to the applicant advising him that he may appeal the decision of the Director or of the Committee to the City Council Section 3.07.10 An appeal of the Director's or the Committee's decision must be filed with the City Clerk's Office within thirty (30) days of the date of decision. The City Council shall consider the appeal no earlier than fourteen (14) days nor later than forty-five (45) days from the date of the filing of the appeal. ORDINANCE NO 450 PAGE 7 OF 9 rs ftairak Amok Section 3.07.11 The Planning Director, the Subdivision Committee and the City Council, in evaluating and making decisions on land split proposals, shall consider the following criteria: 1. The land split proposal's consistency with the City's General Plan. 2. The proposal's conformity to the City's Zoning Ordinance. 3. The proposal's conformity to Article III and IV (Subdivision Design Principles and Standards) and other applicable sections of the City's Subdivision Regulations. 4. The proposal's conformity with the City's Street Classification Plan. 5. The proposal's lot size and design with respect to the site's topography. 6. The identification of any setback problems with respect to any existing development on the property and the new parcel boundaries to be created. 7. A determination from the title information and lot/street design that a subdivision is not being created. 8. That the signatures on the land split map have been affixed with India ink for recordation 9. Other pertinent criteria. Section 3.07.12 One (1) approved mylar each shall be distributed to the County Recorder, the Director of Planning, and the applicant, and one print each to the Building Official/Zoning Administrator, and to the City Engineer. Section 3.08 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS None required. 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 ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 8 OF 9 s Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST: Amftk Kathleen Connelly City Clerk PROVED AS TO FORM: C avi exa r City ttorney "Ink ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 9 OF 9 Alsk ORDINANCE NO 450 LAND SPLIT ORDINANCE (Seventh Draft) �W%✓'/(/1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING ARTICLE III OF THE APACHE JUNCTION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS BY SETTING FORTH STANDARDS, PROCEDURES, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND SPLITS, 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 Article III (Administrative Subdivisions - Land Splits) of Chapter 2 (Subdivision Regulations) of Volume II (Land Development Code) of the Apache Junction City Code be amended as follows. ARTICLE III SECTION 3.00 ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS - LAND SPLITS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATION SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES SROIIONX3X08 REQOIREOXIMRRNYHMENXS SECTION 3.01 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance may be referred to and cited as the "Apache Junction, Arizona, Land Split Ordinance." SECTION 3.02 DEFINITIONS SECTION 3.02.01 LAND SPLIT. the division of improved or unimproved land whose area is two and one-half (2-1/2) acres or less into two (2) or three (3) tracts or parcels of land for the purpose of sale or lease. SECTION 3.02.02 SUBDIVISION see Section 7.03.19 SECTION 3.03 AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL REGULATIONS The regulations contained in this Ordinance are authorized pursuant to A.R.S. Section 9-463.01(L). Such authority refers to the determination of division lines, area and shape of the tracts or parcels, and does not include authority to regulate the terms or condition of the sale or lease, nor does it include the authority to regulate the sale or lease of tracts or parcels not the result of land splits as defined in A.R.S. Section 9-463. SECTION 3.04 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS Section 3.04.01 A land split map shall conform to all applicable policies of the Apache Junction, Arizona, General Plan. ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 1 OF 9 r--g • Section 3.04.02 A land split map shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance. Section 3.04.03 A land split map shall conform to the Street Classification Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 38 and any amendments thereto. atAbb 18XXt4XXU4 ANRXOUVWX44.64g, a x>5 X4WDX#14 'FX ' XXSE•XxiXzaEXYex 1x1 S f.Y,IrSpX Ox TFX kRX#Tx xixippt pw Arizomx)owetolittiu X SXT�C SECTION 3.05 APPLICABILITY Section 3.05.01 The regulations contained in this Ordinance shall apply to all divisions of land created for sale or lease within the corporate limits of Apache Junction, Arizona, defined by this Ordinance to be a land split. Section 3.05.02 It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, or other legal entity to sell or lease any parcel that is subject to the requirements of this Ordinance until an approved land split map complying with the provisions of this Ordinance has been recorded with the recorder's office of the county wherein the platted area lies. Ux7t)b CMX)3XXI5X)33 TORX A00011X0fXANYMOY KtSOlOXOMMXXV)00rXRUOX'12XI7QY'X;)2)O XXXi)<X X014i1XXIONWAFXANXNIXNOXXXA XPKOKetOnlrOXllgklXO2X;6WAVAMDPX:pXbX 6 C x eetipNxRx05x04 I61NX07KXXAONX0fX411r(Olftgl0MatteXb6111,1dUltXXVfXiibi tIVIAIXie XRzxedAyxxxxotox dddxxobd8ttxgxomxpbavxihtbx►ott xthAm XWX24 kk AV XSddttdr(XSx8Sx8S The(tXgAtxdxXdx RAIK44IXWaaW6x141SMialldangx0lexagttxPfx maina exatoomormotio ddxwith mmidIvIdg4x1411K>extx;iloXtbtxboulX tiltEtXx4 xitixamilfddtilitilom4Xlimoi2mmtaxpxopettpkgOKtgXlt19ffi)krztAytx dddiNdatrAOUtatitptoOdaddxdpaixxxxmxRAlrxpl tWx4xxlSAARXWm a tlBfd(dd Bfxif6(CtiiddIVXXXdiiXOMPAXX. 3ddtiTW3A5Xlsx ddiddnigUeddddpii(d4padOX664XthniKXii?idWmi ADOSt1{M XX]6Xt1SeAkA ddOixagXXd(XVandddSXhXdWhiiiaiiiiitAIX00510i1F1ip1.WHIWUXXAMAxik X pdpidtPtliXTIXWOMxt10(660ixtli4xXAMVX0aAVOillioxpibaUX Section 3 05 OX 03 Boundary adjustment plats and deeds, where the land taken from one (1) parcel is added to an adjacent parcel, need not be filed with the City of Apache Junction, provided that the proposed adjustment does not: ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 2 OF 9 eisenr 1. Create any new lots. 2. Render any existing lots substandard in size or shape. 3. Render substandard the setbacks of existing development. 4. Impair any existing access, easements, or public improvements. SECTION 3.06 ENFORCEMENT Sections 6.12, 6.13, and 6.14 shall apply SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Section 3.07.01 The division of land defined by this ordinance to be a land split requires the approval of a land split map by the Planning Director, Scandi;xi:si:enx&nmmxttee or the City Council. Section 3.07.02 The purpose of the Land Split Map review is to determine the appropriateness of the access and lot design with respect to the contours of the land, to determine if the setbacks of existing development are being rendered nonconforming with the creation of new lot lines, to determine if a subdivision is being created, and to determine whether or not the proposed land split conforms with City policies and ordinances. Section 3.07.03 Application Requirements Applicants requesting land split map approval shall submit the following to the Department of Planning: 1. A completed application form. 2. A nonrefundable $ filing fee to offset the costs of investigating and processing the application. '1 8. Aximel iun aag xd a vcAWN6partx4mx4M044Ati§xvitioxthw Aptxt*x Jummtkaamanakapaemblai;dexi:fcxxeqtRxedxbyxtkvgAt:yxfaug7iayw . Five (5) 4. SCiacteeax(ck6)b blueline or blackline prints folded into a 9" x 12" size and three (3) mylars (which may be submitted later) of the land split map. Section 3.07.04 Land Split Map Requirements The land split map shall be submitted on a transparent reproducible polyester film drawn with India Ink at a scale large enough to show all details clearly (normally 1" = 100' or larger) on a sheet 18" x 24", or 24" x 36". A line shall be drawn around the sheet leaving a margin of one inch (1"). The land split map shall show or contain the following information 1. A title to read "Apache Junction Land Split Map (case number)." ORDINANCE NO 450 PAGE 3 OF 9 2. Graphic and written scale, north indicator, and date of preparation. 3. Legal description of the property. 4. Location and description of existing and proposed monuments to which all bearings, dimensions, angles, and similar data shall be referenced. Such data shall be tied to the City datum system. 5. Boundaries of the property fully balanced and closed showing all bearings and distances (in feet and decimals thereof) determined by an accurate survey in the field. 6. By note or a legend, identify any symbols used on the map. 7. Bearings and dimensions of all parcel lines with each parcel identified by letter and indicating the net area in square feet of each parcel. 8. Name, course, length, and width of existing and proposed street dedications. 9. Course, length, and width of existing and proposed private access, utility, public service, and drainage easements. 10. The identification of adjacent subdivisions and land split maps by record data. 11. Delineation on the map of any areas identified on the flood insurance rate map as special flood areas. 12. fa=vutzboniroixnalsx>andx;swnikerx>fmQcyeof>ecxxbheodedrnaalxiorx>s kkx xteoivrtx>t cpract rtyx>tcy tteosutuvittethtoc>a<>14ordeoodxacxkno oxixycx itzgxiNtexx x>The<xxapx thea>Imehow the(ibooattoonc>aodo>edeec ofx>faeofxx xaoi>tx An*>ottato codxosthwec useoacrdcxxo>orxxxsec)aneamc. )12. Afx mopirkrxixbycLityx f.xtgicteerx>ate<xtopogr>aphy)ofxxtbec>sdteoshoeux xotx c>fxratx>(>t)>)xxmatacmc>ixraermad xixfx>4)he<>s<ixbe<>scboopeschesoc >tb>aox>fkvexxtemeotx>(>61' Xx>tvtoofo ldx>f>3cx)c>000ttotxxxiokelmacbecxi <xxx >tkte>c>S>i>t>tos>3;opesx>WtxAtAl kxkweatv<>pArc eoct x ;c>and;x due&oat<x )(>5)>)x rxintour<>ixotervele>ifxthec>sitec>ibopeec morecxbtxarxAvie tcyc iex c >tx>(>:fb%)xx 12.a4. The location of existing structures. 13 >1A. Owner's certificate: Dedication State of Arizona ) S.S. County of Know all men by these presents that as owner(s) and as Trustree have divided (under the name of )a portion of the 1/4 of Section , Township , Range , Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, County, Arizona, as shown mapped hereon and hereby publish this land split map and hereby declare that this map sets forth the location and gives the dimensions of the parcels or units and streets and easements constituting same and that each parcel and street shall be known by the letter and name ORDINANCE NO 450 PAGE 4 OF 9 Amok anwnir • given to each respectively on this map We hereby dedicate to the public the streets as shown on this map and included in the above-described premises. Easements are hereby dedicated for the purposes shown hereon. In witness whereof as owners, have caused its name to be signed on this map, this day of ,19 By: In witness whereof: as Trustee, has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 , as Trustee By. Its. 14. Id. Acknowledgement- State of Arizona ) S.S. County of On this the day of , 19 , before me the undersigned officer appeared who acknowledged themselves to be as owners, and also appeared before me who acknowledged himself to be a Trust Officer of , as Trustee, and that they, being duly authorized to do so, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 15. I7X. Title company certificate: This is to certify that the parties who executed the owner's certificate (dedication) are the parties having record title interest in the land to be divided or are the trustees of the land held in trust. In witness whereof, Title Insurance Company of has caused its corporate name to be signed by the undersigned officer thereunto duly authorized this day of , 19 By: Its. ORDINANCE NO 450 PAGE 5 OF 9 16. I($(. Engineer's or surveyor's certificate: This is to certify that the survey and the map of the division of land described herein was accurately done under my direction and that all lots are staked or will be staked and all monuments are set or will be set within one (1) year after recordation Signature Date Registration No. Seal 17. 2(. Certificate of Approval This is to certify that this map complies with the requirements of the City of Apache Junction; that on behalf of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, the streets offered for dedication by this map are accepted, and that this land split map is hereby approved on this day of , 19 By: Cdut to k` XckiN(i(040xxa mittif xutx Planning Director BgxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ) x(xigXvoxav xtaa XtZalktei;x X 44RXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CKVIX,x Xp(tX Xg/iYeds)441 xtyxt txdxgttyZSIXKaS11(I, 18. 212K. Reserve space for the recorder's certificate in the upper right hand corner of the map: .x x x kvalaxagtownd)ixevit lblyxaa cxaa c i(mca XtheX1sty Eiiiykitwxr:x X Arx>emsemsaxbcxCmrcxtheock ascak)(afxxat<arm[>Nadler<xmama&fcxsulaSestx boxxbhexxfioxl<lowirragcxberms<xand<xa d:ictcicarxscxks<xtxecr ycxlamavtatedxx mem(xxnderc x xand<xaarossc Abe xprno;xe xtyc xx*es;a aided xas xiakkaxsa The<>oosneax(xs+>of<Ana xprxopacrxt<y:xaaatGaixrxisgxkQmaxrx age xarxd Becher lxionc>iiaGemendWkxs?xa<boncbcxataxarxycxticRexi:tweeter(xii;kk, aclberx,x xxx>riewi<a<bec x6moax xb4rec>rgr adecs:>chasm xaa Ache x as puxa v ed x x impr>omemerxbc>?>ib<ansc>orxxfxi<le<xatx Abe xafxf ice nil(Atha xaxtycxE<rrgixneex orx>r>educe<Abe<xvoxlrxuex>rfosctraxaga xmegataxeak idEtt xxthexxxxxxx easements>x)undes9cnsmicbxberx xau;bixonicacati on xis xgrxaated x xyxxthm x Czirk c>of<Ap<aohecxJu nabciorxxxAtm(xawrzeax(<sx)<xatxakkmat xat x arty xt zmex hereafxterc>bxlooda<,x>1)iistourdx,xxonxiaapedexi<axaay<xmaaaemxttxexRkawx ofx>suaterx xboc x xaor>ossx,x>or(xbdrr ougdx Ake xdrxaimage xaad xmeterxt tat a x easements x x>Oaarer>Q>ec)<>shalxio xatx=a rsxetxa x xsaktxe m xtaxtte xemeateel x on(xbhecx e xandx>a etemxt<icorxxe<asxemexatsxxstayxlxaickd tag xaaxxxxxxxx scbr uc<tur>ecxxxlxxxbbe<>er et&>damagecxtxaxatayc4meg:cen<tyc mess itsxfKam vd.o<1<atinag<xbi>eGex>Oa rcarxboc xsxaicrkxnwrxem skxagrceesxtameg(ait<xat h(Ssoownoexpense xaddx>such(>damage x x xT<Ixexasaetx(xs)(xstxakkxtxaverxa per>petuacic>obxlcigextxiorxxtoottainct in xialxe mext<er:timxfxaakk;t*es anckhvrostrtx rvrtx(0 xaso<approvol>4Yyxt xeityxaf 6t46 ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 6 OF 9 t xi>Qrx 60ozocwd c>av(icDhocoadci ia>rx i<xasc xrxat tzils ed;xf ar cl>ppneatx>c xt>ta yamiqiaya(loprojewmxx3bkicscxeovicelx&rxtxxsdxakkxtxt$ xaormamodoorgloaarktxviued<>44(i46xt>tftxGrxarxs(fxenat(*Alexarnxxxxx >C01410M>tkigix>ax>a4i>dc>flrx 041<kio<tAxaMAxaockxackkx455("415• 24)x et xnobecx x krdwate(xi eedc>restaxiecbcionsc x98xa<lrk>mac xsasb ivxatcec xta )05 4c>mrximraocemc. Section 3.07.05 The Planning Director may approve alternative wording in the certificates Section 3.07.06 The Planning Department shall review the application and make a determination as to its completenes. The Planning Department shall advise the applicant of deficiencies if the application is determined to be incomplete. T>hec>0eper:Qxnerbxmra9x>cvavestc4ateo rec> foxxa6cxtcic+x}cec fiot>c>comps>a>areoeexvd>htx>thee>SupdeixAsefom>{ ax>Kate amese. Section 3.07.07 Upon determining that an application is complete, the Planning Department xxktsbrlbltQ>e<>aop kimzlxi X 9 xtaxtpc 9trbxiaw>dvi>otoc>Oomnxvtteecxami may distribute materials to the following agencies for their recommendations: 1. 3trcixl>ddttgc045fttxtkaly Other City Departments 2. Fire Chief. 39cxx pcytptpryxitea4ttlK>oep<dtxpuYettK 49(xx>Ootinty>eti iilitvtx)(anti<>Qttuitt, >4 dtterrii 41t<rxc:,x2 i()(ilkxaivi<i(6e,,(M gtxxx>irkti<ixivtly>golcyrtfirevotx>fxxp ov cictc x-rfw Ckxoctcx gccxx>( jyc> yc 3. X1X Any other relevant agency. Section 3.07.08 The Planning Director shall render a decision on the proposed 1 and split. Tbe<lki)neotoonont&›rer<lxioquiatxxtd>e>aieaics<i0rx-uaaftcioxon a pan i t-0c arx>p roparva4x 4o(xthe<>&uhd<iv>(iado k>Gotn[aiMee. Section 3.07.09 Notices of the decision shall be sent to the applicant advising him that he may appeal the decision of the DirectorX0V0XXVIWCalOYUCOA to the City Council. Section 3.07.10 An appeal of the Director's cW(TIVOCciftattftiViaft decision must be filed with the City Clerk's Office within thirty (30) days of the date of decision. The City Council shall consider the appeal no earlier than fourteen (14) days nor later than forty-five (45) days from the date of the filing of the appeal. ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 7 OF 9 Seocbcivax x3cgklxxl%1x liiNicxAckmmciaxgcxQiaxeac xwt6zaxSnaixdirocicscicaaxCxammXtteexaaixtkex6ci:ty Zolunacid‹x xiax xa v a kutiaxgc ami xxaixiazg xctaaicxxaasc xaax kaad x ap k zt xpaa pa a a k a x x sbalAmocascidamxtbaxfakkalcingmaritemiexxxxxxxx lxxxxxxTizecxkandowkic4cwowmakksxmaasicstanaycxwitkxtkexRi:tyrksxGeaenul 2(xxxxx xpqmOq kx x 4 mktc xtacxthenftycksxZem*apOrdi;aanee. (xxxx c OrNWS4Vaxaanf<awaictycxtaxAvtiakexkkicxandxiV4SeladRxxsAiax )0 s&grxxlkmcimmIgketscxaad:xitaadavds xacidxakkexxappki;eahke searti mme xtmeakta ts“ mhdtsieo;eeekegxiatQ®eaxx 11:x x x x iftge xpvcaaas:ak ks xaaa4cam icty<xk itk xtke x&is tyc k s x S t x e e k fxkasscicfx km aticaa xnaa x x 5cxxxxxTbozopropasakkscxkatxsckaaxamdxdeszgwxwztkxrespextxtoxkbexsAtesx trcaaagmap:hycxx &xxxxxkhaxicdaaticfcicaatkaaxafcxaaynetttaakxpeekkecmax►vikbxxexpeatxto mvxexis(tcicagxdaxakapmeatmutkexpeapeekycxandxkksxAewo ei bammdamkasc xta xlxaxameatad xxxxx nxxxxlkxiectcerr tmaticocaximamxtkeixtrkkkexiaformakzewxaadx>®t stxeetxx decac pxtftatcxaxs t0(0cesxtsxaetxbeimpereaked E KxxxxENatcxt1W0504 s wixtaecxkadgxsp#xxxmapxkaVexbeenxai f4mdx t ictUxWta:xtOxf60(xice60ddt tOKXxxx SXxxxxat4 rxx int44oftwktc6Vci:6Xxxxx Section 3.07 1 11 One (1) approved mylar each shall be distributed to: the County Recorder, the Director of Planning, and the applicant, and one print each to the Building Official/Zoning Administrator, and to the City Engineer. A00i4mx3KxQaxxxxxRcWARR€cQxkKRINYKU9fU 9 RRRx5cMiRck0 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 ORDINANCE NO. 450 PAGE 8 OF 9 Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST• Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David F. Alexander City Attorney Aimmk ORDINANCE NO 450 PAGE 9 OF 9 POLL CALL VOTE SHEET "DOTES :1)u() ?Iti° I /1() ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: ►� ' YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO ✓ VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON ✓ COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MAYOR HILL ✓ UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES c6•2 (0 r • ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY; SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO • VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL Auk COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ MIN NTYC MAYOR HILL UNANI"OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL mow.---_ s ITEM NO. 5 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. (400 OR 449 OR 450) , 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. (400 OR 449 OR 450) BY TITLE ONLY. I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. (400 OR S 3 449 OR 450) AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. (400, OR 449 OR 450) AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 452 2 . WILL THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/PUBLIC SAFETY 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 ..... ..... rpsp.CHF ote ,,GG gRiZoNP c 0 it y o pache ounction NOVEMBER 21, 1985 r. MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: .��� IRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SASETY THROUGH: 1r "' ;74A( CITY MANAGER REGARDING: TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (AGENDA ITEM) Attached is Ordinance No. 452 in regard to the installation of Stop Signs for your consideration. RWB:th p Agenda Approved by /-t✓ Date Item k Consent Agenda / / Public Hearing �! � �� `1' Old Business New Business Postponed Item File # 309.013 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ORDINANCE NO. 452 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 IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA THAT: SECTION I IN GENERAL It is in the public interest to insure safe, effective and efficient traffic flow along public rights—of—way within the City of Apache Junction, Arizona and it has been determined that traffic control devices are necessary for the public safety Now, therefore, be it ordained that stop signs be designated at the following locations: Westbound on 13th Avenue at Palo Verde Drive, Southbound on Palo Verde Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Saguaro Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Main Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Ocotillo Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Grand Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Lawther Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Hale Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Desert View Place at 16th Avenue, Southbound on Lawson Drive at 16th Avenue, Southbound on San Marcos Drive at 12th Avenue, Northbound on San Marcos Drive at 12th Avenue, Furthermore, the Director of Public Works and the Director of Public Safety are hereby empowered and directed to initiate appropriate action to install and enforce said traffic control devices. 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, subsection, 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 i/\ the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION IV PENALTY CLAUSE Any person found guilty of any violation of or failure or refusal to do or perform any act required by Chapter 12 of this code constitutes a civil traffic violation Civil traffic violations are subject to the provisions of Title 28, Chapter 6, Article 20 and 21, Arizona Revised Statute, and amendments thereof. SECTION V EMERGENCY CLAUSE 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 hereby 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 , 1985. NORMAN S. HILL Mayor ORDINANCE NO. 452 PAGE TWO ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David F. Alexander City Attorney I ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES d- r 'U oti ITEM # MEETING OF I -1/ 01 MOTION BY: CPri\ SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER I owik COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ tOstItURSPIAArNTAYL-OR\ COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL 1 UNANP.OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Adolkk Ink ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET 0) NOTES t vi PJ \),) ITEM # `P MEETING OF l v MOTION BY: k(go SECONDED BY YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL I COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER I COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ I COUNCILMAN BALJO I MAYOR HILL I UNANPOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 6 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 452, 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. 452 BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 452, AS S 3 READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 452, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 454 2 . WILL THE CITY CLERK 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 PQ ACHE ✓(i 0^e t ' Cam, i A; O ..`,e), qR NP amity o� ,pache unction �zo Agenda Approved by / ' Date Item November 25, 1985 Consent Agenda i _.z Public Hearing - Old Business MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYO AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIew Business Postponed Item THROUGH: CITY MANAGER 2 ' ' FROM: CITY CLERK !26' SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 454 (ORDER OF BUSINESS) As discussed at the November 19th work session, the attached ordinance amends the order in which the council conducts business at regular meetings. There are several proposed changes contained in the ordinance: 1 . Call to Order: language is added in the last sentence authorizing the city attorney or any other council-appointed individual to serve as parliamentarian for regular meetings. 2. There are no changes in the text of Sections B or.C. 3. Minutes: the language referring to the reading of the minutes by the city clerk or deputy has been deleted since this is not the council practice. 4. There are no changes in Sections E or F. 5. Call to the Public: replaces the section previously called "miscellaneous business" and appears on the agenda immediately following the City Manager report as opposed to the end of each meeting. This time in council meetings will be used to hear complaints, requests, comments and petitions from citizens. There is still the request to submit a written request to speak to the city clerk as well as the five-minute time limit and group representation by a designated individual . 6. There is no change in Section H. 7. Old Business and New Business: There are no changes with the exception of the last line in each of the sections which adds the stipulation that no person will be permitted to speak on any of the items listed 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Ordinance No. 454 Page 2 under either of these sections of the agenda unless they first submit a written request to the city clerk and are then invited to speak by the council . Hopefully this will prevent the past problem of the audience speaking randomly on items that are not open to the public. 8. There is no change in Section K. This ordinance has been written with the emergency clause so that, if adopted by council , these new procedures will be put into effect at the next regular council meeting. kmc vet Amok ORDINANCE NO 454 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, CHAPTER 2 MAYOR AND COUNCIL, SECTION 2-4-6 ORDER OF BUSINESS, 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, AS FOLLOWS .0.1"N SECTION I IN GENERAL That the Apache Junction City Code, Chapter 2 MAYOR AND COUNCIL, Section 2-4-6 ORDER OF BUSINESS, be amended to read as follows: Section 2-4-6 Order of Business The business of the council shall be taken up for consideration and disposition in the following order A. Call to Order. The mayor shall take the chair precisely at the hour set for the meeting and shall immediately call the council to order. In the absence of the mayor, the vice mayor shall call the council to order In the absence of both the mayor and vice mayor, the clerk shall call the council to order and an acting mayor shall be selected to chair the meeting Upon arrival of the mayor or vice mayor, the vice mayor or acting mayor shall immediately relinquish the chair upon the con- clusion of the business immediately before the council. The mayor shall preserve order and decorum, decide all questions or order, and conduct the proceedings of the meeting in accordance with the parliamentary rules contained in Robert's Rules of Order unless other- wise specified. The city attorney may serve as parliamentarian or a parliamentarian may be appointed by the council to be present at all regular meetings B. Roll Call. Before proceeding with the business of the council, the clerk or deputy shall call the roll of the members, and the names of those present shall be entered in the minutes If a quorum is not present, the members may adjourn pursuant to Section 2-4-4 of this code. C Consent Agenda The council may, at this time, take single action on any or all items listed as consent agenda items. These items may include, but are not limited to, acceptance of agenda, acceptance of minutes, second readings of ordinances, acceptance of resignations, and adoption of certain resolutions and other items which do not require a public hearing D. Minutes. If not included as a consent agenda item, the clerk or deputy shall present the minutes of the preceding council meeting which shall be approved if correct. Any error noted shall be corrected and initialed by the clerk. E Introduction of Distinguished Guests and Visitors, Awards, Presentations and Communications. The council may wish to acknowledge the presence of an individual or individuals present in the audience. Proclamations issued by the mayor, presentations from other agencies and awards given to or received by the city will be considered at this time F City Manager' Report. The manager, members of the city staff or those individuals designated by the manager may present information pertinent to items under consideration or information related to the operation of the city. ORDINANCE NO 454 PAGE ONE OF THREE G Call to the Public. At this time the council shall, as it deems nec- essary, consider all business not specifically provided for herein Requests, petitions, remonstrances, communications, comments or sug- gestions from citizens present shall be heard All speakers must submit a written "Request to Speak" to the city clerk in advance of this item All such remarks shall be addressed to the council as a whole and not to any member thereof. Such remarks shall be limited to five minutes unless additional time is granted by the council Where a group or organization wishes to present comments or dis- /, cussion, one person from the group shall be designated to present said comments or discussion No person other than the individual speaking shall enter into the discussion without the permission of the presiding officer. H. Public Hearings. Public hearings required by city ordinance, state statute or federal regulations shall be conducted by the council and all interested parties given the opportunity to speak Public hearings shall be conducted on amendments to the zoning ordinance, if requested by the aggrieved party, any member of the public or any member of the council, or if no public hearing has been held by the Planning and Zoning Commission. I Old Business The council shall consider any business that has been previously considered and which is still unfinished to include those items previously postponed or tabled. No member of the public shall be permitted to speak on these items unless invited to do so by the council after first filing a written request to speak with the city clerk. J. New Business The council shall consider any business not heretofore considered including, but not limited to, acceptance of resignations, adoption of resolutions not requiring public hearing, consideration of contracts, award of bids, appointments to boards and commission, and setting of dates for work sessions, special meetings and executive sessions. Council liaison reports and committee reports as required by the council shall be presented at this time. No member of the public shall be permitted to speak on these items unless invited to do so by the council after first filing a written request to speak with the city clerk. K. Adjournment. The council may, by a majority vote of those present, adjourn at the conclusion of business, A motion to adjourn shall always be in order and decided without debate. SECTION II REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the pro- visions of this ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference are hereby repealed. SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, 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 ocmpetent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the valid- ity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION IV EMERGENCY CLAUSE It being necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall become immediately operative and in force from and after the date of posting hereof ORDINANCE NO. 454 PAGE TWO OF THREE Oak ^ s PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 1985 NORMAN S. HILL Mayor IATTEST KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID F. ALEXANDER City Attorney I /NN ORDINANCE NO 454 PAGE THREE OF THREE ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTESL/7 41 ITEM II MEETING OF 'v MOTION BY: ),Njam' SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED c0wiTw 0 -\. COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER t/ COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ L/ MAYOR HILL I UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 1 J � ()) )X/ ITEM # MEETING OF l )/// MOTION BY; _� ' ' SECONDED BY. p_ YES NO A3STAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ V COUNCILWOMAN `TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO f' VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL , COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL e`', ' ! UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED . A3STAINED TOTAL 4! ITEM NO. 7 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 454, 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. 454 BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 454, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 454, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PQp.CHE✓C, s • 4' 6 die`r; J` �'1��J 6 yY� ,', / U�,�A � i, Z '9RIZ0NP (Oily o Apache unction November 25, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO. HONORABLE MAYO AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH. CITY MANAGER /12-7 FROM. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK j REGARDING. CONSULTANT SELECTION WATER QUALITY - SEWER - STORM DRAIN STUDIES (AGENDA ITEM) In this year' s budget, funds were provided for water quality, sewer and storm drain studies. In these regards, on October 21st, a request for proposals (R.F.P. ) was posted and advertised in accordance with City policy. On November 13th, the City Clerk' s office received and opened proposals from the firms of Anderson-Nichols & Co. , Inc. , Dooley-Jones & Associates, Inc. , Engineering- Science, Inc. , Hansen-Bunger-Hansen, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. , Moore Knickerbocker & Assoc. , Inc. , RGA Engineering Corporation, and Wilson & Company; whereupon the proposals were reviewed by an evaluation panel consisting of the City Manager, Director of Public Works, Planning Director, and the City's Engineering Consultant (Bill O' Dell ) , which resulted in inviting the firms of Anderson-Nichols, Engineering- Science, Malcolm Pirnie and Moore Knickerbocker to make a further presentation on November 22nd to the panel . Upon completion of the interview process, the panel discussed the qualifications, methodology, and content of the proposals and agreed to recommend the firm of Anderson-Nichols & Co. , Inc. to perform the studies. Attached are excerpts from the R.F.P. and their proposal for your information. Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda Public Hearing RWB:sh Old Business / Attach. Excerpts from R.F.P. New Business A Postponed Item File 100.051 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 �. Aft, ATTACI+ENT "A" WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS/MONITORING STUDY Present and future septic and sewer improvements have raised questions as to present and future effects on groundwater quality. For the City of Apache Junction, groundwater is the sole source supply, until such time as augmentation through C.A.P. delivered Colorado River water becomes a reality. Depth to groundwater averages 500 feet and is contained in alluvial basin fill . Research also indicates that the probable direction of flow is southwesterly into eastern Maricopa County. According to the 1980 U.S. Census, the City had 9,935 permanent resi- dents. By 1985, the population had risen to 14,412, a 45% increase. During the same period, dwelling units increased from 6,834 to 10,939. Not reflected in these figures is the winter population component, estimated to swell the City' s population to over 35,000 persons. Given the continuation of this trend, we anticipate a doubling of our present population by the year 2000. All liquid waste disposal in the community and surrounding unincorporated environs is served by septic systems or small wastewater plants resulting in a 3.2 mgd flow according to the Apache Junction 208 Plan Amendment. Approxi- mately 90% of the population is served by septic systems, with the remainder served by the five small wastewater treatment plants in current operation, There is a documented history of problems with some of these plants. Due to the heavy loading, a problem of potential contamination of the ground- water is suspect. To date, there has been no definitive study adequately addressing the dimensions of the problem nor future consequences to be borne as a result of continued reliance on non-centralized wastewater treatment facilities. By collecting appropriate available information, determine if there has been any degradation of water quality to date, and establish a base line to begin a monitoring program in order to plan and act accordingly to prevent future or further_degradation. During the study, it should be determined if future monitoring can be performed in conjunction with existing facilities (wells, storage reservoirs, etc. ) or if one or more monitoring wells will have to be developed. 8 If monitoring wells must be constructed and cannot be designed or developed as a part of this study, then alternative recommendations would be developed outlining preliminary site(s), concepts, and costs. Primary Questions to be Addressed: I . How does present water quality in the Apache Junction area compare to applicable State/Federal Health standards? 2. Are there any signs of water quality degradation? 3. How can a monitoring program be implemented to prevent future or further degradation? 4. What are the alternative concepts and costs to develop a monitoring system? 5. Is a monitoring system necessary? 6. Can future consequences be predicted? 7. What are some recommendations for the disposal of liquid/industrial waste? 9 ATTACHMENT "B" SEWER STUDY A study in May 1981 (see Executive Summary) addressed future sewage Admikk disposal alternatives for the City of Apache Junction and made broad recommen- dations for implementation. It is the intent of this study to update prior information while address- ing health-related issues and a more definitive implementation plan, if appli- cable. Primary Questions to be Addressed. I . What are the short and long term health, economic and development impacts of remaining on septic systems and isolated package treatment plants? Example: Health - Surface contamination - Sub-surface contamination - Groundwater degradation - Odor Economic - Cost to resident/user - Attraction of business and industry Development - Attraction of business and industry - Cost to implement a sewerage system in the future with no action taken in the short-term 2. Should a sewage system be developed, what alternatives are available for inclusion and assessment of present property owners who presently have a working septic or sewage system? 20 3. Since Federal funding is being reduced, what are some realistic approaches to financing, constructing, and operating a sewerage system? 4. What options are available to phase development and construction of a sewage and collection system? 5. What policy should be developed to fuid new construction so that minimal costs will be incurred with future connections? 6. What is the updated time schedule for implementation? 7. What kind of wastewater plant would best accommodate our fluctuating summer/winter population? 8. What is the present failure/replacement rate for septic systems as compiled from health department, well pumper and septic installers records? (NOTE: if poor records or information is available, should a policy be implemented to determine failures?) 9. What are the implications of continuing to allow large commercial and residential projects to construct individual package treatment plants or community septic systems? (NOTE: Should a policy be implemented to supplement Arizona Depart- ment of Health Services requirements, especially as to location and aesthetics of package and community septic systems?) 10. What would be the maximum allowable density and an acceptable percolation rate for residential development within the various soil i.. types? Where can these limits be delineated in regard to the exist- ing or future street alignments? II . How would remaining on septic systems affect future water resources in relation to augmenting water supplies by reclamation, reuse and recharge? 21 ATTACHMENT "C" STORM DRAIN STUDY The City of Apache Junction, located on an alluvial fan of the Supersti- tion Mountains, contains some unique flooding characteristics. Compounded by water diversion by property owners and developers over the years, and with no local storm drain plan prior to the City's incorporation, the resolution of flooding problems remains very complex. The BUCKHORN-MESA WATERSHED work plan was supplemented in June 1976, and has been partially constructed from Power Road (Bush Highway) to Signal Butte Road. Presently the Apache Junction flood-retarding structure is under design and construction could begin soon. Although the plan calls for the construc- tion of a flood-retarding structure on Weekes Wash, recent meetings with miners and governmental agencies have raised questions of the viability of this parti- cular structure. In addition to the Buckhorn-Mesa Projects, an East Valley storm drain study is presently being conducted by several East Valley cities and Maricopa County. As a part of this study, certain portions of Apache Junction were studied, and alternatives prepared for storm water retention and channel construction in order to protect the integrity of the Central Arizona Project from future additions to drainage runoff. The City of Apache Junction adopted a floodplain management ordinance in August of 1982 in conjunction with the federal requirements of the Flood Insurance Agency and has zones delineated on Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Additionally, in conjunction with the design for paving twenty miles of city roads last year, drainage areas were delineated and storm drains sized for the Q10 and Q100 events at numerous street crossings with many of the structures being installed. In conjunction with the City' s Development Guide, new projects/developments have submitted comprehensive drainage reports and have installed drainage improve- ments. 53 An Ink Special attention is directed to the fact that a storm drain plan should consider a methodology so as to minimally impact the public, and consider the extent of existing rights-of-ways and developments. Considering the above, the City needs to develop a comprehensive storm Auk drain plan and policy. It is the intent to proceed with a broad base approach at this time in order to assemble and analyze data to establish a base on which priorities can be developed. • Primary Questions to be Addressed: I . What are the primary and secondary priorities relating to storm drainage? 2. What are some alternative approaches to developing, financing and implementing a plan? 3. What new development requirements should be implemented now in anticipation of future impacts? 4. ,What are some estimated costs for implementing a preferred plan to minimize flooding? 5. What is a recommended course of action? 6. What costs could be additionally incurred for further detailed studies and engineering designs? 54 ill III METHODOLOGY 111 Described in the following section are the specific methodologies for each of the three component studies. In this section, we will present our general r. approach to the project. Our general methodology for a wide-ranging study of 1111 this type is to approach it as a team with ongoing interaction to insure efficient utilization of the project budget. IIII An initial set of meetings with Apache Junction City representatives will be held to insure a full understanding of the study goals and to agree on an overall approach and final products. Our study team members will have 111 discussed these items beforehand and will meet throughout the study to insure that the work is being conducted efficiently and to exchange ideas on each others separate studies. It should be noted that these are not truly separate studies in that, especially with the water quality and sewer 111 studies, there are several areas where they impact each other. Regarding public input, we foresee the need for little, if any, direct public 111 input in the form of hearings held specifically for these studies. It is our opinion that, although these studies are more or less the "second step", they are still considered to be conceptual-level or early planning and are not sufficiently advanced in detail nor potential impact to warrant public IIIhearings. We have found that public hearings work best when specific alternatives with well-defined social and econcmic impacts can be presented to the public and they can more or less "choose" the one they prefer. Prior 11 to that level of detail, the public generally has trouble grasping the nebulous aspects of the concepts. 11 Rather, we propose for these studies to rely on the input of the City Council members as representatives of the citizens. We propose to produce a brief ,r•. and concise Concept Report roughly mid-way through the study which will present the pertinent data, our findings, and our conclusions to that point• 1 We will discuss the development of this report with Mr. Broman on a regular Ai basis during the early part of the study and present it to the City Council at a work study session. We would then expect to utilize their comments as public input to modify or redirect the remaining work. Of course, public input from citizens attending this session would also be heeded. 1 When the report has been prepared, we will submit a draft and again ask for comments. Those comments would be integrated into the final report and our findings would again be presented to Council at a work study or regular session. 1 As with any study that could have a significant long-term impact on a community, we will use our usual approach of identifying at the outset the } potential short-term, medium-term, and long-term impacts that these studies could have. These potential impacts then help to determine the issues which must be addressed and the relative importance of the issues based on when the 1 ipmact is likely to occur, the level of detail of the current planning, and I. the likelihood that the potential impact mpact could change significantly or become less important with time. Determination of these impacts is a part of our normal practice interactingon the P tice of projects in the office. Since we have a relatively small office, the senior personnel (Larry, Greg, Frank, and Woody) are constantly interacting on all of the current projects. This interaction helps generate ideas and concerns that the individual project manager may not be aware of or Irkcannot "see" since he is too close to the project. These studies will allow us to make excellent use of this process since all four of us will be actively involved throughout the project. I I I I I I I I I I 11 r ii I SEWER STUDY 111 Scope of Work: The overall issue of the need for and implementation of a sewage collection and disposal system in a rapidly growing community such as Apache Junction is Jlq complex, both technically and politically. Two major factors are crucial to the outcome of this study; health impacts and economics. The health impacts are tied directly to the rate of septic system failures and the projected rate for the future. Preventing an undue amount of future failures may 11 result in densities which are econcmically unacceptable to developers. The other economic impact is the sheer cost of building collection and treatment facilities. These are the two principal aspects of this study on which we illwill be concentrating. The remaining issues such as system and plant alternatives, funding options, policy development, and so on will follow fairly straightforward from the illinitial work and development of a recommended approach. Data Collection: III We would attempt to mobilize all available resources to provide the largest collection of data from which to base recomendations upon. One area of data that would be stressed is personal experience relative to specific issues of 14 the study. To accomplish this, we propose to interview any public and 111 private persons that have knowledge or expertise relative to portions of this study. As part of this initial phase, the following tasks would be performed : a) Review existing reports and other published data. 111 b) Field inspection of existing sewage facilities. .164, ,,,.a, c) Interview public officials, including the health department, adjacent cities, Maricopa Association of Governments, Federal L government, and the City of Apache Junction. d) Interview private individuals, including septic tank maintenance ill companies, operators of package treatment plants, and local developers. 1 Analysis of Issues and Options: Using the collected data, we would perform a preliminary analysis of the s issues and available options for sewage disposal in Apache Junction. To maximize input from the City, we propose to prepare a brief concept report which would identify problems and pose questions to the City. This report would be presented to the City Council during a work study session to obtain their input and insure that the final study addresses the needs of the City. Based on input obtained from City officials and the Council we would proceed with the final analysis and prepare the preliminary and final study reports. I I al 401. t The following is a list of the issues that we propose to analyze in the study: I1) Health Issues a) soils and geology b) groundwater c) odor 2) Planning and Development Issues I AN a) zoning and future density b) impact on development I 3) Engineering Design Options a) septic systems b) onsite package treatment plants c) local area treatment plants d) regional treatemnt plant e) trunk sewer to outside treatment plant 11 4) Economic Concerns a) existing owners conversion from septic to sewer 1 b) cost of all design options IIc) cost of no action. Report Preparation: The final study report will recommend a plan of action for the City to I implement . The proposed plan will provide the City of Apache Junction with the information to serve the present population and accommodate the needs of future development. One area of particular concern is the outlying planning area that is presently under County jurisdiction. Predicting growth and development in this area will be more difficult . The issue of water reclamation is becoming a major component of sewage treatment and could have a great impact on future plans. We will consider very strongly the issue of water reclamation in any recommendations. 4 1 _1 ill 11J 111 STORM DRAIN STUDY Scope of Work: 111 The preliminary storm drain study for the City of Apache Junction is intended to provide an evaluation of drainage and flooding problems and possible AIM Pos. solutions within the study area of approximately 48—square miles. The study objectives can be summarized as follows: 111 1 . Identify existing and proposed drainage facilities and drainage problem areas. 2. Develop conceptual plans to alleviate the drainage problems incorporating existing and proposed drainage facilities, where practical. 111 3. Recommend and develop a preferred plan to alleviate the drainage problems including estimated costs and alternative approaches to developing, financing, and implementing the plan. Project Approach: The objectives addressed above can be met through the performance of the three tasks listed and described below: 111 1 . Data Compilation 2. Development of Conceptual Plans and Recommendation of Preferred Plan 111 3. Report Preparation and Meetings. Task 1 — Data Compilation: In order to develop the conceptual plans to alleviate drainage problems, all available pertinent information will need to be compiled. This information i. would include, but not be limited to: 1 . A copy of the Flood Insurance Study prepared for the area, including the topographic mapping (1" 400' scale, with 4—foot contour intervals) . 2. City maps of drainage problem areas and lists of drainage complaints. 3. Information on existing and proposed flood control facilities and related hydrology by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) . 4. Information on hydrology and selected drainage system plan for Eastern Maricopa County Master Drainage Plan prepared for the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC) . 5. Information on existing and proposed land use and zoning. 6. Drainage reports and drainage plans of existing and proposed develop— ments. 11 II 7 . Locations and descriptions of existing City-owned land and drainage, roadway, and major powerline easements and/or rights-of-way which could be utilized for drainage facilities. 8. Location and sizes of culvert crossings of U.S. Highway 60, 70, 80, and 89. 3 9. Information on Superstition Freeway drainage channels and/or detention basins. Task 2 — Development of Conceptual Plans and Recommendation of Preferred Plan: With the limited project budget, we would propose utilizing the existing hydrology information compiled to estimate peak discharges. We would propose developing a relationship of peak discharge in cubic feet per second (cfs) versus drainage area in square miles from available existing hydrology to estimate discharges for sizing conceptual plans. We would propose presenting the conceptual plans on a 1 ,000-scale map of the 1 48-square mile study area. This map would be approximately 36" x 48" in size and would contain base information including contour lines, section lines, existing and proposed drainage facilities, and roads. After identifying the existing and proposed drainage facilities and drainage problem areas from the data compiled, we would develop conceptual plans to alleviate the drainage problems within the constraints revealed by the information compiled. We would develop conceptual level cost and size estimates to aid in evaluating the plans. 1 Components of the conceptual drainage plans to be evaluated would include, a but not be limited to, the following or combination thereof; 1) lined or unlined channels, 2) storm drain pipes, ' 3) regional detention basins, 4) existing washes or channels, and 5) road crossing culverts. The conceptual plans that we would foresee evaluating in the study at this time would include: 1 . A surface channel and road culvert crossing system as necessary to maintain access and provide positive drainage on major mile and half-mile roads. This plan would involve a channel system on a grid pattern and/or a diagonal channel system which would follow existing washes. 2. A storm drain pipe system on a one-mile grid network with laterals on one-half mile intervals, possibly with regional detention basins to optimize pipe utilization. A plan would be recommended to the City and interested parties based on evaluation of costs, maintenance, land requirements, implementability, etc. Upon approval of the recommended plan, we would refine the 1 ,000- ,..._ ....... 11 ___ _ scale exhibit presenting the plan and summarize component sizes, costs, and phase implementation. III Task 3 - Project Preparation and Meetings: The report would summarize the development of conceptual plans and the recommendation of the preferred plan, including the 1 ,000-scale exhibit of 111 the preferred plan and the conceptual plan cost and size estimates. Funding alternatives would also be presented and evaluated . We would anticipate two progress meetings with the City and a meeting to present alternate concept 11 plans and a recommended plan to the City Council and interested parties. 111 II ' ill 111 11 110! 1 I ! I .a 4 1 I ' if AIM. 1 11 WATER QUALITY ASALYSIS/MONITORING STUDY 11 Scope of Work: The City of Apache Junction is a rapidly growing community that will have an increasing amount of wastewater production in the future. Septic tanks are v,.....„ used for the disposal of approximately 90 percent of the wastewater currently generated in Apache Junction. There are five small systems to process the remaining 10 percent of the wastewater. IPopulation projections predict that there could be 30,000 people living in Apache Junction by the year 2000 and there is also a large seasonal population increase due to winter visitors. The City of Apache Junction is liconcerned about the possible impacts that the wastewater generated by the projected population and the winter visitors could have on groundwater quality if additional septic tanks are installed to dispose of the increased 11 wastewater quantities. The City is also concerned about the present septic tank network, and if current wastewater disposal has altered the quality of the groundwater. 11 The primary work items for this project are listed in the City of Apache Junction's Request for Proposal and these can be classified mto two major topics, 1) Present Conditions, and 2) Future Monitoring. 11 Present Conditions: The City of Apache Junction would like to know what is the overall quality of II the groundwater stored beneath the City and how does that groundwater quality compare to Federal and State standards for drinking water. The City would like to know the present status of groundwater quality and if the present 11 conditions represent an alteration of quality. This phase of the project requires that the consultant document the present and past groundwater quality conditions. The consultant will have to compare water quality analyses to determine if the quality of groundwater has been changing and to calculate the amount of change. The consultant will have to try to determine if the use of septic tanks has made an impact on the present 11 groundwater quality. Future Monitoring: The City of Apache Junction has many questions relating to the development of a system to monitor groundwater quality. The consultant will have to try to determine if the use of septic tanks will have an impact on groundwater quality in the future based on historic water quality trends and projected `I future wastewater quantities. If there are impacts that can be predicted, then the consultant is to determine if a monitoring program is needed and if the monitoring system can be used to prevent future or further groundwater Iquality degradation. The consultant is to develop alternative costs and concepts for a monitoring system, should a system be deemed required. 11 1 I Project Approach: Just as the Scope of Work was separated into two major topics, so is the Project Approach required to complete this work. Present Conditions: Anderson-Nichols would initiate this phase of the study by reviewing all the data provided to our firm by the City of Apache Jucntion. This would establish the foundation for further research. Anderson-Nichols' staff would contact Federal agencies for data relating to groundwater quality in the Apache Junction area. These Federal agencies to be contacted would include the U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Reclamation. Our firm would contact State agencies, such as the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Arizona Department of Health Services, and the Arizona Geological Survey, to collect any groundwater data that those agencies might have relating to the Apache Junction area. We would also research the records at the Pinal County Health Department and the Maricopa County Health Department to obtain water quality data from wells in and surrounding the study area. Anderson-Nichols, in conjunction with Dr. Kenneth Schmidt, has an extensive library collection and records in office files relating to groundwater. We would research these records for information related to 'the City of Apache Junction and this project . These resources would then be analyzed by our staff. Anderson-Nichols would determine present and historic groundwater quality conditions in the Apache Junction area. These analyses would be used to determine if there has been an alteration of groundwater quality through time with particular emphasis relating to drinking water standards. If suitable water quality analysis 1 test results are available, Anderson-Nichols will try to determine if the use of septic tanks has caused an alteration in groundwater quality. It has been our experience that in most areas in central Arizona that there 3 is a natural change in groundwater quality that occurs with depth. As the groundwater levels decline due to pumping, the groundwater quality can change as different layers in the ground contribute water to a well . This natural change in groundwater quality can often mask a man-caused alteration. 4 Specific organic compounds can be added to the groundwater reservoir by man's activities, such as the use of septic tanks. If the available water sample analyses include test results for these conmpounds , it will be possible to evaluate the impact of septic tanks. The analysis cannot be based on nitrate concentrations because it is a natural component in groundwater in central Arizona and it could also be introduced as an agricultural by-product due to fertilizer use. Future Monitoring: If the Present Conditions portion of this project indicates that the use of septic tanks has not had an impact on groundwater quality, then our firm will try to determine if there is a potential for degradation of groundwater quality in the future. If septic tank impacts are identified, we will begin working on a monitoring system. 1 I 1 The potential for future septic tank impacts can be evaluated using a water budget study. Anderson-Nichols will estimate the quantity of wastewater that could be produced in the future based on population projections. We will also evaluate geohydrologic conditions to estimate what percent of the wastewater could percolate down into the groundwater reservoir. These calculations will permit our firm to estimate if there is a potential for 111 future alteration of groundwater quality and will allow us to estimate the magnitude of the impacts. The development of a monitoring program will be initiated after Anderson. Nichols determines if such a program is necessary and if such a program would aid in monitoring groundwater changes. Anderson-Nichols could propose alternative monitoring programs and related cost estimates for the City of 111 Apache Junction. These would be general in scope. A successful monitoring program requires detailed geologic and hydrologic studies that are site- specific. These studies must include borings to verify the local geology and to identify clay layers below the surface that could influence the downward percolation of wastewater. Clay layers cause perched water table conditions in which the wastewater would migrate horizontally through the sediments 111 rather than in a vertical direction. Hydrology studies would be required to determine aquifer characteristics and the degree of saturation of the sediments. These requirements for a monitoring program and many more would be documented in the report prepared by Anderson-Nichols. This study would provide the foundation for establishing a monitoring program which would provide useful data for the City of Apache Junction. The Sewer Study will be undertaken simultaneously with the water quality study. Interaction between the two teams at Anderson-Nichols will prevent Jil duplication of research and analysis in the areas where these two study topics overlap. Wastewater quantity projections developed by the sewer study team will be used by the water quality team to predict possible groundwater 111 quality alterations. Groundwater quality studies completed by the water quality team will be used by the sewer study team in the evaluation of Am. present wastewater facilities and in the planning of future facilities. 111 I a 11 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 1 � ITEM #_ MEETING OF 1 v MOTION BY: (PIA SECONDED BY: ) S NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ J COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL I UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED . ABSTAINED TOTAL a a 'rL. ITEM NO. 8 I MOVE THAT THE FIRM OF ANDERSON-NICHOLS & CO. , BE APPROVED AS THE CONSULTANT TO PERFORM WATER QUALITY, SEWER AND STORM DRAIN STUDIES, AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CONSULTANT TO DEVELOP AND EXECUTE A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. ( 1.01CHE✓Gti 0 :. : O -' �', O 1t! r A jy 1, z J '9PiZONP C4ac/ze 2 nction y e November 26, 1985 ( ("/ MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CIT OUNCIL FROM: THE CITY MANAGER s SUBJECT: REPAIRS TO MOTOR GRADER The City's motor grader is down due to transmission problems. As with this and other pieces of equipment of this size it is expensive to repair. The estimate is between six and nine thousand dollars depending an what they find inside. This is the first major repair work on this grader. Our request is for authorization to have the grader repaired at a cost not to exceed $9,000.00 MJMc/lt1 Agenda Approved by r`� Date Item # Consent Agenda Public Hearing Old Business New Business Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL I UNANLM..OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 8b I MOVE THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH REPAIRING THE MOTOR GRADER AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $9,000.00. Amok .•. PQACHEG OL � nfit ;ZwCe" d �t � 11' om; t ' , fir, AlRizoNP c .its a . ace &unction November 20, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO. HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL -> THROUGH: CITY MANAGER 1 FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS j REGARDING. SIERRA ENTRADA SUBDIVISION - STREETS (AGENDA ITEM) The Sierra Entrada subdivision has certainly had it's share of difficulties since the beginning of the project, even prior to the City's incorporation. With the change of developers, there were oversights and omissions that resulted in the project not being constructed in accordance with the approved plans. During the time the developer was negotiating with the City to correct discrepancies and problems with the streets and sewage treatment plant, the developer' s corporation was dissolved. Subsequently, governmental agencies took action which resulted in a temporary suspension of building permits, and for some time the development lay idle. Inasmuch as recent action has again allowed for the building of units except for Lots 122 through 136 in Lucy Court in Unit Two due to a special agreement relating to the improvement of Broadway Avenue as recorded in Pinal County ...... (copy attached) , the question of street acceptance for maintenance remains to be acted upon. Considering all events to date, the following action is presented for your consideration. Agenda Approved by /4 RWB:s h Date Item • Consent Agenda Attachments (2) Public Hearing Old Business /-i - New Business ! < • Postponed Item File 100.051 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 r.,�-T; •..,� G ►Z 706761 LAW U"ICES 1 1 1 b - > 6 8 EVANS . HAM MON D £3 MI LL1 KEN JAM CS T MI .LIKCN SUITE 2201 TIRST TEDCRAL SAVINGS BUILDING 7000 C.CAMCLBACK SUITE II PHIL B NAM MONO 3003 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE SCOTTSOALC,ARIZONA 85251 J ROBCRT CVANS [6023 99.-5595 PHOENIX.ARIZONA 85012 JIM ROBCRT JUNKCR [6023 266-222• P.O.BOX 541 JOHN R.TELLIER PINCTOP,ARIZONA 85935 COURTESY RECORDING October 2 , 19 81 [6023 3 3 6-19 7.. MINNESOTA TITLE COMPANY NO TITLE CO. LIABILITY City of Apache Junction 1001 North Idaho Road Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Attn: Richard W. Broman , Director of Public Works Re: P & P Development , Inc. Gentlemen: This letter is to confirm the agreement which was made with the City of Apache Junction during the meeting between yourself and certain other City officials and my client, P & P Development on Friday, September 18. This agreement concerns the paving requirements for Broadway Road along the southerly edge of Sierra Entrada Garden Homes Unit Two. The requirement which the City has set forth for the paving of this section of Broadway differing in certain manners from those earlier imposed by the County at the time the subdivision was approved and recorded. The agreement reached is as follows : You will issue building permits and , upon completion of a structure in accordance with the City Building Code , the appropriate occupancy permits for lots within Sierra Entrada Garden Homes Unit Two;:*except for the lots which front on Lucy Court (Lots 122 through 136) . You will not issue , nor will we seek to have issued, building permits for the latter 15 lots until we have resolved and agreed on the specifications for the paving of the north half of Broadway Road adjacent to the southerly boundary of Sierra Entrada Garden Homes . We will use our best efforts to reach an agreement on the paving of Broadway Road prior to February 1 , 1982 . **peg Map recorded in Book 19, page 38 records of Pinal County, Arizona. 1116- 869 • City of Apache Junction • October 2 , 1981 Page Two • • • If this letter accurately confirms our agreement, I would appreciate it if you would sign the enclosed copy and return it for our files. Very truly yours , EVANS, HAMMOND & MILLIKEN • • R ber Evans JRE:dst 267 cc: John S. Moore THE TERMS CONTAINED IN THIS LETTER ARE ACCEPTABLE AND ARE AGREED TO. City of Apache Junction By : Its : Director of Public Works Date: October 5, 1981 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES / 044/4) Sitp1)1 ITEM # MEETING OF l ' MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: Y=S NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON Am. COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANI"1OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL C_. ITEM NO. 9 I MOVE THAT THE STREETS IN SIERRA ENTRADA UNITS 1 AND 2 BE ACCEPTED FOR MAINTENANCE UPON THE CONDITION THAT WITH THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ON UNDEVELOPED LOTS, THE PROPERTY OWNER/BUILDER WILL REPLACE AND/OR REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO THE CURB AND SIDEWALK AREAS AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY. PQACHF ✓G ^�/ 1y '�RizoNPity o . pacLieunction DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER ? 17 FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING: AB-85-12 RESOLUTION NO. 85-51 RELINQUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENT AND VACATION OF DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY (AGENDA ITEM) GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANTS: RICHARD HOWARD, FRANCINE WRIGHT ROBERT ARENDS SR. , ROBERT ARENDS JR. PARCELS: 100-38-6C 100-38-18D p STREETS REQUESTED: CEDAR DRIVE, FROM SHIPROCK STREET TO MANZANITA STREET STREET CONDITIONS: UNIMPROVED AND NOT MAINTAINED. D.C.C. RECOMMENDATION: SEE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM DATED OCTOBER 31, 1985 Agenda Approved by 1 Date Item # Consent Agenda Public Hearing Old Business New Business /:/V l./ RWB:th postponed Item File # AB-85-12 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 PQACHE 1— z 'ki ' 0 U ;� z AIPIZONP `Oity o . ` pache 02uncizon DATE: OCTOBER 31, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: CITY MANAGER FROM: VICE CHAIRMAN, DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COMMITTEE REGARDING: RELINOUISHMENT OF FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENTS AND VACATION OF DEDICATED RIGHT—OF—WAY , AB-85-12 The Development Coordinating Committee reviewed the above application on October 31, 1985 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 of the property owners desire abandonment. cc Engineering nivis-ion Planning Department File No. AB-85-12 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 0.1164 RESOLUTION NO. 85-51 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENTS AND DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY ON CEDAR DRIVE IN THE VICINITY OF SHIPROCK AND MANZANITA STREETS AS DESCRIBED IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE #AB-85-12, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS ROADWAYS AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND VACATED AS PRESENT OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. OIS WHEREAS, the requested abandonment and vacation are parcels of land located in 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. Parcel No. 1 The West thirty-three (33') feet of the Northwest quarter of Lot 25, Section 18. EXCEPT the Nor thrit ree (33') feet and EXCEPT the South e (5') feet thereof. Parcel No. 2 The East thirty-three (33') feet of the Northeast quarter of Lot 26. EXCEPT the North thirty-three feet and EXCEPT the South five (5') 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, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, finds that said Federally Patented Easement and Dedication 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 and dedications requested for abandonment have never been improved or maintained as a public roadway and 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 and Dedication reserved for public right-of-way purposes are hereby abandoned and extinguished as g present or future public rights-of-way. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the abandonment and vacation of the public right-of-way has no effect on reservations for public utility easements. 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-I2 ml HOWARD, WRIGHT, ARENDS m SE II PROCK ST -- 66' 1 -- - - -MANZANITA ST- - -+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - 33 I 33 • I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -ROUNDUP ST- - - - --� z /30 1 Q • w w UA - - - -MOCKINGBIRD ST - - -• - - - - - - I � SILVERADO ESTATES r A 1 GREASEWOOD ST.SCALE I"= 200' /// PROPOSED ABANDONMENT 0 TAX PARCEL NUMBER LOT NUMBER ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ,y4j9i/D ITEM # 1 ° MEETING OF 14/ o MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: `►���4L_ 1 YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER _ V COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ 0 MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 10 I MOVE THAT RESOLUTION NO. 85-51 , A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT CERTAIN FEDERALLY PATENTED EASEMENTS AND DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY ON CEDAR DRIVE IN THE VICINITY OF SHIPROCK AND MANZANITA STREETS AS DESCRIBED IN STREET ABANDONMENT CASE AB-85-12, ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE AS ROADWAYS AND ARE HEREBY ABANDONED AND VACATED AS PRESENT OR FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. PQACHE✓, O n I q,Q/ZONP COity o 47yache cOunction Agenda Approved by /4.--' Date Item M November 26, 1985 Consent Agenda Public Hearing Old Business �� NN w Business - '- MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCP�stponed Item �'Z 4 Re THROUGH: CITY MANAGER / :,� � FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT: APPEAL OF ASSESSMENT In accordance with City Code Article 9-2, Section 9-2-8 Removal by City, Mr. Louis Christensen has filed an appeal of the assessment placed against his property for non-compliance with this Article of the Code. A copy of this section of the Code is attached for your reference (Attachment #1 ) . The events surrounding this appeal are as follows: 5/14/85 Litter complaint filed and inspection of property by Building Department shows property to be in violation of Article 9-2 (Attachment #2) . 6/10/85 Letter received by Mr. Christensen notifying him of 30-day period to bring his property into compliance (Attachment #3) . 7/17/85 Reinspection by Building Department showed property still to be in violation (Attachment #4) . 7/22/85 Request to clean property in violation of Code forwarded to Public Works Operations for their action (Attachment #5) . 10/15/85 Cost of actual lot cleaning received from Public Works Operations (Attachment #6) . 11/5/85 Notice of assessment received by Mr. Christensen with 30-day appeal period (Attachment #7) . 11/20/85 Letter received from Mr. Christensen appealing assessment (Attachment #8) . 12/3/85 Appeal forwarded to City Council for review and decision. 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Appeal of Assessment (Christensen) Page 2 Mr. Christensen indicates in his letter that the property was cleaned on June 12, 1985 (Attachment #9) . Mr. Christensen did not contact the city at that time indicating that this work had been completed and that a re- inspection was in order. However, the reinspection done by the Building Department on July 17th showed there still to be a violation. Mr. Christensen 's letter also indicates that the open septic tank filled in by the city was dug by another party (John C. Johnson) to whom he had sold a portion of his land. As of November 22nd, the County Assessor's office has no such parcel number as indicated in his letter nor is there any record of such a sale. A representative of Mr. Christensen, John Gyldenvand, informed us that John C. Johnson cannot be located and he has not made any payments on the property. On November 19th in a phone call to the city, Mr. Christensen stated that the city had removed the survey stakes on his property. The property survey to place these stakes cost him more than $500.00. Mr. Gyldenvand will be at the council meeting to represent Mr. Christensen. kmc 9-2-7 HEALTH AND SANITATION 9-2-9 Sec. 9-2-7 Appeal to Council Prior to the date set for compliance on the notice, the owner or person controlling such property may appeal in writing to-the council from the demand of the clerk. The council shall, at its next regular meeting after receiving the appeal, hear and determine the same and the decision of the council shall be final . The council may either affirm or reverse the decision of the clerk or modify the scope of the work as required in the notice. Y-Sec. 9-2-8 Removal by City When any such person to whom notice, as provided in this article, has been given, and on or before the date of compliance on the notice, or within such further time as may have been granted by the council on appeal, fails, neglects or refuses to move from such property any or all litter, the clerk is authorized and directed to cause same to be removed and disposed of at the expense of the owner or person controlling such property. Upon completion of the work, the clerk shall prepare a verified statement of account of the actual cost of such removal or abatement, the date the work was completed and the street address and legal description of the property on which said work was done, including five percent for additional inspection and other incidental costs in connection therewith, and shall serve a duplicate copy of such verified statement upon the person owning or controlling such property in the manner prescribed in Section 9-2-6. The owner or person controlling such property shall have thirty days from the date of service upon him to appeal in writing to the council from the amount of the assessment as contained in the verified statement. If an appeal is not filed with the clerk within such thirty day period, then the amount of the assessment as determined by the clerk shall become final and binding. If an appeal is taken, the council shall, at its next regular meeting, hear and determine the appeal and may affirm the amount of the assessment, modify the amount thereof, or determine that no assessment at all shall be made. The aecision of the council shall be final and binding on all persons. Sec. 9-2-9 Lien for Removal If no appeal is taken from the amount of the assessment, or if an appeal is taken and the council has affirmed cr modified the amount of the assessment, the original assessment or the assessment as so modified shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder and from the date of its recording, shall be a lien on said lot or tract of land until paid. Such liens shall be subject and inferior to the lien for general taxes and to all prior recorded mortgages and encumbrances of record. A sale of the property to satisfy a lien obtained under the provisions of 110 this article shall be made upon .judgment of foreclosure or order of -69- 9-2-10 HEALTH AND SANITATION -�-'^ 4111 sale. The city shall have the right to bring an acticn to enforce the lien in the superior court at any time after the recording of the assessment, but failure to enforce the lien by such action shall not affect its validity. The recorded assessment shall be prima facie evidence of the truth of all matters recited therein, and of the regularity of all proceedings prior to the recording thereof. A prior assessment for the purposes provided in this section shall not be a bar to a subsequent assessment or assessments for such purposes, and any number of liens on the same lot or tract of land may be enforced in the same action. Sec. 9-2-10 Placement of Litter It is unlawful for any person to place any litter, rubbish, trash, filth or debris upon any private or public property not owned or under the control of said person. In addition to any fine which may be imposed for violation of any provision of this section, such person shall be liable for all costs which may be assessed pursuant to this article for the removal of said rubbish, trash, filth or debris. • -70- ^' l / , `C Oc if-/' ' , PERMIT JOB ADDRESS / �.O,�t, / ' "{ NO PE DATE / � 0 DATE WANTED S j 7 / RE INSP RCVD A FND B UNDR FLOOR C TOP OUT FRAME C 1 MASONRY ❑ 1.FOOT'S/STEEL 0 1.SOIL&WASTE ❑ 1.ELECT. ❑ 5 HTG/VENT ❑1 GROUT O 2.STEM/STEEL 0 2.WATER ❑ 2.PLUMB. ❑ 6 REFRIG WALL ❑ 3.MONO FTG. 0 3.BLDG.SEWER 0 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 ❑ 6.FENCE D INT/WALL E MOBILE HOME F POOLS I G FINAL INSPECTION ❑ 1.DRYWALL! El1.ELECTRICAL ❑ 1 PRE-GUNITE 0 1.BUILDING ❑ 6 PAT.COVI NAILING ❑2 GAS ❑2.ELECTRICAL ❑ 2 PLUMBING ❑ 7 CAR PRT1 ❑ 3.WATER ❑ 3.HEATER ❑ 3 ELECTRICAL❑8.OTHER ❑ 4.SEWER 0 4.PRE PLASTER 0 4.HTG/AC 0 9 PUMP ❑ 5.AWNING ❑5.FENCE 0 5.FENCE 0 10 SIGN ❑ 6.BLOCKING ❑ 6.PLUMBING - - OTHER:,- _. 1.,, \, et CI APPROVED /0 REJECTED CI CLEARANCE IF APPROVED 'L.- -�✓ f"``'��r� (IF REJECTED,MAKE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED GALL FOR REINSPECTION( ,/,.. -,,-47-___c -71- / /oz .3V o.s. ► I L u.i , c�. i r t`c - -,r cam.Ai v�r IQ 4 A),,..D, `5? .C , -- - i '��ss�� , I INN 1 1 I El i,r. .._.ark. ter *... ^� �• �i s > . r a 'r 4 w s 1 ., i .t '? r 4 cr Ai.- 6t ��'' w, ', tip€ t , :; 1'4. i''a , vi fir." i-'' : j :`_ -4 �► ma SE11iQ,ER• Complete items 1,2,3 end 4, 0 (-"FirkC,.H� 3 Ttl"itpace On thex `�(/ co tt thia card from --ro s" ti 1t fee will provde* 0�\ ��� ,and the date of t `4, r- g services are ~ box(es) „ ' `' F O 7 d check I 4,/ Co of delivery. 'QRIZONP it ti On L' Louis Christensen June 7, 1985 Verona, ND 58490 Louis Christensen 4. Type of Service' Article Number Verona, ND 58490 a Registered 0 insured Certified 0 COD P 183 034 920 RE. VIOLATION 0 0 Express Mail Always obtain signature of addresseegr agent and Parcel numt DATE DELIVERED e x r F - _ 6. Signature-Agent . 8 Dear Mr. Christensen: x • If 7. Date of Del•very The City of Apache Junction has received a comp -' • `\Q defined by the City Code, on property located a Z $• `Addressee's Address(ONLYifiequeatedvnd According to the Pinal County Recorder's Office fee paid) of this particular property as of the date of t m i Article 9-2 of the City Code requires that the -4 any private property shall at all times maintain tne- prtri _ In accordance with Section 9-2-5 of the City Code, you are hereby requested to take whatever steps are necessary to remove all unsightly and hazardous materials of any kind from the above indicated property within thirty (30) days from receipt of this notice. Unless steps are taken to remove the violations, the City will proceed to perform the necessary work at a cost to you to be estimated at $62.38 per hour for a minimum of four (4) hours. If you wish to appeal this notice, you must do so in writing, addressed to the Cit Council , within thirty l , (30) days from the receipt of this notice and prior to the date set for compliance. I have enclosed, for your reference, a complete copy of Article 9-2 of the City Code, a list of yard maintenance and handyman services licensed to do business in the city, and photocopies of pictures taken of the property. If you have questions or wish additional information, please contact me at (602) 982-8002. Sincerely, e.&t/ezax.J Kathleen Connelly City Clerk kmc Enclosures 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 .,...--_..>. --'�--..._._ CAL- rI f a, -& ,�Ya:�r�'t., k.ti '5, . / PERMIT NO ED 1 ❑ RE 1NSP l DATE RCVD ND B LNDR FLOOR C TOP OUT FRAME C 1 MASONRY • •s OOT'S/STEEL > i'.. TEM/STEEL ❑ 1.SOIL&WASTE 0 1 ELECT ❑ 5.HTGNENT ❑1 GROUT ❑ 2.WATER 0 2 PLUMB. ❑ 6.REFRIG. WALL K)NO FTG ❑ 3.BLDG SEWER 0 3 FRAMING ❑ 7 OTHER ❑2.GROUT v . - HKN SLAB ❑q WATER SERV ❑ 4.ROOF SHTNG F PLACE ` IRE PL ❑ 5.ELEC COND 0 CONSTR POWER 03.BOND BM ftt. • ENCE vi, • t ❑ 6.SLAB 1..4r T_ y r INT/WALL E MOBILE HOME F POOLS G FINAL INSPECTI( N g1,' •4 )RYWALL/ ❑ 1 ELECTRICAL ❑ 1 PRE-GUNITE ❑ 1 BUILDING 0 6. AT.COV JAILING 0 2.GAS ❑2 ELECTRICAL ❑ 2 PLUMBING ❑ 7 AR PRT ❑ 3.WATER 0 3 HEATER ❑ 3 ELECTRICAL❑B.OTHER ,� _ { °. ❑ 4 SEWER 0 4 PRE PLASTER ❑ 4.HTG/AC D 9.PUMP r - x - ❑ 5 AWNING v `F _ *'� ` ❑5.FENCE ❑ 5.FENCE 0 10 SIGN � .�. '• _.,� ,,y ❑ 6.BLOCKING ❑6.PLUMBING e f r , ,i -, , t*j `� �, t fir: •a' R y Y. C. j"" � I•,„ ., ^i' '1„..- '' ROVED ❑REJECTED ❑CLEARANCE IF APPROVED !EJECTED,MAKE CORRECTIONS AS NOTED CALL FOR REINSPECTION) A:-.) Z- - -- 0,5: r_- 7a,-/Lef- , Lf" // INSPECTOR SIGN `-_' DATE i �A Or _� Its i 44-- O �{ t V x u' rr I '9PIZONP (Oily o, packe &unction July 22 , 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR FROM: CITY CLERKel SUBJECT: PROPERTIES SCHEDULED FOR CITY CLEANING The following parcels have exceeded the thirty-day limit set by the City for compliance with Article 9-2 of the City Code . All of the respective property owners have been provided legal notice and have failed to comply with the City' s request or to ask for additional time to restore their properties . Therefore, I am requesting that the City clean each of the parcels . Please submit itemized bills for each parcel to me after the work has been completed. 1. Parcel No. 102-06-003 Third lot west of Royal Palm, South side of Osage Property Owner: Walter Scott Haynes 2 . Parcel No. 102-24-040 , 102-24-054 , 102-24-055 102-24-056, 102-24-087 Location: 102-24-040 - 1 lot North of 2209 S. Arizona Rd. AwaN 102-24-054 - lot West of 2323 S. Belair 102-24-055 - lot West of 2301 S. Belair 102-24-056 - lot West of 2287 S. Belair 102-24-087 - lot North of 2091 S. Cactus Property Owner: David and Dolores Ward 3 . Parcel No. 102-34-055C 1 lot West of 2831 W. 14th Place Property Owner: Louis Christensen Please contact me if you have any questions . kmc 3' Ii; �-,'t; 1C01 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 /ti rr 'ity o 94pache 09unction INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM DATE: October 15, 1985 TO: City Clerk FROM: Operations Superintendent SUBJECT: Lot Cleaning Cost The cost for cleaning the lots are as follows: 1. 102-06-003 Walter S. Haynes $280.00 2. 102-24-040 * *Properties of David and Dolores Ward 102-24-056 * *$280.00 each property 102-24-054 * 102-24-087 * 102-24-055 * 3. 102-34-055C Louis Christensen - clean lot, 10 loads of debris plus filling in large septic $491.00 -o — °I.0 ea. r 13 ® SEN KR' Complete items 1,2,3 and 4. (.// Put Yoi drew in the-RETURN TO"space on the 3 reverse side.Failure to do this will PeACHf tl being returned to Prevent this card from Cp You.The return recei t},a wilt rovide �+ tG/` it CL� ou the name of the person delivered to and the date of }fAV.� , + delivery For additional teas the tollow�np KrvrCes are O (z r.. available.Consult l9 # P Postmaster for teas and check boalea) r►` apk 6 I�� ; O .. for servicels)requested. U ' ru rl Z -' } a V _ W 1. 0Show to whom,date and address of delivery. .. ? 2. 0 Restricted Delivery. q1P/ZONP X� Zva vU 3. Article Addressed to. Louis Christensen Verona, ND 58490 November 1, 1985 4. Type of Service, Article Number Louis Christensen g Registered 0 Insured Verona, ND 58490 Certified ❑ COD P 559 211 508 0 Express Mail RE: Pa Always obtai Date of DATE DELIVERED n signature of tddr eeQagent and p 5 Si.a.tore_Ad ,� 0 Addressee / Dear Mr. Christensen: m x A %-=L1--3 Q \I�,`,-(L—,,v�,v In accordance with Article 9-2 of the Apache JI m 7 Date of Delivery of an existing violation on your above caption on the date indicated. m ��� 5 z 8 Addressee's Address(ONLY if requested and fee paid) s Your failure to bring your property into compl m the City Code within the time permitted has re f cleaned and the violations removed by the city inspection and administrative costs, as providea by OLauc ._ _ . -_ Please be advised that a thirty (30) day period is hereby established during which time you may appeal this assessment, in writing, to the Apache Junction City Council . Failure to appeal within this thirty (30) day period, or to pay the total amount due, will result in the placement of a lien against your property for the full amount. Enclosed is a copy of the section of the City Code pertaining to this appeal process. If you have questions regarding this matter or wish additional information, please contact me at (602) 982-8002. Siinncerely, ZeatZte-„) , Kathleen Connelly City Clerk kmc Enclosures 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Allk AM*. PQACHF✓G ,y . p,' City O ,Apache cT unction 'P/ZOO 6 ..` STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 9-2, SECTION 9-2-8 OF THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, THIS DOCUMENT SHALL SERVE AS A VERIFIED STATEMENT OF WORK PERFORMED AT THE FOLLOWING PREMISES IN VIOLATION OF THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE: OWNER OF RECORD: Louis Christensen STREET ADDRESS OF PARCEL: 1 lot west of 2831 W. 14th Pl . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel No. 102-34-055C DATE OF WORK COMPLETION: October 15, 1985 ACTUAL COST OF REMOVAL: $491.00 INSPECTION, INCIDENTAL COSTS: $24.55 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $515 55 DATED THIS 1st DAY OF November , 1985. ed,&_i_e_..2,j (-1-4;4_,,ji,// KATHLEEN CONNELLY, CITY CLFK 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 crr/*" $ (41:1'\GCe$\'' / I , (Lc, ),- p 4., c -c-Q ;) Xt9-(r 4_,±1 * 4CTI - +1° \r-trp .v.p.(14) \t7 ---44-Nt --f !4-N2 -cr‘ "4 '9:5221"/ efvfL P'4fN ( )744 fraipr k-s7--cY 9 7 (s_ -kJ 421 ( T -4-D rzrY'N-in t") rPrA, rPT '7x 'r-14 '\?%-") ry -)-12-7- xcivrc k I, • 9-r-57,62/v/ errT \--flrr 4 C Q/ 1)Th''vf)(if 1 r Auk — - - - /( " r _ F.f. 2: PAi.: - JOHN B GYLDENVAND 184 WINONA GYLDENVAND r'..7„.....7114111 11101 E. UNIVERSITY NO. 139 984-1875 4- 47 ,gs 19 APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 91-1/1221 Pay to the , Order of ,,,/,__•_:_dir ....0111 I $ 4t. 4441PW.F.c:.- - IF Do lars Afr `. ".....4—...VA ZIO '' Ei First Prat Interstate Bonk of Arizona,NA Mesa Office 21 6 'Iv 41 Jorl / MOW= interstate 4 E Main Vank For C-__z., i___C'ec--1/1 ‘,....e.- f,-;," 1•• _ - 1: / 2 2 1000 I 11:0 /aloe 0 2 i 3-6S ' s -0 0'00000 /6000.0 V,ICNVO.10lINIAIMBAMR MOTE FIRST INTEASTAIVSAFETY I --.A-•••11 Ciel:ti /2&." T;e/ /Oft, ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ‘1/\,' I Y11/1) / ITEM # MEETING OF 1 �' MOTION 3Y: lov) SECONDED BY: \-41/- YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO V VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ V MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 11 I MOVE THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSMENT REQUESTED BY LOUIS CHRISTENSEN BE (GRANTED/DENIED). PCFHE ✓G O A nP o U I z qR, . NrPit opacheunction zo A. . November 25, 1985 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL in THROUGH: CITY MANAGER '''1/ 4'i' FROM: CITY CLERK / SUBJECT: SELECTION OF DATES FOR WORK SESSIONS At the November 18th work session, members of the Council indicated a desire to have separate work sessions on amending Chapter 3 of the City Code per- taining to the organization of the city departments, the future plans for a city hall complex, and goals for the city including transportaion, water, sewer and sanitation. It was not decided at that time when to hold these work sessions. The following days are those on which the Council Chambers is available in the evening (after 5:00 p.m. ) if the Council wishes to select any of these dates for a work session: Friday, December 6 ..... Wednesday, Thursday, Friday• December 11 , 12, 13 Wednesday, Thursday, Friday: December 18, 9 20 Thursday, Friday: December 26 and 27 Monday, December 30 In making the motion to hold these work sessions, the date, time and location should be mentioned. The subject matter should also be included. AP Agenda Approved by ---=— kmC Date Item # Consent Agenda — Pubiic Hearing — Otd Business /- 3/k New Business 1-�-- Postponed Item — 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 01\ \ l y ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY : \IN SECONDED BY! d`i- YES, NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ &ON-Peq,LOOYAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 12 I MOVE THAT A WORK SESSION BE HELD ON , AT , FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY CODE; AND THAT A WORK SESSION BE HELD ON , AT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING FUTURE PLANS FOR A CITY HALL COMPLEX; AND THAT A WORK SESSION BE HELD ON , AT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING GOALS FOR THE CITY TO INCLUDE TRANSPORTATION, WATER, SEWER AND SANITATION, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. p Amw ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ' tJ (AV) ITEM i MEETING OF r MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: 6 -t- /YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ ✓ COUNCILMAN BALJO I 1 VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL t/ COUNCILMAN EIDSON j// MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Amok CEMMIL ITEM NO. 13 I MOVE THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M. , AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. , ON DECEMBER 16, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M. , ON DECEMBER 17, 1985, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Large map not scanned Map is available in the City Clerk's Office ITEM NO. 15 I MOVE THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT P.M. ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES \ 104 ITEM MEETING OF ,19_ -1'( MOTION BY ; \\\\M' SECONDED BY; rtilei"(y YES NO A3STAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN JIMENEZ yCAPSI'L'WOMAN TAYUOR COUNCILMAN BALJO \\\If VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL J UNANI"^ US IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Y ROLL CALL 102# 13 ROLL CALL PRESENT ABSENT l W.S. MAYOR HILL • PVICE—MAYOR BAKKEDAHL / V COUNCILMA�,� JIMENEZ � / / COUNC I NOMAN TAYLOR / / r COUNCI LWOMAN GARDNER 7 , / ' COUNCILMAN B.AL-J0_ t/i_ / ,'COUNCILMAN EIDSON 1 J Hi TOTAL 69 i 1 STAFF PRESENT .S. CITY MANAGER MICHAEL J. MCNULTY ✓ / CITY CLERK Kathy Connelly /-- —7::;-4fr ' FINANCE CONTROLLER Keith Lewis Atk /' DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Chuck Newcomer /\._ ' 4 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFTEY Bill McDaniel / I� . DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS Rich Broman // CITY ATTORNEY Mr. Alexander/Mr. Hirsch / c))6V . ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST John Schoeph I j CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK � I NAME: d111v DATE: L, 2 - / 9 Es' iz ADDRESS: /7//- j •7i /'ai AGENDA ITEM: a'- -d I D 0,- 3 f - G ;5 S 10/607 AI:0 A,12/7J 1-d_Lati l2P -4,-1.) V CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: DATE: ADDRESS: ;7---10 AGENDA ITEM: //66°1-r/L