Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 12.16 City Council Regular Agenda CA`HE✓ ,� /'� �G�1 Pi_ ;=ILL OUT A "REQ�-ST TO SPEAK" IF YOU WISH ' n� T' 'RESS TEE COUNCIL AT CALL TO -THE PUBLIC OR n. 0 NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEM. r 'v ,ham�ik., z IZONP c i'il,>- 4*--' CpCIC`lG ccdunction Li APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 DECEMBER 16, 1986 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 Regular Meeting of December 2, 1986 INTRODUCTION OF DISTINGUISHED VISITORS AND GUESTS AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS CALL TO THE PUBLIC CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. APPLICATION FOR SMALL GAME BINGO LICENSE, APACHE TRAIL KOA 4. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 552, SWAP MEET VENDOR APPLICATION FEES (With the Emergency Clause)(Postponed Item) 5. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 553, AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY CODE, CITY MANAGER (With the Emergency Clause)(Postponed Item) 6. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 554, PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 86-45, CITY EMERGENCY OPERATION PLAN (With the Emergency Clause) 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 556, ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMIT ON TOMAHAWK ROAD FROM U.S. HIGHWAY 60 TO BROADWAY AVENUE (With the Emergency Clause) 8. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 557, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 486, PZ-3-86, ADULT USES 9. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 558. -42-86, Application by Hoy and Genevieve Stump to rezone a 11 acre el , located on the northeast corner of Junction Street and Tomaha, 3ad. from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence Zone. OLD BUSINESS 10. APPOINTMENTS TO ALTERNATIVE FUNDING AD-HOC COMMITTEE (Postponed Item) 11. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCILMEMBER (Postponed Item) NEW BUSINESS 12. DIRECTION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO AMEND REGULATIONS OF AGE SPECIFIC OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS 13. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH RETIRING COUNCILMEMBERS HEALTH INSURANCE 14. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH BID PROCEDURES FOR SECURITY CAMERAS AND MONITORS FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT 15. AWARD OF BID FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS 16. ACCEPTANCE OF RESIGNATION FROM AND APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 17. ACCEPTANCE OF RESIGNATION FROM PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 18. REQUEST FOR USE OF COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY FOR POLITICAL PURPOSE 19. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH BID PROCEDURES FOR COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH (C.A.D. ) AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SOFTWARE PROGRAM 20. FINAL APPROVAL FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PZ-67-85, ACACIA VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK 21. EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, JANUARY 5, 1987 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, JANUARY 6, 1987 22. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) REQUESTS OF COUNCIL 23. ADJOURNMENT "THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR TAKING AN INTEREST IN YOUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE COME AGAIN AND BRING FRIENDS." CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 2, 1986 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on December 2, 1986, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law CALL TO ORDER Amok Mayor Hill called the meeting to order at 7.00 p.m. INVOCATION Councilman Eidson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilman Baljo led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present: Councilwoman Gardner Councilman Baljo Councilman Eidson Councilwoman Taylor Vice Mayor Bakkedahl Mayor Hill Staff Present Acting City Manager/City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney David Alexander Controller Keith Lewis Director of Public Safety Bill McDaniel Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer Director of Public Works Rich Broman Director of Community Services Jeff Bell Economic Development Specialist John Schoeph Deputy City Clerk Lori Clark Business License Clerk Elaine James Others Present Mr. Roy Hudson 2084 W. 9th Avenue Apache Junction, Arizona Mr. Dave Watson 1800 W. Apache Trail Apache Junction, Arizona Mr. Charles E. Spaulding 4753 N. Saguaro Drive Apache Junction, Arizona Mr. Mike Sleeseman 1863 S. Buena Vista Apache Junction, Arizona Ms Carolyn Laycox 9040 E. Crescent Apache Junction, Arizona Ms Betty Finnell 473 N. Palo Verde Apache Junction, Arizona REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 1 Mr. Robert Wilkening 702 93 Way Mesa, AZ Mr. Dave Workman 6374 E. Southern Ave Apache Junction, Arizona Ms Sandra Smith 3575 N. Prospector Apache Junction, Arizona "NI\ Mr. Lesley E. Coulter 1518 E. Kael St. Mesa, AZ Ms Paula Cargola 655 E. 29th Apache Junction, Arizona Ms Joyce Carpenter 9736 E. Edgewood Mesa, AZ Mr. Dan Rafferty 10638 E. Boulder Apache Junction, Arizona Mr. Jerry Burgess 349 S. Saguaro Apache Junction, Arizona ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, AND 5 BE ACCEPTED, EXCEPT THAT ITEMS NO. 9 AND 14 BE MOVED TO BEFORE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE REGULAR MEETING AGENDA. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried. Introduction of Distinguished Visitors and Guests Mayor Hill acknowledged Sandi Smith, Schoolboard member, former councilmembers Jerry Burgess and Thomas Damiano, and State Representative Roy Hudson. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mr. Jimmy Eidson addressed the Council refuting a statement made by Councilwoman Gardner at the previous regular meeting, and opposing an interview on a radio station with Mayor Hill regarding the ban of that radio station on school buses. Mr. Roy Hudson, 2084 W. 9th Avenue, Apache Junction, spoke in regards to rumors involving himself, and volunteered to submit to a polygraph denying these rumors. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 2 Mr. Dave Watson, 1800 W. Apache Trail, Apache Junction, owner of Henry's Tastee Freeze, requested an additional turn-around west of the new intersection at Apache Trail and Highway 88 Mr. Charles E. Spaulding, 4753 N. Saguaro Drive, Apache Junction, representing Cross Roads Baptist Church, Community Christian, and Assembly of God, addressed Mayor Hill asking if the Mayor's interview on the radio was representing the City. Amok CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Acting City Manager Kathleen Connelly stated that official notification has been received from Governor Babbitt of the award of a Community Development Block Grant to the City of Apache Junction in the amount of $150,000, which is to be used for the construction of a center for the handicapped, and further that December 8th in the Chamber of Commerce Building, a Public Forum will be held with Mayor Hill, Vice Mayor Bakkedahl, and Councilwoman Gardner, and announced that the public is welcome to attend. APPOINTMENT OF CITY MANAGER _ ) ) Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT BILL DEVEE BE APPOINTED CITY MANAGER, EFFECTIVE APPROXIMATELY 45 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT; I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE SALARY BE ESTABLISHED AT $52,000 PER YEAR AND THAT THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill introduced Mr. DeVee to the public. City Attorney David Alexander stated that members of the press have inquired with regards to the resume of Mr DeVee, and informed them that Mr. DeVee has copies to distribute should they wish to obtain it. osomk PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 552, SWAP MEET OPERATIONS (With the Emergency Clause) ) Acting City Manager/ City Clerk Kathleen Connelly explained that this ordinance amends the City Code with regards to business license requirements, requiring swap meet vendors to obtain a business license and pay sales tax, and further explained options that may be included in the ordinance. Councilwoman Taylor requested that information be read pertaining to petitions submitted by swap meet vendors. Mayor Hill opened the hearing to the public. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone wishing to speak on this item. Mr Mike Sleeseman, 1863 S Buena Vista, Apache Junction, General Manager of Apache Park N' Swap, addressed the Council with statistics in regards to sales and vendors at the swap meet, and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 3 10"-s requested that this ordinance be postponed until a committee may be formed to discuss this proposal. Ms Carolyn Laycox, 9040 E. Crescent Avenue, Mesa, Arizona 85208, representing the retired vendors at Park N' Swap, spoke opposing the proposed business license requirement. Ms Betty Finnell, 473 N Palo Verde, Apache Junction, Park N' Swap vendor, addressed the Council stating that the business license application fee is unjustified due to the small profits made at the swap meet, and also requested postponement of the ordinance. Mr. Robert Wilkening, 702 93 Way, Mesa, addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed business license requirement. Mr. Dave Workman, 6374 E. Southern Avenue, Apache Junction, Park N' Swap vendor, argued that the space fee is more than a business license fee would be. Ms Sandra Smith, 3575 N Prospector, Apache Junction, owner of Copperstate Trading Post, addressed the Council requesting that a committee be formed to come up with a fair solution, and volunteered to serve on such a committee. Mr Lesley E Coulter, 1518 E. Kael St., Mesa, Park N' Swap vendor, Central U.S. Wholesale Distributing, addressed the Council stating that profits made at the swap meet are minimal, and requested postponement of the adoption of this ordinance. Ms Paula Cargola, 655 E. 29th, a swap meet vendor, spoke in opposition to the business license requirement at Park N' Swap. Mr. Sleeseman again addressed the Council, stating that Apache Park N' Swap is in favor of enforcing the payment of sales tax, and explained that the Business License Clerk had selected at random cards from the Park N' Swap files for the purpose of research, with his permission. Ms Joyce Carpenter, 9736 E. Edgewood, Mesa, explained the procedure for application with the State for a sales tax number. B siness License Clerk Elaine James, /°N thanked Mr. Sleeseman for his cooperation. There being no one else wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 552, BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1986, AND THAT MAYOR HILL APPOINT A STUDY COMMITTEE OF FIVE PEOPLE THIS EVENING TO BRING A REPORT TO THE COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 16TH. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. Councilman Baljo amended the motion: THAT THE REPORT BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK BY DECEMBER 12, 1986 Councilwoman Gardner seconded the amendment VOTE (on amendment): Unanimous REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 4 r--s VOTE (on the motion) Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill appointed the following persons to the Study Committee: Sandi Smith, Mike Sleeseman, Betty Finnell, Acting City Manager, Councilwoman Gardner /O Mayor Hill recessed the meeting at 8 02 p.m Mayor Hill reconvened the meeting at 8:17 p.m. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 528, PZ-30-86, FOLSOM AND RAFFERTY Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer briefed the Council on the application for rezoning of two combined parcels of 2 1/2 acres located on South Royal Palm Road approximately 330 feet south of Southern Avenue, from General Rural to CR-2 (MH) Single Family Residence Zone, and stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial of the rezoning. Mr Dan Rafferty, 10638 E Boulder, Apache Junction, applicant, addressed the Council requesting approval of the rezoning. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application. Mr. Jerry Burgess, 349 S. Saguaro, Apache Junction, spoke in favor of the application. There being no one else wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 528, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. Amok VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-30-86, FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-2 (MH) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO 528, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT: THAT THE NORTH 25 FEET, AND 20 FOOT CUT-OFF OF PARCEL ONE BE DEDICATED FOR STREETS AT ROYAL PALM AND 25TH AVENUE. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 5 s ,ommk oink* Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl stated that the Council should not deny this request, as it complies with the General Plan. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 550, TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (With_Emergency Clause)_ ) ) Director of Public Works Rich Broman explained that this ordinance allows the installation of stop signs at various locations throughout the City. Mayor Hill asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Hill closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 550, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, 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: IL ORDINANCE NO. 550, 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, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 550, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 551, AMENDING CITY CLASSIFICATION PLAN ) Acting City Manager/ City Clerk Kathleen Connelly explained that this is a request for reclassification of a particular employee in the Economic Development Department, from a Secretary I to a Secretary II, with a total cost for the remainder of the budget year of S515.82, which will come out of the departmental budget. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 551, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 6 VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows ORDINANCE NO. 551, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, REPEALING ANY Amok CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 551, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO 553, AMENDING CITY CODE, CITY MANAGER (With the Emergency Clause) ) Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO 553, BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1986, AND THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ACTING CITY MANAGER TO MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, TO REFLECT THE ADOPTED PROVISIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER CONTRACT AS REQUIRED Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS None. /111.6, NEW BUSINESS SELECTION OF DATE FOR MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW_ Councilwoman Taylor explained that this item was requested, as it would be an opportunity to review the current budget and discuss with staff Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT A MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW BE HELD AT 7:00 P.M., ON JANUARY 15, 1987, AND ALSO JANUARY 29, 1987, IF NEEDED, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried. DESIGNATION OF DATE FOR GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 7 Ms Connelly stated that to meet legally required advertising, it is necessary for a date to be set for a public hearing on the General Plan, and suggested February 5, 1987 Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT A GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 5, 1987, AT 7 00 P.M., AT FOUR PEAKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATIVE FUNDING TASK FORCE _ ) Councilwoman Taylor explained that the citizens should be involved with researching alternative methods of financing city projects and essential operations, and suggested forming a task force to address these matters. Ms Connelly suggested a smaller group of people consisting of five people with staff in an advisory capacity. City Attorney David Alexander stated that in his opinion, there should not be official committee members of any committee that are not residents of Apache Junction, unless those members are non-voting Councilwoman Taylor stated that non- voting members should be able to express their opinion, even though they may not vote on the issue. Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT THE CITY CLERK BE DESIGNATED THE STAFF COORDINATOR FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND THAT THE FOLLOWING STAFF SERVE IN AN ADVISORY NON-VOTING CAPACITY BUSINESS LICENSE CLERK; AND THAT THE CITY CLERK ACCEPT TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, A BUSINESS OWNER WHO IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, A CITY RESIDENT (CONSUMER), A MEMBER OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TEAM, COUNCILMAN EIDSON, AND A NON-VOTING PERSON AT LARGE; I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE APPOINTMENTS TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE BE MADE AT THE DECEMBER 16TH COUNCIL MEETING BY MEANS OF TALENT BANK APPLICATIONS AND LETTERS OF INTEREST BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL BY THE CITY CLERK. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. EXPIRATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PZ-20-81 (ORDINANCE NO. 120) ) Director of Planning Chuck Newcomer stated that this planned development located at North Ironwood and Smoketree, was zoned TH/PD in 1981 with a proposed subdivision, but the planned development was not constructed and it is recommended that the parcel revert to an (MH) designation Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR REZONING CASE PZ-20-81 (ORDINANCE ND. 120) HAS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 8 r—s Ark EXPIRED AND THEREFORE SHALL BE REVERTED TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CR-2 (MH), THIS CLASSIFICATION BEING DEEMED AN APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION FOR THE SUBJECT SITE. Councilwoman Taylor seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. AWARD OF BID FOR PROSPECTOR PARK CONCESSION STAND Director of Community Services Jeff Bell explained that two bid were received for Prospector Park Concession Stand, and recommended the lease be awarded to Country Deli/Classic Caterers. Councilwoman Gardner MOVED THAT THE BID FOR PROSPECTOR PARK CONCESSION LEASE BE AWARDED TO COUNTRY DELI/CLASSIC CATERERS. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 86-44, IBM SYSTEM/36 OPERATING SYSTEM PROGRAM FINANCING_ Controller Keith Lewis explained that it is necessary to finance the IBM System/36 and related programs, and that this resolution requests that financing Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 86-44, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ENTERING INTO A LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF THE USE AND POSSESSION OF AN IBM SYSTEM 36 COMPUTER SYSTEM, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. Amilk VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY AND MERIDIAN ROADS ) Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated that with concerns for safety of pedestrians and motorists with present traffic and future increases, staff recommends that a vertical curb with specific driveway approaches, in compliance with the Development Guide, be constructed in conjunction with the improvements to the intersection of Broadway and Meridian Roads. Mrr. Broman also suggested not allowing parking along that particular corrido at all. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl stated that this should not require Council action, as the Development Guide is in affect, and was approved by the Council. Councilman Baljo MOVED THAT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY AND MERIDIAN ROADS ARE TO BE IN REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 9 •--s ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY DEVELOPMENT GUIDE, WHICH REQUIRES 6" VERTICAL CURBS ON SECTION LINE ROADWAY, BE CONFIRMED. Councilwoman Gardner seconded the motion. Councilwoman Taylor asked what the cost would be. Mr. Broman estimated $160,000, as there is a large drainage problem in this area. Arm..„Councilman Baljo added to the motion: THAT ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY BE ALLOWED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION. Councilwoman Gardner agreed to the addition. VOTE: In Favor. Councilman Baljo, Councilwoman Gardner, Councilwoman Taylor, Councilman Eidson, Mayor Hill Opposed: Vice Mayor Bakkedahl The motion carried SUPERSTITION FREEWAY LANDSCAPING ) Councilwoman Taylor MOVED THAT ALTERNATIVE 1 BE RECOMMENDED TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION FOR THE LANDSCAPING OF THE SUPERSTITION FREEWAY, WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES 1. OVERSEEDING 2. TRANSPLANTING OF EXISTING TREES 3. LONG-TERM GERMINATION AND GROWTH 4. POTENTIAL DUST PROBLEMS WHICH SHOULD BE CORRECTED BY USING E GRANITE 5 NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS, REQUIRING NO WATERING AND THAT STAFF BE AUTHORIZED TO COORDINATE WITH PINAL COUNTY, MARICOPA COUNTY, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO DEVELOP APPROPRIATE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING WHEREUPON THE CITY COUNCIL'S REVIEW, FURTHER ACTION WILL BE CONSIDERED. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. SEWER AND WATER ANALYSIS_ ) Mr Broman suggested a sewer and water analysis be made of the various options of benefits and consequences as well as economic consideration. Ms Connelly stated that the proposed authorization for the use of $20,000 is not budgeted this year, so should possibly be delayed until following the mid-year budget review, and expressed concerns regarding advertisement. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, THROUGH THE ACTING CITY MANAGER, TO INITIATE THE PROCESS TO SELECT A FIRM TO ASSIST THE CITY IN DEVELOPING AN ECONOMIC FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF SEWER AND WATER ISSUES AS TO UPDATED COSTS OF BOTH SYSTEMS AND FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE CITY TO SUPPORT EITHER OR BOTH, AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE ACTING CITY MANAGER TO DESIGNATE $20,000 FOR CONSULTING SERVICES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 10 Oak Orrnr Mayor Hill seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl explained his reasons for wishing a financial study Councilman Baljo stated that the funding should wait until the mid-year budget review. Vice Mayor Bakkedahl withdrew the last section of the motion, regarding designation of funds. Mayor Hill agreed to this deletion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Hill requested that staff contact Mayor Brooks and the Director of Public Works, of Mesa, to possibly meet with Councilman Baljo regarding a sewer system. EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, DECEMBER 15, 1986 EXECUTIVE SESSION, WORK SESSION, DECEMBER 16, 1986 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 15, 1986, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M., ON DECEMBER 16, 1986, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) None. REQUESTS OF COUNCIL Mayor Hill stated that the statement made on the radio regarding the school bus issue, was a personal conviction, and apologized for getting involved with the situation. ADJOURNMENT _ ) Vice Mayor Bakkedahl MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 9:50 P.M. Councilman Baljo seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned with general consensus *Consent Agenda Items are as follows: *1 Acceptance of Regular Meeting Agenda REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 11 *2. Acceptance of Minutes from Special Meeting of July 14, 1986 *3 Acceptance of Minutes from Special Meeting of July 23, 1986 *4. Acceptance of Minutes from Special Meeting of August 11, 1986 *5. Acceptance of Minutes from Regular Meeting of November 18, 1986 ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF , 1986, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk I p REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 12 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES (1)( ,./) ‘ki \Ci\j )1/4)e 4 \\ / P ITEM # MEETING 0' MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: / 4 YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON V COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL /I MAYOR HILL UNANI"1OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2 I MOVE THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS. 1 AND 2, BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. Amok, IN\ PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR SMALL GAME BINGO LICENSE APPLICATION ANN 2 . THE APPLICANT IS APACHE TRAIL KOA 3. WILL THE APPLICANT OR SPOKESMAN PLEASE SPEAK ON THIS ITEM . 4 . IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? 5 . IF NOT, THIS HEARING IS CLOSED . CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING CALL FOR A MOTION CALL FOR A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ROLL CALL VOTE PQ ACHF✓G 4( A ift'..,,1, ,qP `1ZONP Vity pa o che unction � December 10, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY CLERK SUBJECT- APPLICATION FOR SMALL GAME BINGO LICENSE, APACHE TRAIL KOA Attached is an application for a Small Game Bingo License, submitted by Apache Trail KOA, 1540 S. Tomahawk Road, Apache Junction, Arizona. Pursuant to Title V, Chapter 4, Article 2, of the Arizona Revised Statutes, the City Council shall hold a public hearing and recommend approval or disapproval of the application to the licensing authorization, which is the Arizona Department of Revenue. I have attached responses from the Director of Public Safety and the Apache Junction Fire Department, with their recommendations. lvc Approver for Agenda //Date Item # First Reading � �:,'6-147(p ` e:;ond Reading _Le-Public Hearing Old Business New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 Apache Junction Fire District P.O. BOX 829 150 N OCOTILLO APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 Emergency - 982-2551 Business - 982-3221 December 8, 1986 ,^ MEMORANDUM TO: APACHE JUNCTION CITY CLERKS OFFICE FROM: APACHE JUNCTION FIRE DISTRICT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU SUBJECT: INSPECTION REPORT FOR SMALL GAME BINGO LICENSE, APACHE TRAIL KOA Pursuant to a request from your office, we have examined the request for a small game bingo license for Apache Trail KOA. As an inspection was just performed July 10, 1986, and the definciencies have been or are in the process of be- ing corrected, we recommend for the approval of the li- cense. oak Res ctfully Submitted, John A. Flynn Fire Inspector JAF:pz - LEARN NOT TO BURN - ct:QACHE ✓G U a 1f *. Z ,; „ y '' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY it gR,Z`OW' p 0 cOit2 ache unction � � W E. McDANIEL Director December 3, 1986 TO: Kathy Connelly Acting City Manager/City Clerk FROM: William E. McDaniel Loel^'• Director of Public Safety SUBJECT: Application for Small Game Bingo License, Apache Trail KOA Please be advised that upon making the necessary investigation, this Department can find no reason to deny the application for a small game bingo license for the Apache Trail KOA, located at 1540 South Tomahawk Road, Apache Junction, Arizona. WEM/lla 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85219 • PHONE (602) 982-8260 jA2120Alili DEPARTMENT OF BINGO Sv V 1700 West W jLC Phoenix, Ari 85007 &402 West Congressr�OV 17 1986 Tucson, Arizona 8y - BINGO APPLICATION FOR SMALL GAMEBINGO LICENSE ARIZONA DEPT. OF REVENUE To be considered for approval, this application must be completed in its entirety. If any information is blank or incorrect the application will be returned. All information is subject to verification. FALSIFICATION OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION CONSTITUTES A CLASS 2 MISDEMEANOR. All small game bingo licenses expire at the end of the calendar year in which issued. To allow continuance of the conduct of bingo, a license must be renewed prior to December 31 of the year issued. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Approved by: Disapproved by: DATE ISSUED: LICENSE YEAR: I C i `.~ / LICENSE NO: 1 ' . PRINT IN BLACK INK OR TYPE CHECK ONE: ( ) New License ( )() Renewal Prior License No.,J,J,kAj o cL ti Fran: To: License Fees $5.00 payable to local governing body (1 time - new application) $5.00 payable to Arizona Department of Revenue (new and renewal) 1. Organization Name:P/1(f/I(_ !61 /�1 i.) if Phone: q��(1" 1� ' 2. Administrative Office Address: %.5% S. %off?4/V4c-Jl< /`TCi, Am` j 3. Mailing Address: Zov / 4. Address where bingo is to be played: S/4,n 1Q,601./r- 5. Indicate time on appropriate day(s) bingo will be played. Monday, AM/PM Tuesday, 7 AM/M) Wednesday, AM/PM Thursday, AM/PM Friday, AM/PM Saturday, AM/PM Sunday, AM/PM 6. Liquor license held: 1KNo ( )Yes If yes, type: Liquor license issued to: Revised November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. E E V Ffn NOV 17 1986 Page 2 of pages TUCSON - BINGO 7. Nairn of individual designA ppUMEME•bi atif responsibility for the proper utilization of the net proceeds of the games of bingo. (This individual must complete responsible party affidavit) Name /-; R X Gj, LD GRA) Title: A d7-2v ,� 1`?‘ Address: i S 176 S �I O r'1 A N R L:i :tiicme Phone: 9 - A p C'N Se T /I Z Office Phone: Gj�' - VU/.5' 8. Type of premises where bingo will be played. Check one. A. ( ) Rented or leased (Attach rental affidavit or agreement) Landlord Name: Phone: Address: B. (X) Owned solely by the organization. (If not owned free and clear, attach mortgage, deed of trust or purchase and escrow agreement) C. ( ) Owned jointly with other organizations. (If not owned free and clear, attach mortgage, deed of trust or purchase and escrow agreement) Mortgage Holder: t1 0 1 r Phone: Address: Co-owner Name: Phone: Address: ,^ 9. List names, addresses and phone numbers of all active members who will assume overall responsibility for conducting bingo games. Each person must submit an affidavit as a Responsible Person. No limit on number of members as Responsible Persons. Name: / SA V/ )4 O /J S Home Phone: yo/ c Address:l 6'/o S %014/i /- fr c,J;‘e 44 Work Phone: Q Y - /a/j Name: Home Phone: Address: Work Phone: Name: Herne Phone: Address: Work Phone: (If more space is needed, attach additional sheets to application) Revised November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. NOV 17 1986 page3 gycsoN -Iii4aa ARIZONA D PT. OF REVENUE 10. Identify all individuals authorized to write checks on bingo accounts. All must canplete affidavit for Responsible Party. Name: it/ 0 iJ f Hare Phone: Address: Work Phone: /0014. Name: Hare Phone: Address: Work Phone: (If more space is needed, attach additional sheets to application) 11. EXPECTED BINGO EXPENSES (A.R.S. 5-423.D.4) A. Rent of $ j)p/ per (month/hour/occasion) payable to: Name: Address: for facilities located at: B. Janitor at $,voji< per (month/hour/occasion) payable to: Name: Phone: Address: Name: Phone: Address: C. Accounting at $ 171n,c) . per (hour/occasion) payable to: Name: Phone: Address: Name: Phone: Address: D. Bingo Supplies at $ J:)/J S per payable to: Name: Phone: Address: Name: Phone: Address: Revised November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. J J Novi 7 1986 ARM BINCQoages AR A bar. ► EVENUE E. Prize payment ranging from <. 0 to to 'ti tFr .x . F. Purchase/fir of bingo equipment at $ 4.'C ! payable to: Name: ti' t i ' A, �.'(Z/_''t i� ,,^. Phone: i_ - L Address: , ,30 G. Payment for utilities (nme and address of company; account #) Elect rical: /Jo i) - # Address: Gas: yb/o,t) # Address: Water: /V p�•� # Address: Trash Removal:A/0,d b Address: 12. Individual who has overall responsibility for conduct of all the games of bingo and for the accuracy of all information contained in this application. Name: //1,1 . G . k 0 4 ! Home Phone: Q r - a!S Address: J5 5/0 S / O ,e.4 ti w iek Work Phone: q S-a -y°! S I, fl N, )( k 6 /q ,,J , being of lawful age, upon oath depose and say that I am duly authorized to sign and file this application, that I have read the foregoing application and know the contents thereof and that all information provided is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Subscribed and sworn to before me this / `1 day of 'r611 2 r, 19 i My emission expires :;ds �.��+ a, 791'19 Signature of Notary Public Revised November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. mEn E D DEPARTMENT OF �.. BINGO SECTION 1700 West Washington NflV 1 ; 198b oink ry Phoenix, Arizona 85007 & TUC. j - BINGO 402 West CongressARIZONA DEPT• OF REVEtgUE Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any manner in the conduct of anv game of bingo. If any information is blank or incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NO.11 -v t,-t ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( )CAT 7 ,R ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFIANT'S NAME f r� � �5,� -us. SOCIAL SECURITY3.2,2 -?O- LICENSEE'S NAME ,_ k AFFIANT'S PHONE /1.7r,J i- PLACE OF BIRTH Liss 7-Lc a e_'UF •—�_. _ DATE OF BIRTH e:// ;3 / DRIVER'S LICENSE NO 3'95yr(//� DATE JOINED ORGANIZATION /e!, /i 19 ?/ SEX Al HAIR COLOR h r\1, EYE COLOR -/ HEIGHT '�� WEIGHT CURRENT EMPLOYER A pin A LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT s ADDRESS %n MA /)c v,� /C� r n / - f+> - PHONE -t1c�i LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TERM OF RESIDE SA r-,- As- A ✓F FROM TO FROM TO I, �c�,/�,/- ,P S� c., , „�r , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, under penalty of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will comply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all tears and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby confirm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete and correct. Signature of Affiantn 7/ Subscribed and sworn to before rre this � 1.il day of lit re1n ic-'i'19 d b �-v corn rass?cn expires '.:+t 1i�:,:i:` i t. _ ...� ;:IV 266CA__ / Signature of Notary Public • Revised November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. IZONAT Of +� REVENUEBINGO SECTION n / , 7 1966 s. „ 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 8500 'J S vvO'; - 402 West Congress AR1Z07 'ra DPI. CF REVENUE Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any manner in the conduct of any game of bingo. If any information is blank or incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INKC Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NO. ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( )CALLER TIER ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFIANT'S NAME /, v' v ;, Ti Mit/1 ,v SOCIAL SECURITY?4„— /.- ii LICENSEE'S NAME n. AFFIANT'S PHONE (7 / - ' PLACE OF BIRTH j2//;,' �s_' ' DATE OF BIRTH 7 /,a,f'/1fz1 DRIVER'S LICENSE NOW'/4 r 2 , DATE JOINED ORGANIZATION /n/i SEX HAIR COLOR/ L D EYE COLOR �5 L U s HEIGHT S 1 < WEIGHT / CURRENT EMPLOYER / /r; iL 1-c/ LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT ADDRESS < l PHONE - LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TERM OF RESIDENCE A I- < A f).) FROM TO FROM TO I, A , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, u der penalty of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will comply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all terms and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby confirm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete and correct. Signatture of Affiant Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1V-6, day of J k c t 11 L—,Y 19 g6 My ccnnassion expires,': .__ r,7J 123.94 , Signature of Notary Public Pevibed November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. MEnEHED j5217. PIA tiny 17 1986 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BINGO SECTION TUCSON BINGO 1700 hest WashingtgIZONA DEPT. OF REVENUE Phoenix, Arizona 85007 402 West Congress Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any eiN manner in the conduct of any game of bingo. If any information is blank or incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NSE NO. ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( }CALLER ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFIANT'S NAME r02, 1.o« o r1 SOCIAL SECURITY✓/ -3 y-503 0 LICE VSEE'S NAME 4 f, ell e Tr-0 1 f kiini AFFIAN'r'S PHONE Ni, n P PLACE OF BIRTH L e ID an on k t-, sac DATE OF BIRTH/eV) 7 / /2 DRivrA 'S LICENSE NO N d / N ) DATE JOINED ORGANIZATION 6 r 1977 SEX )\ HAIR COLOR Grav EYE COLOR 6}rown HEIGHT 5"f mWEIGHT /4/0 CURRENT EMPLOYER N o n P. LENGTH OF ENTIDYMENT ADDRESS PHONE LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR1J THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TERM OF RESIDENCE RI et v\O v\ ) Kt.A 4, s CA C, FROM TO el 16LID S :Tan-, akaw \-C d : iyaelie Jed;4 7 FRai/1777 TO I, r , F5, L, n QQ ri n h , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, under penai°Ey of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will comply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all terms and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby confirm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete and correct. , i--Th y� , ..ignature of ALfix .:,ubccribed and sworn to before me this r elay of /6)Vet be7 19 0 My cotraussion expires ci L,!:.res Nov 5, 1989 __Lsis_iatx.a...c.,_.„ SignatAre r autary Public t evi:,ed November 1985, supercedcs all prc—ions e .sions. EOE E DEPARTMENT OF '" REVENUE BINGO SECTION a� �• clt 1700 West Washington T.��..SON B,hGG Phoenix, Arizona 85(f ONA DEPT OF REVEt1U6 f. 402 West Congress Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any ok manner in the conduct of any game of bingo. If any information is blank or rl incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NO. ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( )CALLER ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFIAN'T S NAME L O i 5 Yr. n L n nyin tiN SOCIAL SECURITY51, -3 -O 9l 5 LICENSEE's NAME A p a Ct1 e '7 n i) 'l AFFIANT'S PHONE N,,n e, PLACE OF BIRTH �-ct cop() (,° a W a b1 SOS DATE OF BIRTH/,11 /3L_ DRIVER'S LICENSE NO, g 1,1 X 7 DATE JOINED ORGANIZATION el- 193 C0 SEX HAIR COLOR 6,,„„on EYE COLOR G re er HEIGHT 515" WEIG T 1 / CURRENT EMPLOYER None. LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT T ADDRESS PHONE LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TE'.'�N1 OF RESIDI 10E 00 u) t G r La�� e.I' �E.! , 'C aa�5 10 7`/AO FROM i '/ TO -------- 51 L' �� �n v -\O. k a_,J K 01, /)po4E Jun4 D;y4.1 r)V 6 TO AP9,a I, I-. C i S , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, under penalty of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will comply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all terms and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby confirm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete and correct. Signature of Atfiant _uf.�cribeci and stern to before rre this p- e�''1 day of e✓f4'lh 19 r� My comcussror. e ,-lres Pg,'C;r ;:'n �'c;itC3 P;'ov 5, 1 9 Signatu:e of Notary Public Revised November 1985; supercedes all pre"ious versions. j 3ZON E Emu DEPARTMENT of NOv 1 7 1986 2dal E7E BINGO SECTION 1700 West Washington TUCSON - BP.G9 Phoenix, Arizona 854eiZONA DEFT. OF REI E';IJE 402 West Congress Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any manner in the conduct of any gain of bingo. If any information is blank or incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NO. ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( )CALLER ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFLANT'S NAME 2 7 ,- d�.,.�.�r� � -�� soclp.L S�JC[JRITY�7 -5'z y 2. 6 y LICENSEE'S NAME f r, A AFFIANT s PHONE Al G A! PLACE OF BIRTH Mr, pie ee Sp AIT C H DATE OF BIRTH /Zo/ t/ DRIVER'S LICENSE NO A/_ /o p _/ f q-3 c3"bM1E JOINED ORGANIZATION l 0 - 7 1926 SEX � HAIR COLOR g IC, EYE COLOR C rt , HEIGHT / WEIGHT fi CURRENT EMPLOYER /1) 6 Ale- LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT A,10 , `e ADDRESS PHONE LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TERM OF RESIDED / >0 5 s, p eo rnA 4 1c , FROM s To 6 T_ p(67 SA fi, 17711 FROM TO I, �a /.��,r p(C' 4r 47 , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, under penalty of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will c:a:ply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all teiii s and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby corairm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete a-na correct. 1/.4) 6-4--er;e We/1; Signauure of r,lfiant = �� L ube,r'ed and sworn to before me this /FPn day of f Uh✓2lri bevi 9g C MI ccamassion expire ' a Signa ure of notary Public Itevn,<-c' November 1985; supercedes all previo=us liE rsions. D _) 1 '� 'I _jU U I ' 7 1986 DEPARTMENT OF T��c ili �; GO REVENUE BINGO SECTION ARIZONA DEFT. OF REVENUE 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 402 West Congress Tucson, Arizona 85701 AFFIDAVIT This affidavit must be completed by each person who wishes to assist in any manner in the conduct of any game of bingo. If any information is blank or "^ incorrect, the form will be returned to you. All information is subject to verification. Proof of membership term is required. Disclosure of Social Security number is voluntary. This information will be used to establish positive identification for purposes of criminal history background checks pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes, Sections 5-404.B and C and R15-7-204. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK Check appropriate blocks corresponding to positions to be held LICENSE NO. ( )RESPONSIBLE PERSON ( )CAL'TER ( )ASSISTANT TO CALLER AFFIANT'S NAME / , -�;_ zT 4' SOCIAL SECURITY /,,5-U.^-!! '1 7 S' LICENSEE'S NAME f4 1 J , • j-/` fT AFFIANT'S PHONE 1 1 c1 PLACE OF BIRTH Ct_,o V - 1. DATE OF BIRTH ) / ! / DRIVER'S LICENSE NO - a -y</t" CbATE JOINED ORGANIZATION //' > 19 4 SEX F HAIR COLOR r, -{ EYE COLOR i3 I _c HEIGHT '.�' WEIGHT )2(,) CURRENT EMPLOYER /)(°,4,1 LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT ADDRESS PHONE LIST ALL ADDRESSES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH TERM OF RESIDENCE ‘e'. l,� 11/1 YY) Ct) t FROM/C j To / FROM TO I, /, ,, ►p, y , the above name affiant, being of lawful age, under penalty of perjury, upon oath depose and say that I will act in the capacity indicated above at games of bingo and will comply with, am knowledgeable of, and will enforce all terms and provisions of the license, Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 4, and Arizona Administrative Rules and Regulations, Title 15, Chapter 7. I hereby confirm that I have read and understand the foregoing and verify that the information and statements made herein are true, complete and correct. X" �-/I Signature of Affi4nt Subscribed and sworn to before re this /, -fi day of /1.JLThV kx r 19 My corrmission expires • , ``:. .:OV _.;9 Signature of Notary Public Pevi.ed November 1985; supercedes all previous versions. ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES id'A) ITEf1 # MEETING OF NOTION BY: � SECONDED BY: YEsI NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL �1 COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL CEEIMILL ITEM NO. 3 I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A SMALL GAME BINGO LICENSE, SUBMITTED BY APACHE TRAIL KOA BE RECOMMENDED FOR (APPROVAL/DENIAL), TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, BINGO LICENSING AUTHORITY. �•.► Agenda by —� ✓G DateItem #:::::a(-rspkCHE. � �, ) a; tiy0� U 4:, � "�ayx� �„ Old Business — 1. i �� = New Business — Postpo ed Item "` 4R/ZONP (nly oc y2pache unction November 25, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SWAP MEET VENDOR APPLICATION FEES PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 552 (WITH EMERGENCY CLAUSE) As discussed at the previous council work session, the city is presently losing a considerable amount of revenue by not licensing flea market/ swap meet vendors on an individual basis. The revenue is lost not only by not requiring a business license, but by the non-payment of sales tax. Proposed Ordinance No. 552 would enable the city to begin a vendor licensing program and would require the payment of an application fee for certain types of sales. The space fee presently in effect would remain for all vendors. Hopefully, this last provision would offset non-payment of sales tax as well as impose some kind of requirement on those vendors exempt from the actual application fee. By requiring the completion of a city business license application, a record of the vendor would be established for future sales tax collections. The designation of the fees has been deliberately left blank since the '01,' council had indicated that there would be discussion in this area. I have written the ordinance with the emergency clause since it would be wise for the city to begin its immediate implementation since we are in the time frame when the bulk of swap meet vendors are renting spaces and selling their goods. Attached for your review are copies of the potential revenues that could be realized by the city based upon certain fees, as well as a copy of the existing code provisions and a traffic count taken by Engineering. Please note that 20,420 vehicles entered the swap meet located on Apache Trail during a three-day period last weekend. This count reflects only those vehicles that used the main entrance and does not take into account any walk-in traffic. It is obvious from these counts that the city is losing a large amount of revenue each day that is continues unregulated. Elaine James will be present at the work session to bring you up-to-date on her study of vendor practices. kmc 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 PUBLIC HEARING 1. FOR ORDINANCE NO. 552 2. WILL THE ACTING CITY MANAGER 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 liN, CHF .l•. Agr^1 Approved by /''L/x. o Date Item #itt .& MZn Consent Agenda �; ' O Public Hearing U �' `�;ti Z Old Business _ ,+ ,) * :,' New 0us:ness l`�F/I,}�► ' gR�z CO t/ o� L pta%e3da unc ion December 11 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER k.„/ SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 552 -- PARK AND SWAP FEES At the December 2nd meeting, the Council postponed the public hearing on this ordinance and appointed a committee to make specific recommendations regarding vendor fees for swap meet participants with the stipulation that the committee respond in time for the December 16th meeting. The committee consisted of Sandie Smith (local business owner and member of the Chamber of Commerce, Mike Sleeseman (manager of the Park and Swap), Betty Finnell (city resident and swap meet vendor), Councilwoman Gardner and myself. The committee met on two occasions to discuss the fees and possible options. The recommendations are as follows: 1 . That the city keep the current fee of 501t per space per day, but change its name to a "city space rental fee. " 2. That a Business License Application Fee of $5.00 per year (12 month period) be established to offset the administrative costs of placing applicable vendors on the city records for sales tax monitoring and collections with the annual renewal fee set at $5.00 per year. 3. That the License Application Fee not apply to casual sales until such time that the casual sales exceed 16 days per calendar year Up to the 16 day limitation, the city space rental fee shall apply. 4. That the ordinance be written with the emergency clause, but that the vendors be allowed until Monday, January 5, 1987, 5:00 p.m. , to obtain their license for those vendors already operating. Additional recommendations not actually a part of the ordinance were that the city provide a letter to the vendors explaining the fees and license procedures, and that a listing of taxable items be distributed to the vendors to further enhance sales tax collections. The members of this committee are to be commended for their work. The 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 Park and Swap Fees Page 2 solutions were actually worked out at the first meeting and finalized at the second. It appears that these fees were considered fair and reasonable by all and the general feeling was that those vendors who will discontinue selling at the swap meet will do so to avoid the payment of the sales tax rather than to protest paying the $5.00 license application fee. It was also discovered that there may be some vendors paying state sales tax on items that are only taxable under the city regulations. This item will be placed on the December 16th agenda for your action. kmc ns ORDINANCE NO. 552 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, CHAPTER 8 BUSINESS, ARTICLE 8-6 SWAP MEET OPERATIONS, SECTION 8-6-6 SCHEDULE, REPEALING ANY CON- FLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PRO- VIDING PENALTIES, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I IN GENERAL That the Apache Junction City Code, Chapter 8 BUSINESS, Article 8-6 SWAP MEET OPERATIONS, Section 8-6-6 Schedule, shall be amended to read as follows: Section 8-6-6 Schedule A. Effective December 3, 1986, and until thereafter amended, all swap meet vendors shall pay to the swap meet pro- prietor a Business Occupational Service Tax in the amount of ' per day for each space or stall rented or leased by the swap meet vendor at the swap meet. All such fees shall be payable at the same time as the rental fees prescribed by the swap meet proprietor B Effective December 3, 1986, and until thereafter amended, all swap meet vendors renting or leasing a space or stall from a swap meet proprietor at a swap meet shall pay to the City of Apache Junction a Business License Application Fee in the amount of $ if such vendor is engaged in the sale of any new goods, objects, wares, commodities, personalties and intangibles, real estate, amusements, food concessions, services or any antique goods, objects or wares. All such fees shall be paid to the City of Apache Junction prior to the rental or lease of any such space or stall except for those vendors who have paid such rental fees prior to the effective date of this amendment All such vendors shall be required to pay eaN the Business License Application Fee prior to commencing business on their next day of operation or prior to December 8, 1986, 5 00 p m , whichever is sooner C. All such Business License Application Fees shall be based on a twelve month period, and shall be due and payable on or before the last day of the month twelve months from the month of issuance, and shall be renewable each twelve month period thereafter Delinquencies and penalties shall accrue as set forth in Section 8-5-9 of this chapter. It shall be the responsibility of the vendor to notify the city of any change in status of the business D Payment of the Business License Application Fee does not imply any exemption or exempt any vendor from payment of the Business Occupational Service Tax or Transaction Privilege Tax as set forth in this Code ORDINANCE NO. 552 PAGE ONE OF TWO A �� E. All swap meet vendors required by this article to pay such Business License Application Fee shall also be required to complete a City Business License Application upon payment of said fee 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 refer- ence 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 any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts 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 this code shall be guilty of a mis- demeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not to exceed one-thousand dollars or by imprisonment of not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be a separate offense punishable as herein above described SECTION V EMERGENCY CLAUSE It being 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 its passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 1986. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 1986 rsl\ NORMAN S. HILL Mayor ATTEST KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID F ALEXANDER City Attorney ORDINANCE NO 552 PAGE TWO OF TWO ';'n+i;:'- - (11 ... O\ 3-6-5 BUSINESS 8-6-6 a gr- . Zr D. The clerk may refuse to issue a proprietor's license for good cause z stated. oz 3,:c P. The clerk shall revoke a proprietor's license upon the swap meet N - proprietor's conviction of any violation of this article within co three years of any prior conviction of a proprietor under this Z article. • F. Before suspending or revoking a proprietor's license, the clerk shall give the swap meet proprietor prior notice, by certified mail addressed to the swap meet proprietor at the address of the licensed premises or by personal service, that a hearing to suspend or revoke the license will be held by the city clerk at a specified place, and m at a time not sooner than five days from the date of such notice. > The notice shall clearly and concisely state the grounds and reasons relied upon for revocation or suspension. The clerk shall hold the hearing at the time and place specified, unless adjourned by consent of all parties, and the licensee shall be allowed to appear in person and by counsel , offer proof, and evidence. A record shall be kept of all the proceedings at such hearing, and a transcript of all " 4 -` evidence offered shall be made and filed. No proprietor's license shall be suspended or revoked except when grounds therefore as provided in this section are satisfactorily established by the proofs offered as shown by the record of proceedings and transcript of the hearing. The decision of the clerk suspending or revoking any license shall be final . G. The clerk may suspend or revoke a proprietor's license upon evidence that a swap meet vendor is allowed to participate in a swap meet following three or more convictions of violations of this article within any three year period, unless the proprietor forbids the offending vendor from continued participation at the swap meet. Prior to suspending or revoking a proprietor's license pursuant to this subsection, the clerk shall notify the proprietor that a swap meet vendor operating upon the premises owned or controlled by the proprietor for the purpose of a swap meet sale has three or more ,"�n convictions of violations of this article within any three year period. >i(' , __ -7 - 46 '&9-1(..4) ZZ O Sec. 8-6-6 Schedule Effective September 1, 1983, and until thereafter amended, all swap meet r-.0116. - ', vendors shall pay to the swap meet proprietor a Business Occupational Service Tax in the amount of .50t per day for each space or stall rented by the swap meet vendor at the swap meet. All such fees shall be j payable at the same time as the rental fees prescribed by the swap meet o 3. proprietor. m_ —�" zc m U) -65.25- Rev. 6/84 • I ; NK-N-SWAP APPLICATION/SPACE FEE RK SHEET I 950 SPACES FOR RENT AT PARK-N-SWAP MONEY THAT WAS COLLECTED FOR 12 MONTHS AT 50t PER SPACE $25,622.50 IF THE CITY CHARGED .75¢ PER SPACE, THE INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN $38,433.75 IF THE CITY CHARGED $1.00 PER SPACE, THE INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN $51,245.00 950 SPACES X $10.00 CITY APPLICATION FEE $ 9,500.00 (PLUS) 'oli \ 950 SPACES X $15.00 CITY APPLICATION FEE $14,250.00 (PLUS) 950 SPACES X $20.00 CITY APPLICATION FEE $19,000.00 (PLUS) 950 SPACES X $25.00 CITY APPLICATION FEE $23,750.00 (PLUS) $10.00 APPL. FEE $15.00 APPL. FEE $20.00 APPL. FEE $25.00 APPL. FEi .50c $35,122.50 $39,872.50 $44,622.50 $49.372.50 .75c S47,933.75 S52.683.75 $57,433.75 $62.183.75 $1.00 $60,745.00 $65,495.00 $70,245.00 $74,995.00 THE ABOVE FIGURES SHOW WHAT THE LICENSE FEES WOULD BRING INTO THE CITY. KEEP IN MIND THAT THE MAIN INTENTION OF THE LICENSE PROGRAM AT PARK-N-SWAP IS TO START REGULATING SALES TAX COLLECTION. AT THIS TIME, THE CITY SEES VERY LITTLE REVENUE FROM THE SELLERS AT THE SWAP MEET. THE CITY IS LOSING A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY FROM NON-PAYMENT OF TAXES. A LICENSE PROGRAM CAN BE SET UP ALONG WITH OUR REGULAR BUSINESS LICENSE PROGRAM. WITH IN THE FIRST 12 MONTHS, WE SHOULD SEE A GREAT DEAL OF INCREASE IN REVENUE FROM SALES TAX. THIS CAN BE CHARTED ON A MONTHLY BASIS AND REPORTED TO THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE. 1 _1_1._ i Htc-,1-4 \Air - i Go i i:i.- i 7 '-i ; , t ::.,1 El:4f. a--, _ '_iFRi 444I 4390 FRi �µ�SAT_ /7q CI0 4g78 ShrH4 ' HU Sva1 8 07 cI 500 0 v,J 1 { 1 f EL rc EXIT :1::::F _ _ _ . ( i ! , ............._4____-,., 464 F2i, SUN) - 711-1-17-71-7-7 Ci2Ey -+ ou 1-5 ID / 340 2- -- , , 4 qv // i !? 'i i ' �:f , L _ l ; 1_ ' f { I � 000 � ' :: �Z1- ^ r , , n i Spr 315 5 10 COvk) r e-rzs -r- Ar Coco Frzi. ,!1, V1� 24 I /2EA0 /NG5 7—,--, /CZA.) i I s p! I , Y.IT, 4 <J 1, 3 O , - r 1 1 ofm. Aft. PROPOSED AMENDMENT - ORDINANCE NO. 552 SECTION 8-6-6, Subsection B: Insert the words "or used" in line 6 in between the words "new" and "goods" so that the section reads as follows: "if such vendor is engaged in the sale of any new or used goods, objects, wares, etc. " This amendment would serve to include those vendors who sell used goods on a full-time basis as a business. SECTION 8-6-6, Add a new Subsection F: "Individuals renting or leasing a space or stall at a swap meet for the purpose of selling their personally-owned household items shall be exempt from any Business License Application Fee only if such sales do not exceed sixteen days per calendar year. Such vendors shall not be exempt from the Business License Service Tax and shall be required to complete an "exempt status" license application form available at the City Clerk's office. This addition would exempt those people who sell their own personal items such as at a garage sale from paying the application fee. They would still pay the space fee as they are presently. Those individuals selling their own used goods for 16 days per calendar year or less would not pay the application fee. Ink SUGGESTED MOTION: ORDINANCE NO. 552 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 552 AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: 1 . That the title of the fee paid to the city for the rent or lease of a space or stall at a swap meet be changed to a "city space rental fee" where necessary, and that the fee remain at 50G per space per day. 2 . That the words "or used" be inserted in Section 8-6-6 , Sub- section B, line 6 after the words "of any new" . 3 . That the Business License Application Fee be set at $5 . 00 per - ' and that existing vendors be given until January 5 , 1987 , 5 : 00 p.m. to obtain their license and sales tax numbers and that the renewal fee for the license be set at $5 . 00 per year for each twelve month period. 4 . That a new Subsection F be added to read as follows : Individuals renting or leasing a space or stall at a swap meet for the purpose of selling their personally-owned household items shall be exempt from any Business License Application Fee only until such sales do not exceed sixteen days per calendar year. Such vendors shall not be exempt from the city space rental fee and shall be required to com- plete an "exempt status " license form. When such sales exceed sixteen days per calendar year, then the vendor shall be required to pay the Business License Application Fee in addition to the city space rental fee and comply with all other regulations pertaining to vendors at swap meets . ...... p ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES / (,)ifil _... J6 ./, ‘)\-) ' t4.) '4(9 '; ITEM # 1/\ MEETING OF MOTION BY: ( l)CA\rf\ SECONDED BY: Y NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO J +1/4 VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER JJ`P4EAbE�� J _ MAYOR HILL UNANI"SOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED . ABSTAINED TOTAL j ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES oP /0-6 ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED A COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL UNANITMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES agir ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY; t(i) SECONDED BY; w`t,() YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER 1/ �E�� YPI�4w YIP' J COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL UNANI^IOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ter, ITEM NO. 4 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 552, 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. ) St, 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO. 552 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 552, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED). OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 552, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1. FOR ORDINANCE NO. 553 2 . WILL THE ACTING CITY MANAGER 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 4 App.CH 0 '-t.,j1r..."#`1.0.:61Z-.) r °;zo%' i 1 /pac he ; - )unci,ton December 11 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER Vi/ SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 553 -- AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY CODE The Council postponed action on proposed Ordinance No. 553 at the December 2nd meeting in order to allow time for the review of the provisions of the City Code regarding the contract for the city manager. The City Attorney has reviewed the code and recommends that Section 3-1-2 be amended in order to accomodate the current manager's contract. This item will be placed on the December 16th agenda for your consideration. The ordinance has been written with the emergency clause in order for it to become effective immediately. kmc Agenda Approved by __._ __ Date Item rt Consent Agenda Public Hearing 4l"// -^ 5 Cld Business New Business Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE ,;L'r•1CTION, ARIZONA 35219 • TELEPHONE (002) 982-8002 rank Pp p,CHE G/►. /� V ri`�a. T .-Yr, �st "1'1 o u + 1, Z qR� NP city o� ace unction zo r November 25 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER Of SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 553 -- AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY CODE ( CITY MANAGER) The City Attorney has indicated that it may be necessary to make certain amendments to the city code regarding the terms and conditions of hiring a city manager if certain provisions are to be made in a contract between the city and a manager applicant . At this point in time , it has not been deter- mined what exactly those amendments would be . In order to meet the deadline for agenda item submittal and place consideration of such an ordinance on the agenda in accordance with the Open Meeting Law, the item has been listed on the agenda but the text is not available at this time. In the event that a code change is necessary, it will be presented to the council at the Monday work session. kmc ygd Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda sla /0 Public Hearing Old Business New Business ] _ Postponed Item `, / 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 CHAPTER 3 ADMINISTRATION Article 3-1 City Manager 3-1-1 Definitions 3-1-2 Office of City Manager Created 3-1-3 Residence 3-1-4 Eligibility 3-1-5 Bond 3-1-6 Acting City Manager 3-1-7 Compensation ^ 3-1-8 Power and Duties 3-1-9 Internal Relations • 3-1-10 Removal Procedure 3-1-11 Agreements on Employment Section 3-1-1 Definitions A. Manager. Whenever the word "manager" is used, it shall be construed to mean the city manager of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona. B. Ratification. Whenever "ratification" by the council is required under this chapter, it shall be effected only by a majority vote of the seven member city council , as then constituted, convened in a regular or special council meeting. Sec. 3-1-2 Office of City Manager Created The office of the city manager of the City of Apache Junction is hereby created and established. The manager shall be appointed by the council wholly on the basis of his administrative and executive ability and qualifications and shall hold office for and at the pleasure of the council. Sec. 3-1-3 Residence Residence in the city at the time of appointment of a manager shall not be required as a condition of the appointment, but within 120 days after reporting for work the manager must become a resident of the city unless the council approves his residence outside the city. -24.2- Rev. 6/80 rs ORDINANCE NO 553 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 3 ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 3-1 CITY MANAGER, SECTION 3-1-2 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER CREATED; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, en AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS SECTION I IN GENERAL That the Apache Junction City Code, Chapter 3 ADMINISTRATION, Article 3-1 CITY MANAGER, Section 3-1-2 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER CREATED, be amended to read as follows: Section 3-1-2 Office of City Manager Created The office of the city manager of the City of Apache Junction is hereby created and established. The manager shall be appointed by the council wholly on the basis of his administrative and executive ability and qualifications and shall hold office for and at the pleasure of the council, subject to any agreements on employment entered into pursuant to Article 3-1-11 of this chapter SECTION II RPEALING 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, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance or any part of the Code adopted herein by reference is, for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent ,jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION IV DECLARING AN EMERGENCY It is necessary for the preservation of 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 THIS DAY OF , 1986, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 1986 NORMAN S. HILL Mayor ORDINANCE NO. 553 PAGE ONE OF TWO ,.� r--s ATTEST: 17 KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk Amik APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID F ALEXANDER City Attorney I ORDINANCE NO 553 PAGE TWO OF TWO ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 9-)16#-1/ rioi‘l):4114/ ))/ITEM # MEETING 0 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER ^ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR J COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL UNANIIOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL /I\ r. ROLL CALL VOTE EET NOTES q_ / 0 i1 Lty 4 \J \( t\ \ r)q P ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: (:12j0" SECONDED BY: v Y S NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER �OC11C�Ik / COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL V J UNANI"IOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED . ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 5 —Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 553 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. 553 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 553, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 553, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 554 2. WILL THE DIRECTOR OF 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 rsACHE do '� ZOO O DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY gRIZONP V ity o ache &9unction W E McDANIEL November 25 , 1986 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Public SafetylaJ THROUGH: City Manager 0.1 SUBJECT. City Emergency Operation Plan On October 1st. , 1985 , the City Council passed Ordinance #432 dealing with Emergency Powers and Authority. Since that time the Public Safety Department along with the State Department of Emergency Services and the Apache Junction Fire District have written an Emergency Operations Plan for the City. The plan has now been completed and is attached for your review �" Ordinance #554 and Resolution #86-45 if passed will formally adopt the plan for the City. Approver for Aaenda_thL.--- �e Rend! Reading a Second r.eezimg V Public Hearing Old Business New Business Consent Agenda 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982.8260 3 ORDINANCE NO. 554 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY /ak BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS SECTION I IN GENERAL That certain document known as the CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN, three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, which was made a public record by Resolution No. 86-45, is hereby adopted as if fully set out in this Ordinance. 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 the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof SECTION IV EMERGENCY CLAUSE Whereas, the immediate operation of the provisions of this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of the public health and safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this ordinance shall be in full force upon and after its passage by the Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 1986. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 1986 NORMAN S. HILL Mayor ATTEST KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID F. ALEXANDER City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 86-45 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING AS A PUBLIC RECORD THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENT FILED WITH THE Aso, CITY CLERK AND ENTITLED CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT: That certain document entitled City of Apache Junction Emergency Operations Plan, three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, are hereby declared to be public record and said copies are ordered to remain on file in the office of the City Clerk. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 1986 SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 1986. NORMAN S HILL Mayor ATTEST KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM DAVID F. ALEXANDER City Attorney fx ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES , , ►I , L; , ( "1 / � 0 ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YE NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON V COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER Ajkyvt'aFz`/ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL \JI UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOTE FEET NOTES ' r %Y9 I I ITEM # MEETING OF «l MOTION BY: r SECONDED BY : Y S ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL J COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER At COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 6 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 554, 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. 554, BY TITLE ONLY. S1 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 554, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED) . OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 554, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: I FURTHER MOVE THAT RESOLUTION NO. 86-45, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING AS A PUBLIC RECORD THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENT FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK AND ENTITLED CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR _QRDINANCE NO._556 . 2 . WILL THE DTRFCTOR_OF PUBLIC WIRKS 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 (11-1P,CHE✓Gti F► 1 r + j f O U •A �A ii'; z 'gPIZONP' (Oily o &4pache 02unctian DECEMBER 4, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: LTING CITY MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY REGARDING: ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMIT ON TOMAHAWK ROAD FROM US HIGHWAY 60 TO BROADWAY AVENUE. Having been requested to perform traffic counts, Traffic Investigation Report and speed studies for Tomahawk Road, from Highway US 60 to Broadway Avenue, Engineering has obtained the following data: Highway US 60 to Broadway 1 . Traffic count 11/17/86 to 11/18/86 771 2. Street intersections 1 (12th Ave. ) 3. Driveway entries 0 4. Business entries 1 (Sun Unlimited) 5. 85 percentile speed 40 MPH 6. Visibility Open/clear 7. Physical features New pavement In comparison, the posted speed limit on Tomahawk Road, North of Broadway is presently 35 MPH. This section has several residences and two apartment complexes. Considering the above, it is recommended that the speed limit be placed at 40 MPH. Attached for your consideration is Ordinance Number 556 establishing the 40 MPH speed limit. /� Agenda Approved by Date Item 4 Consent Agenda RWB/cmc HearingPublio i7' /ic 7 Old Business New Business Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85219 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 WorlEr ORDINANCE NO 556 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING THE SPEED LIMIT ON TOMAHAWK ROAD BETWEEN U S HIGHWAY 60 AND BROADWAY AVENUE; 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 speed limits are necessary for the public safety, therefore, the speed limit be established at 40 M.P.H. on. Tomahawk Road, between Highway U S 60 and Broadway Avenue. Furthermore, the Director of Public Works and the Director of Public Safety are hereby empowered and directed to initiate appropriate action to install the speed limit signs and enforce the speed limits on the referenced streets. 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 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 , 1986 "SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 19 Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST Kathleen Connelly, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David F Alexander, City Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 7's J0—i l(Ps v3\ 11 (f) I/\ ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: NIAA, SECONDED BY: NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V/ COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER v MAYOR HILL UNANIIOUS IN FAVOR, OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ,... ROLL CALL VOTE SH T NOTES / V /6 .1, .. ili/x/ u\)\)) ITEM ## 1 MEETING SF A � MOTION BY: (j\\ ,Aik�v ' SECONDED BY: ./ YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR .•. COUNCILMAN BALJO 1 VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL ‘s/ COUNCILMAN EIDSON i COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL J UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL grai a ITEM NO. 7 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 556, 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. 556 TO READ BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 556, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED). OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 556, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: �► /r. PUBLIC HEARING 1. FOR _ORDINANCE NO._,557 2. WILL THE rTRFCTOR OF PLANNING 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 dram Ikk ROLL CALL VOTE ,do% / , O� Pe ACHE JG2 U f��,:,[i. oIii, z y f- ' Pizol- P amity o C pache 0)unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 8, 1986 A".. MEMORANDUM TO. HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH. KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM• ON/CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 16, 1986 - PZ-3-86 ADULT USES - ORDINANCE NO. 557 - REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 486 BACKGROUND Ordinance No. 486 has an effective date of January 6, 1987. At the October 7, 1986 City Council meeting, the Coucil directed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review the Ordinance and make a recommendation to the Council . At the November 25 Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed a staff recom- mended draft amendment to the Ordinance. In your packet is Ordinance No. 486 as adopted and the amended version as recom- mended by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission (proposed Ordinance No. 557) . The major differences between Ordinance No. 486 and Ordinance No. 557 is in: 1 . definitions of adult uses - the amended definitions more strictly define .-+. adult uses to eliminate the typical convenience market or video store which may stock a few adult magazines or movies; 2. adding wording explaining the purpose of the regulations; and 3. permitting them in the C-4, CI-1 , and CI-2 zoning districts to allow for ample, available locations for adult uses. These recommendations are based on what we perceive as defensible in light of U.S. Supreme Court cases dealing with the subject. Materials on these cases are included in your packet for review. The City Attorney may have some additional comments. Agenda Approved by A--' Date Item # Consent Agenda • Public Hearing 4,ti> ' Old Business New Business Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA I. M - DEC. 16, 1986 - PZ-3-86 ORD. NO. 5E, PAGE TWO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of November 25, 1986, after public hearing, adopted the following motion• (M/S Taylor/Jorgensen 5-0-0) "I recommend that for PZ-3-86, we send the draft of Ordinance No. 486 in relation to adult uses forward to the City Council as submitted with the recommendation that they adopt this, and adding to this recommendation that we allow these adult uses which are taken care of in this Ordinance, to be conducted only within the zoning districts of C-4 or Industrial . The reasons for this recommendation are: 1 . If it was allowed in the other Local Commercial or General Commercial areas there wouldn't be any place for them to go, so we would be basically not allowing them. 2. By allowing them in Industrial and C-4, we're giving them quite a bit of area that's potentially available for their use. 3. By putting them in these areas we will not be infringing on anybody's free speech, we just want to put them in a certain designated area. CRN:jo r /ft. (irsq\CH6-✓G n o ° 4 i f FOB= z r , AlRjzoN c iti c &f ache �iuncticn G October 31 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DIRECTOR il FROM: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST t;k SUBJECT: ADULT ACTIVITIES ZONING ((JJ Any proposal to allow adult activities in CI-1 or CI-2 zoning districts would be seriously detrimental to the goal of attracting light manufacturing employment to Apache Junction. Allowance of such activities would: 1) Discourage reputable business firms from locating in the same vicinity; 2) Tend to breed clustering of related business activities and adjoining development; 3) Downgrade the neighborhood and undermine community image; 4) Send a message equating manufacturing and pornographic activities as compatible land uses; 5) Forfeit any realistic chance for quality manufacturing firms .-. to locate in what is already a limited supply of industrial land within or adjacent to the city; 6) Bring attention to availability of tracts of land outside the city limits under county planning and zoning jurisdiction. (What restrictions do Pinal County and Maricopa County have on location of adult activities?) Although I am not aware of all the legal factors which may be pressing the City to provide locations for adult activities, it would be a travesty for the City to trade off its industrial potential for an expedient remedy to a social issue. It would be my hope that the City would coordinate with both Pinal and Maricopa Counties to protect industrially-zoned lands from the encroachment of adult activities. JMS:bsp c: Acting City Manager 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85219 • TELEPHONE (602) 982 8002 worm! OIN ORDINANCE NO. 557 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING ORDINANCE, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 486 AND ADOPTING IN LIEU THEREOF ORDINANCE NO 557, BY AMENDING AND ADDING TO SECTION 5.0101, BY AMENDING AND ADDING TO SECTION 16 0604 (3), BY ADDING SECTION 17 0111, AND BY ADDING SECTION 17 0211, 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 /11.1 SECTION I IN GENERAL The Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance is amended by amending and adding to Section 5 0101, by amending and adding to Section 16 0604 (3), by adding Section 17.0111, and by adding Section 17 0211 to read as follows. Section 5 0101 Add in their proper alphabetical sequence to read ADULT USES For the purposes of this Ordinance, adult uses are ADULT BOOKSTORE An establishment a Having as a substantial or significant portion of its stock in trade for sale, barter or rental, books, magazines, other periodicals, films or videotapes which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matter depicting, describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas", or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material, or b Having as a substantial or significant portion of its stock in trade for sale, barter or rental, books, magazines, other periodicals, films or videotapes and which excludes minors by virtue of age from the premises or a section thereof. ADULT THEATER An enclosed building a. Regularly used for presenting for observation by patrons therein any film or plate negative, film or plate positive, film or tape designed to be projected on a screen for exhibition, or films, glass slides or transparencies, either in negative or positive form, designed for exhibition by projection on a screen, or any type of viewing booth or equipment, distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to "specified sexual activities" or "specified anatomical areas", or b. Regularly used for presenting for observation by patrons therein any film or plate negative, film or plate positive, film or tape designed to be projected on a screen for exhibition, or films, glass slides or transparencies, either in negative or positive form, designed for exhibition by projection on a screen, or any type of viewing booth or equipment and which regularly excludes minors by virtue of age from the premises. The following definitions are applicable to the definition of "adult uses" SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal, act of human masturbation, sexual intercourse, or sodomy, fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttock or female breast. SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS. Less than completely and opaquely covered human genitals, pubic region, buttock, and female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola, and human male genitals in a discernibly turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered. �s Section 16.0604 (3) add in the proper alphabetical sequence to read. Adult Uses a In order to diminish the adverse secondary effects of adult uses on the community, the harmful effects on neighborhoods and contribution to neighborhood blight, including increases in crime and a diminution of property values, to not suppress free speech, nor unreasonably limit alternative avenues of communication, and to provide ample available sites for such uses, conditional use permits for adult uses shall be subject /mk to all of the following additional requirements 1. No adult use shall be located within 1000 feet of any of the following uses. a. Churches, synagogues, and any other religious institu- tion, b. Public or private school or college; c Public parks or playgrounds, d. Conforming or non-conforming residential use or any residential zoning district, e Another adult use, f. Any establishment selling alcoholic beverages. b For the purposes of this section, measurement from the proposed adult use shall be made from that portion of the adult use, including projections therefrom, that is closest to the property line of any use listed in 1 above or to the property line of any land in any residential zoning district c These provisions shall not be construed as permitting any use or act which is otherwise prohibited or made punishable by law. add Section 17.0111 to read Section 17 0111 USES SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Adult Uses a In order to diminish the adverse secondary effects of adult uses on the community, the harmful effects on neighborhoods and contribution to neighborhood blight, including increases in crime and a diminution of property values, to not suppress free speech; nor unreasonably limit alternative avenues of communication, and to provide ample available sites for such uses, conditional use permits for adult uses shall be subject to all of the following additional requirements. 1. No adult use shall be located within 1000 feet of any of the following uses: a. Churches, synagogues, and any other religious institu- tion; b Public or private school or college, c. Public parks or playgrounds, d. Conforming or non-conforming residential use or any residential zoning district, e. Another adult use, f Any establishment selling alcoholic beverages, OIN b For the purposes of this section, measurement from the proposed adult use shall be made from that portion of the adult use, including projections therefrom, that is closest to the property line of any uses listed in 1 above or to the property line of any land in any residential zoning district c These provisions shall not be construed as permitting any use or act which is otherwise prohibited or made punishable by law add Section 17 0211 to read Section 17.0211 USES SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Adult Uses a. In order to diminish the adverse secondary effects of adult uses on the community, the harmful effects on neighborhoods and contribution to neighborhood blight, including increases in crime and a diminution of property values, to not suppress free speech, nor unreasonably limit alternative avenues of communication, and to provide ample available sites for such uses, conditional use permits for adult uses shall be subject to all of the following additional requirements 1 No adult use shall be located within 1000 feet of any of the following uses a Churches, synagogues, and any other religious institu- tion; b Public or private school or college, c. Public parks or playgrounds, d Conforming or non-conforming residential use or any residential zoning district; e Another adult use, f. Any establishment selling alcoholic beverages b For the purposes of this section, measurement from the proposed adult use shall be made from that portion of the adult use, including projections therefrom, that is closest to the property line of any use listed in 1 above or to the property line of any land in any residential zoning district. c. These provisions shall not be construed as permitting any use or act which is otherwise prohibited or made punishable by law 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 3 000.6. Auk SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 19 . Norman S. Hill Mayor ATTEST• Kathleen Connelly City Clerk Assok APPROVED AS TO FORM David F Alexander City Attorney II /1.1%, AN*. Amok ORDINANCE NO 486 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 5.0101 AND BY ADDING SECTION 17.0111, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, Amok ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I IN GENERAL The Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Ordinance is amended by amending Section 5.0101 and by adding Section 17.0111 to read as follows Section 5 0101 Add: ADULT USES For the purposes of this Ordinance, adult uses are: ADULT BOOKSTORE An establishment a Having as a portion of its stock in trade for sale, barter, or rental, books, magazines, other periodicals, films or videotapes which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material, or b. Having as a portion of its stock in trade for sale, barter or rental, books, magazines, other periodicals, films or videotapes and which excludes minors by virtue of age from the premises or a section thereof ADULT THEATER An enclosed building a. Regularly used for presenting for observation by patrons therein any film or plate negative, film or plate positive, film or tape designed to be projected on a screen for exhibition, or films, glass slides or transparencies, either in negative or positive form, designed for exhibition by projection on a screen, or any type of viewing booth or equipment, distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities", or b. Regularly used for presenting for observation by patrons therein any film or plate negative, film or plate positive, film or tape designed to be projected on a screen for exhibition, or films, glass slides or transparencies, either in negative or positive form, designed for exhibition by projection on a screen, or any type of viewing booth or equipment and which regularly excludes minors by virtue of age from the premises. The following definition is applicable to the definition of "adult uses". SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal, act of human masturbation, sexual intercourse or sodomy, fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttock or female breast C Section 17.0111 USES SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Adult uses, subject to the following additional standards 1. No adult use shall be located within 1000 feet of any of the following uses a. Churches, synagogues and any other religious institution b Public or private school or college c. Public parks or playgrounds d. Conforming or non-conforming residential use or any residential zoning district e. Another adult use f Any establishment selling alcoholic beverages 2. For the purposes of this section, measurement from the proposed adult use shall be made from that portion of the adult use, including projections therefrom, that is closest to the property line of any use listed in 1 above or to the property line of any land in any residential zoning district. 3. These provisions shall not be construed as permitting any use or act which is otherwise prohibited or made punishable by law. This Ordinance shall become effective October 15, 1986 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 15th DAY OF APRIL , 19 86 . Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM �av �lexa� City�lttorney *Originally adopted on March 18, 1986, and reconsidered on April 15, 1986, to become effective on October 15, 1986. t.,3...... -- y, k --,-, ,,,,.. .......4-_,. , t. ft, ..,.., --A.,. 4, ,..,-,Irn r fr. , k * ,-- - i- ,- , ( _ik-'' -- t- i t, .,,..- _. _ - Y -.'1: . 4 ‘,: '-'. ''' .. ,-,- - _ E :,... „..„-_-,., : :. .!, ,, .,,,,,2., . .„, t ..„:„._ . ,...,. ,,,,..:7_,.,.., id .--- ,.._- '3,- r , UM 2111 :111 in 11151 im: 3 Vol. 9, No. 5 1986 NN15151Ilg CITY OF RENTON V. PLAYTIME THEATRES, INC.. �'N,-, 9`da SUPREME COURT REOPENS THE DOOR FOR '� �l �, ZONING OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES o �� qycN <9 N by Edward H. Ziegler, Jr. ?4,e ��q i F cn Professor of Law �' 4q �bo?o 1' University of Dayton School of Law `mac • (;?31, ( • Burden of Showing Substantial • Effect of Suppressive Intent as Public Purpose Motivating Factor • Reasonable Opportunity to Locate Within Community Introduction serving liquor (see Related Issues, infra), but there .dm, Local regulation of sexually oriented businesses has remained the question of whether cities could con- a long and colorful history in this country. At the stitutionally single out for special zoning treatment turn of the century the Supreme Court ruled that sexually oriented businesses when these activities fell cities may exercise their police power to regulate busi- within the scope of First Amendment protection nesses "which minister to and feed upon human weak- Ten years ago, the Supreme Court expressly ad- nesses, appetites, and passions " L'Hote v New dressed this issue in Young v American Mini Theatres, Orleans, 177 U.S. 587, 596 (1900) (upholding ordi- Inc., 427 U.S. 50 (1976), upholding as constitutional nance confining residence of prostitutes to certain lo- a Detroit ordinance imposing special location require- cations within city) However, later Supreme Court ments on sexually oriented businesses See Strom, decisions granting First Amendment protection to "Young v. American Mini Theatres. Zoning of Sex- nonobscene but sexually explicit movies, books, pic- ually Oriented Businesses," 1 Zoning & Plan L Rep. tures, and dancing appeared to limit the lawful scope 1 (1977) The Court's decision in Young, reaffirmed of such regulation Cities might regulate opposite-sex in the later case Schad v. Borough of Mt Ephraim, massage parlors and nude dancing in establishments 452 U.S. 61 (1981),generally was perceived as opening Zoning(..._ PlanningReport and Law is published by Clark Boardman Company, Ltd 435 Hudson Street, New York, NY 10014 ISSN 0161-8113 This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal accounting or other professional service If legal advice or other expert assistance is required the services of a competent person should be sought.—From a Declaration of Principles saintly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers the door for widespread a/'%ption of local zoning reg- the Court/%asoned, the purpose for the ordinance ulations imposing special _ cation restrictions on so- was not to .,.iminate, suppress, or censor the speech ' called "adult" uses. However, local adult use ordi- itself but to "preserve the quality of urban life" by nances were later held unconstitutional on a variety avoiding the "secondary effects" on the community of grounds, some of which were not directly addressed associated with such businesses, e g, ne:ghborh od by the Court in Young. More importantly, a number deterioration and increased crime rates. On this l r of later court decisions which held such ordinances point, the court referred to the "admittedly serious unconstitutional appeared to be closing the door to problems" created by adult theaters Id. at 76 The local regulation of sexually oriented businesses by ap- Court further held that the record disclosed a"factual plication of a rather strict and burdensome interpre- basis" for the city to believe that the ordinance would tation of the standards for validity set out in Young. further its asserted purpose and that the city's goal The Supreme Court in City of Renton v Playtime of avoiding the secondary effects of sexually oriented Theatres, Inc., 54 U S L W 4160 (1986), has now businesses is one that"must be accorded high respect" reversed a decision of the Court of Appeals for the and also substantial enough to justify the resin; Nine Circuit on three separate grounds all of which incidental restriction on First Amendment rib have caused problems for cities in post-Young liti- However, the Court in Young noted that "the situa- gation In upholding the constitutionality of the or- tion would be quite different if the ordinance had "the dinance in City of Renton, the Supreme Court resolved effect of suppressing or greatly restnct:ng access to" all three issues in favor of local regulation and clearly this form of speech. Id. at 72 n 35 rejected the rather strict interpretation of the stan- Five years later, the Supreme Court in Schad v. dards for validity established in Young which have in Borough of Mt. Ephraim, supra, held an ordinance recent-years formed the controlling rationale in post- unconstitutional which excluded from a community Young court decisions holding local ordinances un- all commercial live entertainment including nonob- constitutionali The significance of City of Renton is scene nude dancing Unlike the "incidental burden" perhaps best understood by a brief prior discussion on protected speech in Young, the Court found the of the Court's decisions in Young and Schad and of ordinance in Schad imposed a "substantial restnc- the standards for validity applied in post-Young liti- tion" on protected speech Since the borough had gation presented "no evidence"to meet its burden of showing that exclusion furthered some legitimate zoning Decisions in Young and Schad pose and since it was neither "self-evident" nor - In Young v American Mini Theatres, Inc, supra, mediately apparent as a matter of experience" that the Supreme Court upheld as constitutional a Detroit live entertainment presented greater problems in re- _ ordinance which prohibited sexually oriented thea- gard to parking, trash or police protection than other ters, bookstores and cabarets from locating within commercial uses (restaurants, adult bookstores, and 1,000 feet of two other such uses or within 500 feet taverns, etc.) permitted in the borough, the ordinance of any residential area These so-called "adult" es- was held unconstitutional due to the lack of"sufficient tablishments were defined in the ordinance as uses justification" for the exclusion of such a broad cate- distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on mat- gory of protected expression. The Court in :M ter depicting, describing or relating to "Specified Sex- further pointed out that even if forms of live enter- ual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas" as tainment presented special problems not associated further defined in the ordinance. In a 5-4 decision, with other permitted commercial uses, the ordinance the Court held the ordinance was not unconstitution- was unduly restrictive since it was not clear that such ally vague as applied to an "adults only" movie theater problems could not be addressed by more selective which apparently offered sexually explicit films on a and less burdensome controls regular basis Read together, the decisions of the Supreme Court The Court in Young also held that though the or- in Young and Schad established the analytical frame- dinance singled out sexually oriented businesses for work for determining the constitutionality of zoning special zoning treatment based on a content-classifi- ordinances regulating the location of protected forms cation, the ordinance did not violate the First Amend- of sexually explicit expression. Young indicated that ment or the Equal Protection Clause of the ordinances designed to control the"secondary effects" Fourteenth Amendment An ordinance imposing spe- of adult uses justified the imposition of special location cial zoning treatment as to location on businesses restrictions on such uses at least where regulatio _d purveying sexually explicit materials, the Court ruled, not directly limit the number of or greatly re t would be treated as a "content-neutral" time, place, access to such uses.Schad clearly indicated that where and manner restriction on this form of speech since, an ordinance had the effect of suppressing protected 34 expression within the commun :t would be subject restricting acceto adult uses The following dis- to closer judicial scrutiny as to ether it was unduly cussion focuses these three issues as developed in restrictive and actually furthered alleged purposes for post-Young litigation regulation. City's Burden of Proof Post-Young Litigation A number of post-Young decisions held ordinances In some cases, courts have continued to rely on unconstitutional by ruling that a city had not shown Young to hold local ordinances imposing special lo- the ordinance would further a substantial public pur- cation restrictions on adult uses constitutional as valid pose. These courts generally ruled that regulation content-neutral, time, place and manner restrictions must be supported by a "factual basis" in the record, on protected speech. See, e g., ATS Melbourne, Inc consisting of testimony or planning studies, etc , dem- v. City of Melbourne, 475 So. 2d 1257 (Fla App onstrating how the ordinance as drafted would be 1985), City of Whittier v Walnut Properties, Inc., 197 likely to control the "secondary effects" of adult uses .•.. Cal Rptr 127, 149 Cal.App. 3d 633(1984) However, in view of local conditions existing in the particular local ordinances regulating adult businesses generally community Most federal courts adopted this view of have not fared well in post-Young litigation a city's burden of proof focusing on the"factual basis" A number of post-Young decisions invalidated or- (testimony of sociologists and urban planners) men- dinances on constitutional principles not directly ad- tioned by the court in Young as supporting the Detroit dressed by the Supreme Court in Young and Schad. ordinance. E.g., 754 Orange Ave. Inc v. City of New In some cases, facially neutral ordinances were held Haven, 761 F 2d 105, 112 (2d Cir 1985), Krueger v unenforceable due to selective and discriminatory ap- City of Pensacola, 759 F.2d 851, 852 (11th Cir 1985), placation to adult uses See, e g, E-Bro, Inc. v. Graves, Avalon Cinema Corp v Thompson, 667 F 2d 659 (8th 566 F. Supp. 1476 (D N J 1983) (denial of license Cir 1981). for adult bookstore improper since parking restric- This strict view of a city's burden of proof was not tions not enforced against other businesses) Ordi- adopted by all courts. A few decisions held that a city nances were held unconstitutional where "narrowly might properly rely on the experience of other cities, drawn" and "objective" standards for guiding officials such as Detroit, as a basis for regulation, apparently in issuing licenses or permits were not established focusing more on the Court's statement in Young that See, e,g., 15192 Thirteen Mile Rd v City of Warren, the "secondary effects" of adult uses posed "admit- ( 593 F Supp 147 (E.D. Mich. 1984) (standards for tedly serious problems" or in Schad that such a pur- special permit and site plan review held invalid prior pose might be "self-evident" or "immediately restraints on First Amendment rights), Little v City apparent as a matter of experience " See Genusa v of Greenfield, 575 F Supp. 656 (E.D. Wis. 1983) City of Peoria, 619 F 2d 1203, 1211 (1980), Strand (whether adult use is "compatible" with nearby de- Property Corp v Municipal Court, 200 Cal Rptr 47, velopment or "contrary to general welfare" are not 148 Cal App. 3d 882 (1984) (city not required to sufficiently definite standards for regulating First independently establish factual basis to support or- Amendment nghts). Ordinances also were held un- constitutional on grounds of vagueness and over- breadth. See, e.g, Purple Onion, Inc v Jackson,nofadult zatemc AND piANNING F Supp 1207 (N D Ga. 1981) (definition of adult bookstore would include federal courthouse); Morris v. Municipal Court, 32 Cal App 3d 553, 652 P 2d LAW REPORT 51 (1982) (prohibiting nude entertainment except in establishments devoted to "theatrical performances" Managing Editor presumptively overbroad) The above cases clearly Fredric A Strom Editor illustrate common errors to avoid in drafting and J. Benjamin Galley enforcing adult use ordinances Assistant Editor Other later court decisions invalidating ordinances Nancy J Chapman involved interpretations of three important standards Published eleven times per year by for validity generally established in Young and to some Clark Boardman Company, Ltd 435 Hudson Street extent in Schad (1) whether a city had met its burden New York, New York 10014 of showing that regulation furthers a substantial pub- lic purpose; (2) whether regulation had been mote Subscription $95 for eleven issues Copyright 1986 by Clark Boardman Company, Ltd vated by a desire to suppress the speech itself, and ISSN 0161-8113 (3) whether regulation had gone too far in greatly 35 dinance). As one federal d'amk"ct court observed in ordinance. Srrueger v City of Pensacola, supra'at International Food v. City of tort Lauderdale, 614 F 855-56, Tovar v Billmeyer, 721 F 2d 1260, 1266 (9th Supp 1517, 1521 (D C Fla 1985) commenting on Cir 1983). "conventional thinking" in regard to a city's burden of proof in regulating adult uses- Greatly Restricting Access Any local government can hire a group of experts to say that The Supreme Court in Schad clearly indicated that "adult" entertainment produces undesirable consequences To an ordinance which directly excludes adult uses from perpetuate the legal fiction that a city must first establish objective a community would impose a heavy burden on a city evidence in support of a legitimate reason for enacting a zoning to demonstrate that such exclusion furthers a sub- regulation ignores the basic truth that "adult" entertainment causes similar problems in municipalities of similar composition stantial public purpose Exclusion would likely be held and character Local governments should not have to reinvent unconstitutional as being "unduly restrictive" at least the wheel every time a zoning ordinance is enacted when other commercial uses are allowed in the com- munity. Moreover, the fact that adult uses are readily,, Intent to Suppress accessible in nearby communities would not be co Under the so-called O'Brien test for First Amend- sidered adequate justification for such exclusion 452 ment constitutionality of a content-neutral, time, U.S. at 76. place, and manner restriction as applied in Young and A difficult issue in post-Young litigation has been Schad, a city's public purpose for regulation must be determining at what point short of direct exclusion "unrelated to the suppression of free expression." 391 zoning "location" restrictions on adult uses go too U S at 377 A number of post-Young court decisions far and have the effect of suppressing or greatly re- held ordinances invalid on the ground that regulation stricting access to such speech In post-Young lit- was motivated in part by simply a desire to suppress gation, a few court decisions have ruled adult use sexually explicit speech. This issue generally is con- ordinances unconstitutional finding that regulation sidered a triable issue of fact and courts in some cases would unnecessarily confine adult uses to only a few have found an improper motive based on inferences potential locations on a small strip of land, would drawn from the absence of an adequate factual basis prohibit new adult uses in a community or, through in the record for regulation, a regulation apparently amortization, would reduce the number of existing directed at a new "target" adult use proposing to adult uses in a community. See CLR Corporation v. locate in the community, the restrictiveness of the Henline. 702 F 2d 637 (6th Cir 1983) (small numb regulation, comments by citizens, planners, lawyers of sites on half-mile strip of land), Alexander v Cit and city officials at the time of enactment and state- of Minneapolis, 698 F 2d 936 (8th Cir 1982) (am- ments in an ordinance relating to community morality ortization ordinance prohibiting new and reducing or the offensiveness of the subject matter See e g, number of existing adult uses), Adultword Bookstore Ebel v. City of Corona, 698 F 2d 390 (9th Cir. 1983), v. City of Fresno, 758 F 2d 1348 (9th Cir 1985) (lack CLR Corporation v. Henline, 702 F.2d 637 (6th Cir. of relocation sites for existing adult uses). 1983), Avalon Cinema Corp v Thompson, 667 F 2d More importantly, a number of post-Young deci- 659 (8th Cir. 1981). In one case, a Court of Appeals sions ruled that an ordinance would be held to hays, had to mandamus a trial judge to prevent city officials the effect of suppressing or greatly restricting pub. from being deposed as to their "motives" in enacting access to adult uses where a substantial number of an ordinance The court ruled that the improper mo- "allowed locations" under an ordinance are found not tive issue is one properly determined by relevant ob- to be "realistically" available from the point of view jective circumstances, such as language in an of a "reasonably prudent investor" desiring to operate ordinance, effect of regulation, comparison to prior this type of retail commercial use within the corn- law, record of proceedings, and facts surrounding en- munity These decisions closely examined the "suit- actment City of Las Vegas v. Foley, 747 F 2d 1294 ability" of allowed locations with respect to whether (9th Cir 1984) the locations were presently available as commercially In some cases where an improper intent to suppress feasible and desirable sites for adult-type retail uses. was found, courts did not directly address the issue Courts considered accessibility, nature of nearby uses, of whether an ordinance otherwise valid would be present availability and occupancy of suitable build- upheld unless the improper intent to suppress was ings, and cost of construction or conversion, etc See, deemed to be the primary or predominate factor in e.g., International Foods & Beverage Systems v. City enactment. However, courts addressing this issue of Fort Lauderdale, supra (majority of potential sit ruled that where mixed motives existed the fact that patently unsuitable since on outskirts of town ne improper intent to suppress was simply "a motivating airport and city's well-fields); North Street Book factor" would by itself be sufficient to invalidate the Shoppe, Inc v Village of Endicott, 582 F Supp 1428 36 (N D N.Y. 1984) (potentiates in industrial zones in the conte'"of Renton's problems " The detailed •where suitable buildings pre..,ntly occupied by other purposes for Lnactment set out in the amended or- ,retail uses and cost of conversion or construction of dinance relating to controlling the secondary effects suitable building prohibitive), Basrardrnes v. City of of adult theaters were found by the court to be merely Galveston, 682 F.2d 1203 (5th Cir 1982) (confining "conclusory and speculative" ad hoc justifications for potential sites to poorly lit industrial zones a great enactment 748 F.2d at 527 distance from other consumer-oriented uses drasti- The Court of Appeals also held the ordinance un- cally impairs public access), Purple Onion, Inc v constitutional on the ground that "a motivating fac- Jackson, 511 F Supp 1207 (N D Ga 1981) (most tor" in Renton's enactment of the ordinance appeared potential sites either wholly unacceptable to reason- to be the intent of the city to suppress the speech ably prudent investor or presently unavailable due to itself. This "inference" was drawn from several state- existing uses) ments of purpose in the ordinance relating generally to the offensiveness of the content of such speech and Background of City of Renton the lack of a specific factual basis for the ordinance The city of Renton, Washington, located just south On this point the court ruled that where "mixed mo- of Seattle, has a population of approximately 32,000 tives" were present an ordinance would be held un- people and a land area of over 16 square miles Renton constitutional even if a city's "predominate concerns" has a typical mix of land uses including, in addition in enactment related to controlling the "secondary to residential areas, a substantial number and variety effects" of adult theaters. 748 F 2d at 527 of retail-commercial uses along with manufacturing The Court of Appeals further held that Renton's and other industrial uses Prior to the location of any ordinance constituted a "substantial" restrictions on sexually-oriented business in Renton, the city council speech, rather than merely the "incidental" burden in 1981 enacted a zoning ordinance imposing special involved in Young, since the effect of the ordinance location restrictions on adult theaters The ordinance would be to suppress and greatly restrict public access prohibited such uses from locating within 1,000 feet to adult theaters. The court found that a substantial of any residential zone, single or multi-family dwell- part of the 520 acres of land (5 percent of the city) ing, church or park,and within one mile of any school. that the Renton ordinance left open for adult theaters Under the ordinance's distancing requirements, the was not presently suitable and available for this type two existing movie theaters in the city were not "al- of retail commercial use since much of this land was lowed" locations for such uses already occupied by buildings suitable only for in- In January of 1982, Playtime Theaters acquired the dustrial use, and by a race track, a sewage disposal two existing theaters in the city and brought suit in plant, a warehouse and manufacturing facilities, an federal court challenging the constitutionality of the oil tank farm, and a fully developed shopping center. location restrictions in Renton's ordinance. While this 748 F 2d at 534. suit was pending, the city in May of 1982 amended its ordinance in several respects, adding for the first Decision in City of Renton time, a detailed statement of reasons for its enactment In City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc, supra, and reducing the minimum distance from any school the Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision reversed the to 1,000 feet Thereafter, the trial court denied Play- Court of Appeals and expressly rejected all three of time's request for a permanent injunction and entered the latter court's above described rulings on the con- summary judgment in favor of Renton upholding the stitutionality of the ordinance Citing Young, the constitutionality of the ordinance as amended How- Court ruled that since the Renton ordinance did not ever, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit re- ban adult theaters altogether but simply regulated versed the decision of the trial court The Court of their location, the ordinance should be analyzed as a Appeals ruled that Renton's ordinance violated all form of time, place, and manner regulation of this three of the above-described standards for validity form of expression. Again citing Young, the court established in post-Young litigation. found the ordinance to be "content-neutral" despite The Court of Appeals held that Renton had not the special location treatment accorded "adult" thea- met its burden of developing some factual basis to ters since the ordinance was not directed at the "con- believe that the ordinance would control the second- tent" of films shown at adult theaters but rather at ary effects of adult theaters in view of"the particular the "secondary effects" of such theaters on the sur- ( problems and needs of Renton." On this point the rounding community The appropriate test for valid- court ruled that Renton could not rely simply on the ity, the Court stated "is whether the Renton ordinance experience of, or studies relating to, other cities such is designed to serve a substantial governmental inter- as Detroit or Seattle, but must "justify its ordinance est and allows for reasonable alternative avenues of 37 communication " 54 U S I.,0144 at 4162 After refer- "must oe alloiumicd the opportunity to experiment with ring to the amended ordinan_ s statement of purposes solutions to _dmittedly serious problems" and a ' relating to prevention of crime,protection of the city's court's function is not "to appraise the wigiom" of retail trade, maintenance of property values, and pro- a city's decision to concentrate adult theaters. as in tection of the quality of the city's neighborhoods and Renton, rather than to disperse such uses, as in De- commercial districts, the Court ruled that the ordi- troit Pointing out that the Renton city council at nance was designed to serve the substantial public time of enactment had before it a judicial opinion bi purpose of attempting "to preserve the quality of ur- the Supreme Court of Washington,Northend Cinema, ban life"—an "interest" the Court stated, quoting Inc v Seattle, 90 Wash 2d 709, 585 P 2d 1153 (1978), from Young, that must be accorded "high respect " summarizing Seattle's studies and findings relating to The Court also held that the Renton ordinance left the secondary effects of adult theaters, the Court held open "reasonable alternative avenues of communi- that there was a reasonable basis for the city to believe cation" for this form of expression since the Court that the ordinance would further its stated purposes found the allowed locations under the ordinance easily met the requirement of providing adult theaters "a Intent to Suppress reasonable opportunity to open and operate" within The Supreme Court expressly rejected the ruling of the city 54 U S L W at 4163 the Court of Appeals that when intent to suppress The Supreme Court further ruled that unlike the the speech itself is found to be simply "a motivating situation in Schad, the Renton ordinance was "nar- factor" for enactment the ordinance must be held rowly tailored" to achieve its goals since it would unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that, so affect only that category of theaters shown to produce long as a city's "predominate concerns" relate to con- the unwanted secondary effects The Court also found trolling the secondary effects of adult uses, regulation that, though the ordinance did not regulate other should not be held invalid on the basis of an improper types of adult uses, it was not impermissible as an intent to suppress the speech itself On this point the undennclusive regulation since no other types of adult Court quoted from its earlier decision in United States businesses were located or planning to locate in Ren- v. O'Brien, 391 U S 367, 382 (1968), that a court ton and there was no reason to believe that Renton should "not strike down an otherwise constitutional would not in the future amend its ordinance to include statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative other types of adult uses shown to produce the same motive kinds of secondary effects as adult theaters 54 U.S.L.W. at 4163. Greatly Restricting Access The Supreme Court's decision in City of Renton The Supreme Court expressly rejected the ruling of expressly addressed and reversed all three of the ear- the Court of Appeals that the 520 acres left open for her described rulings of the Court of Appeals The adult uses was not truly"available"land and therefore Supreme Court's ruling on each of these issues is set imposed a substantial restriction on speech by greatly out below restricting public access to adult theaters The Su- preme Court accepted the finding of the trial court City's Burden of Proof that the 520 acres consisted of"ample, accessible :^ The Supreme Court expressly rejected the Court of estate" crisscrossed by freeways, highways and roaas Appeals' ruling that the Renton ordinance was un- The Court rejected Playtime's argument that the or- constitutional since it was enacted without the benefit dinance was unconstitutional since no "commercially of studies specifically relating to "the problems or viable" adult theater sites were available due to the needs of Renton." Such a standard for validity, the fact that some of the acreage was already occupied Court held, imposes on a city "an unnecessarily rigid by existing businesses and that most of the undevei- burden of proof" The Court ruled that a city may oped land was not currently for sale or lease Pointing properly rely on the experience of, and studies pro- out that the inquiry for First Amendment purposes duced by, other cities, such as Detroit or Seattle, in does not involve "economic impact," the Court held regard to the secondary effects of adult theaters, even that Renton had met its obligation under Young by as noted or summarized in court opinions On this providing "a reasonable opportunity to open and op- point the Court stated. "The First Amendment does erate an adult theater within the city " That adult not require a city, before enacting such an ordinance, theaters, the Court observed, "must fend for them- to conduct new studies or produce evidence indepen- selves in the real estate market, on an equal foot' dent of that already generated by other cities, so long with other prospective purchasers and lessees, as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably not give rise to a First Amendment violation" since believed to be relevant to the problem that the city there is no obligation "to insure that adult-theaters, addresses " 54 U S L.W. at 4163 Furthermore, cities or any other kinds of speech related business for that 38 • matter, will be able to obtain site bargain prices " 65 N Y.2d 324, 4 \1 E 2d 1039, 491 N Y S 2d 307, 54 U S.L W at 4163 cert granted, 106 Ct. 379 (1985) (adult bookstore should not be closed if less drastic measures are avail- Effect As Precedent able). Also, courts are likely to rule that First Amend- Quite obviously, the Supreme Court's City of Ren- ment protection of expression does not extend to the ton decision reopens the door for zoning of sexually "conduct" of certain types of adult uses, such as mas- oriented business that had been partially closed in sage parlors, swing clubs, and escort services, and post-Young litigation Having expressly rejected all that the validity of licensing and regulation of such three of the rulings of the Court of Appeals, the businesses will be based on the usual standards for Supreme Court's decision clearly undermines the validity of police power enactments. See, e.g, Harper precedential effect of many post-Young decisions v Lindsay, 616 F.2d 849 (5th Cir 1980) (massage noted earlier which relied on one or more of these parlors), People v Morone, 198 Cal. Rptr 316, 150 rulings As precedent, City of Renton would now allow Cal App 3d 18 (1983) (swing clubs), IDK, Inc. v ^, a city council armed with little more than the court County of Clark, 599 F. Supp. 1402 (D Nev. 1984) opinions in Young and Northern Cinema to rely on (escort services). the experience and findings of other cities summarized Prohibiting topless waitresses or live nude enter- therein to enact an ordinance as stringent as Renton's tainment in commercial establishments poses a more either dispersing or concentrating adult uses. Since difficult problem. The Supreme Court has ruled that the factual basis for regulation in Young related to a these activities generally may be prohibited in estab- variety of sexually oriented businesses, the Court's lishments serving liquor as a result of the power City of Renton ruling on burden of proof would seem granted to states under the Twenty-first Amendment directly applicable to regulation of other types of adult New York Liquor Authority v Bellanca, 452 U S 714 uses including adult bookstores and cabarets. The (1981) But since nonobscene performances or pro- Court's ruling on burden of proof in City of Renton ductions involving nudity generally are considered is quite similar to its earlier ruling on local regulation protected speech under the First Amendment, ban- of billboards with respect to the deference accorded ring such entertainment in all public places is likely a reasonably plausible legislative judgment that reg- to be held unconstitutionally overbroad Doran v ulation will promote a city's interests in aesthetics and Salem Inn, Inc. 422 U S 922 (1975) Some courts, traffic safety See Los Angeles City Council v. Tax- however, have indicated that topless waitresses or payers for Vincent, 104 S Ct 2118 (1984) nude dancing, as such, may be prohibited in all corn- The City of Renton decision also is likely to sig- mercial establishments to protect public decency at nificantly undercut arguments on the "greatly re- least when the activity is not part of a larger context stncting access"issue based on the present availability reasonably classifiable as a musical or theatrical pro- of "commercially viable" site locations The Court's duction or performance See, e g., County of King v ruling on this issue would appear to leave cities with Chisman, 33 Wash App 809, 658 P 2d 1256 (1983); the discretion to zone adult uses to the outskirts of State v Baysinger, 397 N E.2d 580(Ind 1980), appeal town where many locations are presently occupied or dismissed, 466 U S 931 (1980), Gabrielle v. Town of ."."1" undeveloped so long as these locations have the in- Old Orchard Beach, 420 A.2d 252 (Me. 1980) But frastructure(roads,sewers, etc)to support retail com- see Morris v. Municipal Court, 32 Cal App 3d 553, mercial uses In this respect, City of Renton implicitly 652 P 2d 51 (1982) The Supreme Court has not ex- rejects a "reasonably prudent investor" standard for pressly addressed this latter issue but has implicitly validity indicated its support for this position. See Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville, 422 U S 205, 211, n 7 (1975) Related Issues ("No one would suggest that the First Amendment Several incidental issues related to First Amend- permits nudity in public places") ment protection of sexually oriented businesses merit discussion Owners of adult uses are not likely to be RECENT CASES successful in challenging eminent domain proceedings on First Amendment grounds when the action is Off-Site Road Improvement Requirements found not to be motivated by an intent to suppress Invalidated Due to Inadequate Standards the speech itself See, e g, Forty Second Street Co. v. The Colorado Supreme Court recently held that a Koch, 613 F Supp 1416 (E D.N.Y 1985) Similarly, county could not require a developer, as a condition cities have been successful in closing adult uses when of PUD approval, to bear the entire cost of improving the uses are found to be public nuisances as a result an off-site access road Although state enabling stat- of the commission of crimes in connection therewith utes authonze a county to adopt regulations for PUD See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Crouton Books, Inc., 323 approval that would require a developer to provide S E 2d 86 (Va 1984) But see People v Cloud Books, adequate access roads, the county's regulations were 39 not specific enough to supply the requisite au:aority court, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Beaver Meadows v. Lan^ County Ba of County granted s^ary judgment in favor of a zoning s'o4ra Comm'rs, 709 P 2d 928 (Colo 1985) despite the existence of a genuine dispute over ma- The regulations, which addressed the consequences terial facts The court held that a zoning board's'de- of new development on the environment and infra- cision in a site-specific case with unique facts should structure and stated a general policy that new devel- receive the same judicial deference as a legislat s opment should pay its own way, were sufficiently decision regarding area-wide zoning While actioi( detailed to reflect an intent to consider the adequacy the legislature have a presumption of validity that is of off site access roads during review of a PUD pro- virtually irrebuttable, the general rule is that zoning posal But the regulations were devoid of the necessary board decisions which apply legislative provisions to criteria to accomplish such an evaluation In partic- specific facts must be supported by evidence in the ular, the regulations failed to provide standards by record Most courts and commentators have called which the adequacy of an access road can be evaluated for increased accountability on the part of zoning and remedial measures prescribed, failed to indicate boards, requiring boards to list in writing sp c permissible dust pollution levels to support the coun- reasons for a decision In contrast, the test appliej the court here asks only whether "any conceivable ty's decision to require a paved road, and failed to rational basis supports the decision " The court's de- address the procedural means by which road im- cision denies a trial for plaintiffs who claim that they provement costs could be apportioned among the ap- were refused a variance from the city's off-street park- plicant, other benefiting property owners and the ing requirements, even though similarly situated busi- county Such standards are necessary, concluded the nesses were routinely granted such requests The court court, to ensure that county action will be rational below had held the city liable for money damages due and consistent and that judicial review will be avail- to the board's unconstitutional acts Shelton v City able and effective of College Station, 780 F 2d 475 (5th Cir 1986) City Lacks Authority to Require Restoration (en banc), rev'g, 754 F 2d 1251 (5th Cir. 1985), dis- cussed in ZPLR (July-August 1985) of Historic Buildings New York's Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, has ruled that a city cannot require owners of historic structures to rehabilitate or enhance the build- ings at their expense The court struck down this provision and another, requiring all units to be held RECENT DEVELOPMENTS in condominium ownership, in overturning the re- Compromise on Federal Groundwater Protection zoning of a 22-acre parcel which included the site of U S Senate and House conferees have agreed to the Jay Mansion, built in 1838 by the son of John include groundwater protection measures in legisla- Jay, the first Chief Justice of the U S Supreme Court tion reauthorizing the Safe Water Drinking Act by The court refused to hold that ordinances imposing drafting a compromise bill which substantially weak- such restoration costs are unconstitutional, ruling in- ens protection programs contained in the House"- stead that state enabling legislation did not authorize sion, but which most conservationists neverth ,s the requirement.The court found that the state's Gen- support The conference agreement narrows the scope eral Municipal Law authorizes cities to require main- of state comprehensive plans by requiring states to tenance of designated historic structures, but does not only protect existing underground sources of public permit "restoration" or "rehabilitation" require- drinking water. To accomplish this, state plans must ments. The court added that such a requirement define "wellhead protection areas," identify all po- would exempt the public from paying any restoration tential human-generated contaminants that could pol- costs, despite the public benefit derived therefrom lute public wells, prepare preventive actions, and The court also found that the requirement of con- establish contingency plans for alternative drinking dominium ownership was not authorized by a state water sources. A state has three years to submit a provision permitting control of private property "for plan to EPA, which, if approved, qualifies the state the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use" for federal cost-sharing grants of up to 50 percent of of historic buildings. FGL & L Property Corp v City the cost of developing and implementing the plan of Rye, 66 N Y.2d 111,485 N E.2d 986, 495 N Y S 2d These grants will be funded by a S20 million author- 321 (1985) ization in 1987 and 1988, and $35 million ann in 1989, 1990 and 1991 The only sanction ag t Federal Court Applies Deferential `Legislative' non-participating states is grant disqualification Con- Review Standard to Zoning Board Decision servation and public health advocates hope that this In an apparent attempt to discourage property own- bill will not forestall action on separate, more corn- ers from challenging local zoning decisions in federal prehentive groundwater protection legislation 40 ____ _,.. r - rt FIRST AMENDMENT ( when Are Zoning Restrictions on ri Adult Theaters Constitutional? by Naomi R (aim Renton, Washington is a city of about 32,000 rest- ~ City of Renton dents, located within a few miles of Seattle. The twelfth v, largest city in Washington, Renton contains more than Playtime Theatres,Inc. 1,450 businesses, which employ approximately 81,000 (Docket No 84-1360) people There are eighteen parks and sixty-two churches in Renton's 15 3 square miles - Argued November 12,1985 In early 1980, the mayor of Renton wrote the city .� council president, suggesting that Renton deal at once The First Amendment to the United States Constitu- with the problem of businesses selling or showtng sex- non guarantees the public freedom of speech. But the ually explicit materials The city council referred the Supreme Court has held that speech can be regulated by suggestion to its Planning and Development Committee reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. If the (PDC), which, three months later and without a docu- limitation on First Amendment rights is minimal, and mented study, recommended that the issue be referred the restriction serves a substantial state interest, then the to the planning commission A moratorium on licensing restriction is probably constitutional, the Court indi- businesses selling or showing sexually explicit materials cated in United States v O'Brien (391 U S 367 (1968)) followed. The PDC then held several public hearings, These restrictions,however,cannot regulate the content and looked at the experiences of other cities, including (-If the speech, they must be content-neutral If they are Seattle ontent-based, past Court decisions place a substantial In April, 1981,the city council passed Ordinance No C.:'\ burden on the government entity to justify their stric- 3526, which prohibited adult motion picture theaters tures from locating within 1,000 feet of any residential area, Renton, Washington, passed an ordinance in April any park, or any church, synagogue, or other religious of 1981, restricting the location of adult movie theaters institution, nor within one mile of any school At the In Januai y, 1982, Playtime Theatres. Inc decided to time, there were other movie theaters within this pros- buy two movie theaters in Renton,and to show sexually cribed zone,but no adult theaters. explicit movies at one of them Playtime Theatres sued In January, 1982, Playtime Theatres, Inc. acquired .„.,,enton, claiming that the city's regulation violated the two theaters in Renton—intending to show sexually ex- irst Amendment plicit movies in at least one of them That theater was located within the proscribed zone Playtime sued Ren- ISSUE ton in federal court to get an injunction to stop Renton The primary legal issue in City of Renton v Playtime from enforcing the ordinance The district court denied Theatres, Inc is. Does a regulation requiring concentra- a preliminary injunction, but the case continued in Lion of adult movie theaters in one area violate the First court, with Playtime seeking permanent relief from the Amendments prohibition of content-based speech re- ordinance gulation, or is it a reasonable time, place and manner Renton held a public hearing on adult-use movie restriction; theaters,and then adopted Ordinance No 3629, which amended the earlier ordinance The new ordinance FACTS stated reasons for passing the earlier ordinance,added a The Supreme Court decides legal issues, not factual definition and reduced the permissible distance between a school and adult theater from one mile to 1,000 feet. It issues This case, however, presents mixed issues of fact aLnd law, and both sides have interpreted the legislative also stated that, because of the pending litigation, an history of the challenged ordinance to support their emergency existed,and the ordinance was to take effect ;al arguments immediately. About a month and a half later, Renton passed a third ordinance—identical to No 3629—but iaomi R Cahn is a Teaching Fellow at the Harrison Institute without the emergency clause Under the latter ordi- for Public Law, Georgetown University Law Center, 605 G nances, the set-aside zone was 520 acres, or 5 4% of 3 Street, NW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20001, telephone Renton Although it contained no movie theaters, it (202)621-8235 contained land in all stages of development 114 PREVIEW ill 1 1 After a heating before a magistrate,the district court According to Playtime Theatres,the ordinance is not f : t • preliminarily enjoined Renton from enforcing the ordi- content-neutral. Playtime first asserts that suppression nance against Playtime Playtime then began showing of speech may have been a motivation for passing the 1 I adult movies One month later,the district court refused ordinance If the ordinance Nsould not hare been en- • to enjoin Renton from enforcing the ordinance. It held acted without the suppression of speech motivation, 1i the ordinance did not substantially restrict First Amend- then it is unconstitutional. Second, Playtime argues that ,I ment interests. finding ample available land for adult the restriction on freedom of speech is substantial.so the movie theaters It also found that the restriction was ordinance is not subject to the O'Brien standards ri ,,,.arrowly written to achieve governmental interests, and Instead, the ordinance must be subject to strict scru- i j at the ordinance's purpose was not related to suppres- tiny—a test requiring that the ordinance be narrowly sing speech Playtime appealed. drawn, further a substantial government interest and be I I The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, find- adequately supported by legislative history This ordi- I ing that much of the.520 acres was not available, and nance, Playtime asserts,cannot be justified on the expe- ; that Renton improperly relied on other cities' expen- pence of other cities Echoing the Ninth Circuit, ence in assessing the problems caused by adult theaters Playtime also asserts that the substantial nature of the i (748 F.2d 528 (1984)) It remanded the case, so that burden on speech is shown by the lack of reasonable I Renton could prove that a motivating factor behind the access to land suitable for adult theaters. j ordinance was not suppression of speech based on its Renton asserts that its ordinance is a reasonable reg- content ulation of the location of adult theaters that does not j 1 BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE substantially inhibit speech. After receiving information Since the early twentieth century, the Supreme from other cities, Renton concluded that adult theaters Court has recognized the legitimacy of local zoning reg- have adverse secondary effects,including neighborhood I ulations The Court's seminal decision on the legality of deterioration In passing the ordinance nine months I a municipality's regulating the location of adult theaters before it had an adult theater,Renton was zoning before was Young v American Mini Theatres (427 U.S. 50), de- it was forced to experience these adverse effects The I Cded in 1976 In Young, the Court considered the con- set-aside zone is constitutionally available because it in- f .,,itutionality of a Detroit "anti-Skid Row" ordinance cludes land in various stages of development and is 1 which required adult theaters to be dispersed Adult accessible to Renton residents Because First Amend- • theaters could not be located near two other"regulated ment rights are,at most,incidentally affected,the Court 1 use"establishments,nor near residential areas need not inquire into legislative motives, according to Although the Court held that the ordinance did not both O'Brien and Young Even if the Court looks at legis- I violate the First Amendment, there was no clear-cut lame motive, the proper test is whether there is a legiti- majority.Justice Stevens, writing for a plurality of four mate motive, not the possibility of an improper motive, of the nine Justices, found that the content of speech underlying the ordinance Moreover, Renton's record "'`ould legitimately be used to limit the location of adult shows no improper motive .novie theaters This particular limitation was based on Based on these issues, the Court must consider the Detroit's findings of adverse secondary effects, includ- balance between a municipality's zoning regulations, ing increased crime and deterioration, caused by con- and the possible impacts on freedom of speech In centrating these theaters in one area In his concurring Young, the Court splintered over Detroit's adult theater j opinion,Justice Powell looked at the effect of the ordi- zoning ordinance, without a majority articulating one ; j nance on freedom of speech He found that Detroit had clear test Renton presents the Court with another 'i i placed only "incidental and minimal" restrictions on chance to reconcile these different viewpoints. The f 1 I peoples'opportunity to see adult movies Powell applied Court could set out a test for when regulation of adult 1 the 0 Brien test to determine whether the Detroit ordi- theaters substantially impairs freedom of speech. The r nance survived the First Amendment challenge. Court could also decide what type of inquiry a reviewing Following Young, the Washington State Supreme Court must make into legislative motive behind an ordi- ,i Court upheld Seattle ordinances that concentrated adult nance j it theaters in the central commercial section (Northend The National League of Cities and the American Cinema,Inc v City of Seattle, 90 Wash. 2d 709, 585 P 2d Planning Association are among the many groups who 1153(1978),cert denied,441 U.S.946(1979)) have filed amicus briefs in support of Renton The case is .`: Both parties agree that reasonable time, place and significant to local governments because of its potential.,f • nanner restrictions of speech are valid if they are sup- impact on local planning activities. As the Supreme ` ' ported by a substantial governmental interest and do not Court has recognized, governments have an important : ri restrict speech based on subject matter But they differ interest in zoning for the public welfare A ruling on whether the Renton ordinance is such a regulation against Renton could jeopardize local governments' at- that is content-neutral tempts to experiment with reasonable zoning, and to ,r Issue No 4 115 pi .. • rely on the experiences of other cities in making coning For Playtime Theatres, Inc (Counsel of Record, Jack R c decisions. Burns, 10940 N E 33rd Place. Suite 107, Bellevue, WA ' On the other hand, the ACLU and the American 98004, telephone(213)981-9421) Bookseller's Association have filed amicus briefs in sup- 1 Because the court of appeals remanded the case, the port of Playtime They assert that the Renton ordinance Supreme Court need not consider the issues raised effectively bans adult theaters from suitable, accessible 2 The Renton ordinance is not a reasonable time, place locations This case is potentially significant because of or manner restriction on speech because it is not its impact on regulating protected speech The Supreme content-neutral Court has recognized that time,place and manner regu- 3 Because the ordinance infringes on a protected liber- lations cannot shut off a type of speech Because of the ty, it is subject to a strict scrutiny test, under that test, type of land available in Renton, the ordinance may it violates the First Amendment Jfectively ban adult theaters from suitable locations 4 Two reasons in addition to those stated by the court Thus, the restriction on freedom of speech here is of appeals support the unconstitutionality of the ordi- substantial nance it violates the Equal Protection Clause and is void for vagueness ARGUMENTS For the City of Renton(Counsel of Record,E Barrett Prettyman, Jr, 815 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006, telephone(202)331-4685) 1 Renton's ordinance is valid under Young because it AMICUS BRIEFS regulates only the location of adult theaters and does In Support of Renton not substantially inhibit speech Freedom Council Foundation, National Institute of 2. Renton was justified in relying on the experiences of Municipal Law Officers,Jackson County, Missouri, Na- other cities in enacting its own ordinance tional League of Cities and the Washington and Utah 3 Because the set-aside zone includes land that is avail- Attorneys General able and accessible, Renton's zoning ordinance only incidentally restricts First Amendment rights The Renton ordinance should not be struck down In Support of Playtime Theatres,Inc. fix ' based on an inference as to the subjective motivations American Civil Liberties Union and the American of council members. Booksellers Association L Cif 116 PREVIEW ROLL CALL V T SHEET ( NOTES \ . a \ , i .L!�►'1 ,1 11, e j . WIAIRMAIMMEMINE w ,..., Altitteatilifir Y 1 glirtatrargarf I 1 W ITEP1 # MEETING� OF _j �� PLOT I ON BY: OSECONDED BY: C 2.2 -„ ' Y1ES, NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER kfkaL/NO6Z1Vdt2i -^ COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR I COUNCILMAN BALJO I VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON V MAYOR HILL V UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ..•, 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 1 UNANI"'!OUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 8 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 557, 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. 557, BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 557, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED). OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 557, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING 1 . FOR ORDINANCE NO. 558, PZ-42-86 2. WILL THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PLEASE BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON THIS CASE , AND PRESENT RECOMMENDATIONS . 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 . 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 ,C HE ✓o ' ,it. z N vZONP cOity o� �ac�ieunction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Agenda Approved byL1 Date Item December 9, 1986 Consent Agenda j Public Hearing l`�j.riJ r� _ Old Business _ MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL New Business ) Postponed Item THROUGH. KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER - LI THROUGH. /f/CTUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING FROM. JAYOUG WILLIAMS, ASSISTANT PLANNER SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 16, 1986 PZ-42-86 (ORDINANCE NO. 558) BACKGROUND APPLICANT: Hoy and Genevieve Stump LOCATION Northeast corner of Junction Street and Tomahawk Road CURRENT ZONING. General Rural GR PROPOSED ZONING Single Family Residence Zone CR-2 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Low Density GROSS ACREAGE: lli acres ....... NET ACREAGE. 0.6 acres (27,155 square feet) CURRENT LAND USE- Mobile home and corral SURROUNDING LAND USE North - single family homes South - mobile homes East - single family and mobile homes West - mobile homes SURROUNDING ZONING: North - General Rural GR South - General Rural GR East - General Rural GR West - Single Family Residence Zone CR-2(MH) SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Flat with a wash along the eastern edge 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 HONORABLE MAYOR AND Li 'Y COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM - DECEMBER 16, 1986 PZ-42-86 ORD. NO. 558 PAGE TWO PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Rezoning case PZ-42-86 is a request by Hoy and Genevieve Stump to rezone their property from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence Zone. The site consists of a one and one-fourth gross acre parcel which is developed with a mobile home and horse corral . The subject property is bounded by General Rural zoning on three sides and surrounded by single family and mobile homes. After a roadway dedication, the applicants may split the remaining 0.6 net acreage only once. They wish to deed half of the property to their daughter who intends to build a conventional house where the corral now stands. The subject property is located in Section 22 which is an area designated for one acre lots in the General Plan. The Low Density category could permit two dwelling units and 0-7 persons per acre, if the property was surrounded by higher land use densities. The neighborhood is largely composed of one acre homesites with a few nonconforming lots and densities scattered throughout the section. There have been only two successful rezonings in Section 22 and these were approved in 1981 and 1982, prior to adoption of the General Plan. Based on the inconsistency with the General Plan, staff must recommend the denial of this request. Since one acre lots predominate the section, a one acre minimum zoning classification should be maintained. The applicant was apprised that staff recommendation would be for denial prior to the application being submitted. If approved, staff does recommend stipulating the dedication of the West fifty feet (50' ) , the South forty feet (40' ) , and the East thirty-three feet (33' ) of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20' ) by twenty foot (20' ) cutoffs at intersections of Junction and Tomahawk and Junction and Decanso Road. .n. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of November 25, 1986, after public hearing, adopted the following motion: (M/S Taylor/Davies 5-0-0) "I move that the Commission recommend to the Apache Junction City Council the denial of rezoning case PZ-42-86, an application of Hoy G. and Genevieve Stump for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence. HONORABLE MAYOR AND C'" COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM - DEC. 16, 1986 PZ-42-86 ORD. NO. 558 PAGE THREE The reasons for this recommendation are. 1 . Even though the parties do intend to improve the property after it is rezoned, we are confronted with the situation that this Section is a one acre designation, and if we start moving from Section 21 into Section 22, it will go on further; if these people want to put this area into a higher density situation, the applicants and those concerned submit an amendment to the General Plan which is according to procedure, which would be considered, and then possibly change this area through that process. To start splitting the lots up, in contradiction to the General Plan would be a mistake. Mrs. Davies commented that "Although I know that would improve that corner, at this point we need to be bound by the General Plan." DW:jo PZ-42-86 REZONE FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE I. I CR-1 I 1 I ___ I vacant vacant CR-2 1 MH (MH) I I I� I MH SFH vacant { � I 1 TH • SFH MH MH ; MH Horses Junction Drive • -- I • I o MH vacant I C4.5z MH i MH vacant 1 .: I V H TH I i E. 1st Avenue • • �� SUBJECT SITE LIMITS OF ZONING (REMAINDER IS GENERAL RURAL) Scale 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 5 (S To G R - �- 2 3 4 2. According to the City's General Plan, what is your property planned for? .^ 3. Size of your pro arty: 1 1 / 2 [x] acres [ ] square feet 4. What is built on your property now? Double-wide mobile home 5. What has been built on the property next to yours? North home South mobile hnme East mobile home West mobile home 6. Legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned: The South half of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 22 , 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? 103-03-065B 8. Why are you requesting this rezoning? We wish to deed this property ( 1 / 2) to our daughter and son-in-law so that they can have a home constructed on the western half of property . We are asking to have property split in half . • (Please Complete Reverse Side of Form) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Case Number Pz- ¢Z- Proposed Ordinance No. Date Filed /D- 9- ' Application Received by: 1/Sr1L2/,! i Receipt No. n53 Fee Amount Page I of 2 - Revised 4/25/85 9. I/We do hereby tify chat: 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 the owners of the property in this rezoning application have appointed 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 #E10 of this application form.) (1) Hoy G . Stum (Print Owner's Name gnature 1680 t Junction D r . 9 Phone Nu De (sailing Address) Apache Junction , AZ . 85219 (City, State, Zip Code) (Z)Genevieve E . Stump (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) 1680 E. Junction Dr . 982-5134 (Mailing Address) (Phone mintier) Apache Junction , AZ 85219 (City. State. Zip Code) (3) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City, State. Zip Code) (4) (Print Owner's Name) (Signature) (Mailing Address) (Phone Number) (City. State, Zip Code) STATE OF It; The fore lnstrument was acknowledged before ) onq 9 SS me this day of Or re- ' . COUNTY OF /! it,At ) by. �/t. L +"'•� ,,. • My Commission Expires: 9 mac/ ,(�� El L,,_ rc��L ( 1.LL� t, Np ARY PUBLIC / 10. I hereby certify that I have been appointed by the property owner(s) in this rezoning application as their representative and that all correspondence in this matter be mailed to me at their request. • (Print representative's name) (Signature of representative) (Mailing address) (Phone number) (City, State, Zip Code) STATE OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ;: me this day of , 19 COUNTY OF ) by: My Commission Expires: NOTARY PUBLIC Page 2 .of 2 sprrAr ORDINANCE NO 558 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-42-86 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT: /oak SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, for the parcels of land described as the South of the Southwest 4 of the Southwest $ of the Southwest 4 of the Northwest a of Section 22, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona be and hereby is amended from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence Zone subject to the following stipulation applicant dedicate the West fifty feet (50'), the South forty feet (40'), and the East thirty-three feet (33') of the subject property for public roadway and associated purposes along with twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cutoffs at the intersections of Junction Street and Tomahawk Road, and Junction Street and Decanso Road. 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 adoptd 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 /0.N SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS DAY OF , 19 Norman S Hill Mayor ATTEST. Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM David F. Alexander City Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES / D )/y), ) /( 1/-) ‘)//, A(i) ITEM 1 # Y L(70MEETING of MOTION BY : kk.) / SECONDED BY: k ° ..tooac2) .1, yS NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON V COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANI"^OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VO SHEET NOTES D I \t/\ \\v\ e MEETING Pill° ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: \\_ SECONDED BY YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL J UNANI"IOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ROLL CALL VOT SHEET NOTES 1� b ITEM 1 # d „JoMEETING OF (MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON \i( COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER I COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL - ITEM NO. 9 Step 1 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 558, 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. 558 BY TITLE ONLY. Step 3 I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 558, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE (APPROVED AND ADOPTED/DENIED). OR I MOVE THAT ORDINANCE NO. 558, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: olok Ilk ol\CHEd (/ 85�Lk�� E^fix �A',a l za "ado 4 ',i U `� , Z r fie n,it' q,p/ZoNP �Dity 4pacheunction December 11 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • 1 FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK 0/ SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO AD HOC TASK FORCE ON ALTERNATIVE FUNDING At the December 2nd meeting, the Council appointed a citizen's ad hoc committee to work with city staff on researching and making recommen- dations to the council regarding funding alternatives. The actual appointment of individuals to serve on the committee was postponed until December 16th to allow for talent bank applications. The committee was to consist of a Chamber of Commerce member (city resident) , a non-Chamber business owner (city resident), a city resident as a consumer, a non-voting citizen at large (not neces- sarily a city resident) , and Councilman Eidson to represent the Council . The final member would come from the EOAT. As of this date, we have not received any response to the request for .,.� talent bank applications which has appeared in the newspapers. We have received indications, however, that Mike Davis would serve as the representative of the EOAT and that Lois Porter would like to serve as the citizen at large. The council may wish to make appointments of at least these two members even though we haven't received the actual talent bank applications so that we can begin the process and not delay the matter for too long a period of time. � Agenda Approved by kmc Date Item # Consent Agenda — P !c Hng /y /� Oldubl:BJ:si ear;ness New Business — Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 O�` PQ,ACHE'TGti wy, fr ,.____ __.„:„....,,:„,.„,,,, . . ..,,.„.,..„., .„0„.. . ,,A., ;„..,....- gR/ZOP City o� puce 02unction TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR FOv1c 11 n CZvY) i liee- BOARD/COMMISSIO MMITTEE NCO -vci-ir e-C v+iZe- - Q' DATE: /a- /D ?moo NAME: JY' , K' P�q ra. m TELEPHONE: 9f�3- <//30 (home) J e'-/q- 999F/ (office; ADDRESS: /56 4 Al- So6i Gf' — / T ZIP CODE: (85,2/9 OCCUPATION: .3a•l es/no n - 74r-E,bi-1-�`- ia[ ( nO -; n95 (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: ci eS PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COKMUNITY ACTIVITIES. Ynevylber 0-- e_ bcaywi p� SUi•rs'i l Len 1'Semen s CtSScG, OV)C�lI.k 1 V r l k-ce-5--eet In C ommoni i- \ CQC4i-afle-S anA INorNeS`\ ois teYvA e{- l o rJ- y\J cull E h1 is he_Cm 1E ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: 1 t.,0a_Y\--1-- bQ l Ndokliej I R r_orn►-Aor\',41 ISSUES NOTE: As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. 9(I'L -4,ti_ ----- Revised 6/19/31 Signature of Applicant 1001 NC2TH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION.A2IZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 Aft Aw ,64, ..a.,,„, , ):.)(:))1 , ,,,,,„, ,,,, . .,, . i,:-.,sos .„47.6-. . -0 '9R/zoNP witty0 . 04puc/ie unction TALENT BANK APPLICATION 4, FOR CkOCI�/10 1 om AI ) I c P BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: / //0/2 6. NAME: D a (1 �`1 C, Li 15 Pik TELEPHONE: 9 q 3 - J,S a (home) 9 ?.2-- - /6 2 (office' ADDRESS: S.3Sy t Cr•e-acir.)r)cel ZIP CODE: (�� ) OCCUPATION: t?n 4-- Dt)ner O-- Sk4mrere 10FS*crrt WeQi" (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: J rs C,) 11 El e PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: el(,-1\€,ti - rn,1 ,-��� 0-4: 7 �1(:;-}err\ 1.)-)QC,r _S-f-c r e i t e-ii be r ©1 RJ'acGI d-r S t+ 4 nr e 4-6 e r— n "(' ehCi.4nAo e r 01- aenla1 e r` ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: A f(1<c kse IAALQV 410r1 i s c N-c�� ,0 CcmmuNti� ( . a J NOTE: As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. (/ , Revised 6/19/81 ignature✓ /V plitant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE J'JNCTICN,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 P4ACHE ✓ei cb :i 'r1PIZO IP iCOt y ae @ pacI2e �ZL�actian TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR,c/?e ice'/ l;sA 7/-6 (- BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE -cpI/i -4`6//?%1<, / ii°c'e" -( e - DATE: l2 /)o / .Sy, NAME: /`/, C7/7,-) / .G , 72"%vi r5 , TELEPHONE: '-Iq:�-_5 0 (home) G3,.s—r 3cO 6 (office; ADDRESS. /��;�r: 5 I1A{Cr'�tn L%ri51'�� A- 7 ZIP CODE: , "')-- 22 (; OCCUPATION: _�_,\ co,F, ;,b-,C y4r,i r kl: - - (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: / !_ -.ce' ;al', / .r G<v‘ l',o C Fv 1-12 c-r cl —1—;,, ^t,IA ,- ri�i ,, '-=k' l C.. . C r PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: U,, ,,, /' l,! /4,vytr,N c' l ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: NOTE: As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. c /� / / i.i4Y-' f_i_ 7 ('` ,, Revised 6/19/81 S` °nature of At`p1icant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION.ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Ink QACHE do ___ ,r,...„.." . , .,.,...,,,,,,,)„,., Oix ; t i,,,,A ..„..., .;,,z o ...'=t'''•:‘-, 1411q. z e U) :_,,_, .7 , : „..0, gRIZ`oNA C pcc14e c 2unction Vity U� TALENT BANK APPLICATION PS FOR BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE DATE: 1 ZAc i l NAME: k.- tC,. k (� IA h k e f E. TELEPHONE: q.4 -c,7 1 3c (home) /� (office) ADDRESS: Li LLSS �` LD 1 rl 0 11�5 -- ,- A ZIP CODE: E S< 19 OCCUPATION: G'C(Cii ;-Icfc c /2J (if retired, please indicate former occupation or profession) EDUCATION: k- l , --(z,u,,,,,c ,, ('E,,(,,c,5 PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES. (31 A fv,I4 la <,r c i mc.K'C' E 0 A T E:fN T 1u jl.,t LAJCaUtJ1'5 .,iiiJ 0, l , .)L,\_i A. __1 Iri7\ Hr ,,1 -yi.�'K rah `;F!r7 , ,v., �c_ ,, �,,— ,T _Cti t-L'.,1 `:ra',.4731M1r-1-r -'C t-: A,6 cki- <c1- ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: NOTE: As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. ' 'c,�.✓'L [�/C.`L:_ .f /r'SfAi' Ct44-1 46. (2-C-t�4.'-'t Cam(, , ,7 (,;),.r:1J c, l t;Gs,.a, -.--oe - .- --4(ns GG.:uX..i /Ld.-/- i.'fti.az. a1 L'. h 1//d-- y Revised 6/19/81 Signature of Applicant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,A2IZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ANEW sank p. `- P?AC,NF ✓l,,L , =<=.fix f4kic n2, 6e1)11)ht AIR,za‘AP' Vitt' o �pache ztnction TALENT BANK APPLICATION FOR 7 -,,, BOARD/COMMI SS I O COMMITTEE DATE: // NAME: L ,-2 TELEPHONE: <i6//-6 7 Gp l0 6 (home) 9 ,2 -3 3 (office) ADDRESS: /6,9. �^ 'J ZIP CODE: .5 o�� 0 OCCUPATION: 41 li:4 Uy 4-4_, /� 1. )'lam (if etire please indicate former cd cupation or profession) EDUCATION: �" 4 ..Q .C�.•u_'y 4-I �6 / ' A-�,,`�-- • (1%.0 Lgs . 5p,Ja i:1-a:61;-4k.,;-4-tAJLi.- _-.-1-,- cbu,,,,,,,,.. ttAG zA,,,i,l,e,,,,,,, l_mic) PROFESSIONAL AND/OR COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: C/& 4)(1-1.L.,_ l al to 5 a am_KLA-4- ) it71u- ri-t_e_y ' fOLb - -rt.- n ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION/REFERENCES: , +sac.. 4970 ,� Q,t„-,,�: , v;' Gar..) [=�rv17LaM .�}.� -77-c`1?-pt Q 644-1, ., Co-yr f /-u.-0-/ ''"I°21"AdAi)-\,*(t4-1:44 -i--6..d.AAH,----rte4_, li_m,i_e-2 6a7y-, fA....6,i, !"4.4..--L, a-,,,A. tf-TrrivA.7_,zi-z41-4- NOTE: As a candidate to a Council Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and phone number will be available to the press and the public. From time to time, requests are received from State and County legislators for recommendations of citizens to serve on State and County Commissions. If the City Council recommends your name be submitted, you will be contacted before this action is taken. If appointed to a Board/Commission/Committee, I understand that I must reside within the corporate limits of the City of Apache Junction and that I cannot be absent from the city for over 30 days at one time unless authorized by the Mayor and Council. (2ti-cd. fO-t.; Revised 6/19/81 Signature of Applicant 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • APACHE JUNCTION,A2IZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ROLL CAL VOTE SHEET NOTES 1 Vi (t)) \;)j) '‘) .. )'6/ A,-)). 71/4') ' \\/ 'y, -i16'% cvliip ITEM # \0 MEETIN OF I MOTION BY: SECONDED BYI 4 YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER L IfiZ\_ , COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO v VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL j ji . COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL , UNANIIOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL a Q- ITEM NO. 10 I MOVE THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS BE APPOINTED TO THE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING AD-HOC COMMITTEE: (.,vACHE✓ 7. J�' i ��` ads a r: O 4PIZONP' c 'Zty o ipacl2e e)unction November 13 , 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: COUNCIL APPOINTMENT As of the November 18th regular meeting, the Council should have conducted interviews of all of the qualified appli- cants for the currently vacant council seat . Appointment of an individual to fill the vacancy will be placed on the November 18th agenda for your consideration. kmc Agenda Approved by -- Date Item # Consent Agenda Pubt.c hua.'ng Old [3u.^.!ness NIsw i,lJbtf I'S$ 2/0* /6-) Postponed Item �/�/, S(' if Er:r,RJ- 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET , ) NOTES ecfl 019) I 11/(P/0 ITEf1 # MEETING 0 t MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 11 I MOVE THAT BE APPOINTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED BY THE RESIGNATION OF FRANK JIMENEZ. ink Ale. PQACHE i gR/ZoNP `pity o pache ounclzon December 11 , 1986 Amok MEMORANDUM TO- HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM ACTING CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK44/ SUBJECT AGE SPECIFIC OVERLAY ZONING Due to the considerable amount of discussion on this particular type of zoning which took place at the December 8th public forum, the members of the Council present that evening indicated an interest in having the zoning reviewed and the "loopholes" addressed by possible amendments. Since any amendment to these regulations would first require a review and hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission, it is appropriate for the Council to give direction to the Commission to do so with added stipulations regarding what areas of the ordinance need to be looked at. This item will be placed on the December 16th agenda for your consid- eration. kmc by Agenda Approved Date Item # Consent Agenda — — Public Hearing Old Business New Business Pcstponed Item - 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 V)) )(RO' ' CALL XpTE EET NOTES 11 1 -‘ic , ili7 v r:;A),) 44 •j_ ....., , k ;_r)\t/ty\ ,,t ,z , y ,4\x) k,\ --4Sr - ' � �ITEM # V-V MEETING 0 ( 19 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: n/f YES NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL J COUNCILMAN EIDSON ~ COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER i E4T1� A COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR I/ COUNCILMAN BALJO v MAYOR HILL i . UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL J a cr2TT11.- ITEMM NO. 12 I MOVE THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO AMEND REGULATIONS OF THE AGE SPECIFIC OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS, WITH THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS: ... Agenda Approved by / QACHF Date Item # P „ '''':4 1. Consent Agenda O y} `F3 1GLY. � Public Hearing ..... ' `O Old Business W1.F 1 t f� / /. , " F „; :• New Business C' Po tponed I M m '1R,ZONP `pity o� Lipache .. unction December 11 , 1986 re. MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ACTING CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERKt SUBJECT: INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR RETIRED COUNCIL MEMBERS The Council has discussed the possibility of allowing retiring council members to participate in the city's health insurance coverage, but has never set the guidelines for providing such a benefit nor given the staff direction to proceed with providing the coverage. Before such action is taken, I feel that there are some specific ques- tions that need to be answered regarding the extent of the coverage. There is presently a federal law which requires employers to provide certain health insurance benefits to employees even after the employee has left the job. These benefits include allowing the employee to continue on with group insurance coverage (at their own expense) for a limited amount of time. If the employee is terminated with cause, then the coverage can only continue for 18 months. Under other circumstances, the coverage can continue up to a maximum of 3 years. The payment of the premium is the obligation of the employee and a late payment means .,.� immediate termination of coverage. The coverage is limited to the carrier at the time. If the city changes carriers, then the employee coverage is terminated and they cannot sign up with the new carrier. If the council wishes to be considered "employees" for the purpose of participating in group insurance coverage, then these federal guidelines will apply. If the council wishes to have different guidelines, then they will have to be established and set out in either resolution or ordinance form in which case you will need to provide them to me. There are two questions that the council should consider at this time. If the guidelines for the insurance participation are different from those applying to all other employees, is the city discriminating against the other employees? Will the addition of an older age group such as retiring council members have an impact on the city's group rates or even if a policy is offered? This item will be placed on the December 16th agenda, so that I may have specific council direction before I proceed further. kmc 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 l'4LL CALL VDTE SHEET 4 tions Jk J1 (p y •,,i, Pj \ii/ c v .„. ,‘ 'v ," ' , ' ' ()\)1/4)?,e ;'ir )( \ 0 ' VY°1 \ ) ITEM # \ t MEETING OF di 0 VetMOTION BY : SECONDED BY: - _______, Y NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO / VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL / COUNCILMAN EIDSON 1/! COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER V COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR ii MAYOR HILL V i UNANIMOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL - \ 4111.1. a ITEM NO. 13 I MOVE THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE ACTING CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH RETIRING COUNCILMEMBERS HEALTH INSURANCE TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 1, 1 t , ITEM # \/\ MEETING OF P11 +) 1 c(45,,n MOTION BY: SECONDED BY : YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO � VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL V COUNCILMAN EIDSON J COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL UNANI' OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL C'- ITEM NO. 14 I MOVE THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE ACTING CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH BID PROCEDURES FOR SECURITY CAMERAS AND MONITORS FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT. it �..� PQ ACHE O _ G.j,O „...._ U Z ._ ,,::,„,,,, t.;,,,,,,. 'lRizoNP ,ity o* &4pache unction Mi....- Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda Public Hearing MEMORANDUM TO. HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL MEMBERS Old Business �/ THROUGH: ACTING CITY MANAGER New Business j*:-1gat /5� 01 Postponed Item FROM: ' DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE- DECEMBER 4, 1986 SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS Proposals for the Archaeological Investigations, as required by the Bureau of Land Management on the Apache Junction Equestrian Trail were received on October 30, 1986. The following firms responded to our request for proposals: 1 . Museum of Northern Arizona $17,942.23 Flagstaff, Arizona 2. Arizona State University $20,014.68 Office of Research Development Tempe, Arizona i.ibk 3. Recon $38,355.02 Regional Environmental Consultants San Diego, California 4. Scientific Archaeological Services $38,966.24 Phoenix, Arizona A committee consisting of three B.L.M. Archaeologists and the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer reviewed and evaluated each proposal. Attached is a copy of the letter summarizing their review along with a recommendation. Funds have been allocated for this project in the Community Services Department budget. It is recommended that the Museum of Northern Arizona be awarded the bid in the amount of $17,942.23. 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 -.. Prof NT pr�yF IN REPLY REFER TO P- i ti United States Department of the Interior 8100 (023) • . ° BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT "“"!4101 Phoenix District Office 2015 West Deer Valley Road Phoenix,Arizona 85027 December 1, 1986 Mr. Jeff Bell Director, Community Services City of Apache Junction 1001 North Idaho Apache Junction, Arizona 85220-0190 Dear Mr. Bell: Mary Barger, Bill Gibson, and Gary Stumpf, all BLM archaeologists, and Shereen Lerner, archaeologist with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, have reviewed the proposals for testing the Denham Archaeological site. We evaluated all proposals on a point system and have enclosed the final scores, a brief evaluation of each proposal, and final recommendations. Final Point Score RECON 62.25 SAS 70.5 ASU 82.75 MNA 84.75 RECON The research questions proposed by RECON cannot be answered with the level of fieldwork identified. The research discussion views the site as a "project area," proposes to delimit and explain the functions of several sites within this area, and even goes so far as to attempt to delimit activity areas within these "sites." This approach far exceeds the limits of the data that would be collected. This work could only be accomplished under full-scale mitigation. Personnel was not specified for analysis and the emphasis of lithic analysis for a Hohokam site appears questionable. The costs for curation and special analysis were not included as part of the cost target. The principal investigator and co-principal investigator are both well qualified. RECON's total cost target was the second highest, but if curation costs were included, their cost would be the highest. Their cost per person year of effort was the highest at $63,925. 2 SAS SAS demonstrated a good understanding of the archaeology of the area and made an effort to gain first-hand familiarity with the Denham site. Their research design was well thought out and appropriate for the scope of work. However, surface collection will be limited to the surface of backhoe trenches, and only rare or diagnostic artifacts will actually be oak retrieved. This will result in only 4,350 square meters of surface collection, less than 1/3 that proposed by ASM and RECON, and a little more than 1/2 that proposed by ASU. Furthermore, only one feature will be hand excavated. SAS's fieldwork, laboratory, and write-up hour estimates were the highest of all the proposals received. Their estimate for laboratory work was nearly twice that of the other bidders, which is difficult to understand in light of their proposal to limit surface collection to rare or diagnostic artifacts. Rodgers is well qualified to do the work proposed, but Pike 's experience is relatively limited. As a team, the SAS personnel are not highly competitive in terms of education and experience. SAS's cost per person-year-effort is $32,471, the second lowest of the four bidders. ASU The research design is adequate for the proposed scope of work. We are concerned about ASU's ability to address the detailed research questions of "occupation" from the surface collections of ceramics on a heavily disturbed site. ASU has a realistic approach to the scope of work and its plans for volunteer recruitment will enhance the effort. There is concern that collection strategies are deficient in terms of site area covered . The supervisory personnel are well qualified for this project, although report deadlines have not always been promptly met. ASU's cost/person year ($27,797) was the lowest of the four proponents. Volunteer use was factored into the cost structure. Specialized analysis (i.e. pollen radiocarbon dating) was not included in the proposal. The inclusion of public exhibits in this project was innovative. MNA MNA gave a good synopsis of the culture history of the area and outlined feasible research questions. The proposed field methodology was appropriate in order to answer the research questions. Their trenching and surface collection strategy will provide excellent coverage of the site and individual features. Their surface collection covers 13,400m2, the highest of all the proposals. They include costs for analysis for archeomagnetic dates, pollen, C14 and shell. The amount of time allowed for fieldwork and analysis appear to be low. Their principal investigator and field director are well qualified and their consultant is the best in his field. Their personnel structure represents a good team approach and their inclusion of a park planner is commendable. MNA has a good track record for projects involving park planning. Their costs per person year of effort is second highest at $43,760. The inclusion of a good volunteer effort will make for an excellent proposal. 3 Recommendations As reflected in our scores, we believe either ASU or MNA can do a good job with this contract. They both have acceptable research designs and their total costs are the lowest. However, since MNA had the lowest cost and the highest point score, we recommend you award the contract to MNA with the following stipulation: MNA should drop all effort pertaining to the removal and analysis of human burials and apply this effort to either fieldwork or laboratory analysis. The amount of effort required to remove and analyze human remains is extensive and if numerous burials are located during testing, extra time would be necessary for both fieldwork and analysis. Rather, the location of all human remains should be documented and mapped and the area backfilled. The only real concern we had with the MNA proposal was the limited amount of time designated for fieldwork and analysis. However, as a fixed-price contract, MNA is obligated to do all the work they specified within the cost they proposed. However, if they can use volunteers during fieldwork and analysis, this apparent concern may not be a problem. The use of volunteers should be strongly encouraged. We appreciate this opportunity to review and comment on the proposals and look forward to working closely with the city on this contract. Each reviewer's specific comments for each proposal are on file at the Phoenix District Office and are available for your review. Please call Mary Barger at 863-4464 if you have any questions. Please notify us upon contract award. Sincerely, . .,,,../:,e--:. .)// Marlyn . Jones District Manager ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES fq f)/17 r? ofseb ITEM # \ V )j1;N, MEETING OF MOTION BY: �Ark \ '` SECONDED BY: YES NO ABSTAINED Laiell„.. FEJAIn COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER / MAYOR HILL UNANIIOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL p r a ITEM NO. 15 I MOVE THAT THE BID FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS BE AWARDED TO , IN THE AMOUNT OF Amok / 6CT % "IRiz-ow. ity c C puche 09unctian DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT "wok, December 4, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH- KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: CL HUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT- �, RESIGNATION FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND APPOINTMENT TO FILL UNEXPIRED TERM Attached is the letter of resignation from Tony Vehon. Tony has been on the Commission for over 4 years. Staff would be very greatful if the Council could recognize his service with a Certificate of Appreciation or public recognition. Included in the packet are the Talent Bank applications we have on file for the Commission. We have also issued press releases to the newspaper and cable TV inviting applications. An appointment would be for the unexpired term ending June 30, 1987. CRN:j1 Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda Public Hearing Old Business New Business 1ILL /L- Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 December 2, 1986 Mr. Chuck Newcomber Director of Planning City of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Rd. Apache Jct. , AZ 85219 Dear Chuck, Please accept this letter as my resignation from the Planning and Zoning Commission effective January 1, 1987. It has been a great priviledge to serve on the commission and I truly appreciate all of the help and cooperation that I received during my appointment by all of the people in the planning department. I have been asked to accept a leadership position in my church which would make it impossible to attend planning commission meetings on a regular basis. This conflict, along with my desire to become involved with other community organizations, has brought me to the point where I feel it is time for me to step down from the commission. I am aware that by leaving my position I would be giving up my member- ship in the E.O.A.T. and the Transporation Board. I hope you will have no problem finding replacements for me in these positions. I would appreciate it very much if you could contact John Schoeph and Rich Broman for me and let them know. Sincerely, I160-, Tony Vehdn TV/mav OLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES (� Q t1 1 ITEf1 # \ () MEETING OF f1OTION BY: SECONDED BY: YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER Cau.N11 MAfd SIMENEZ'�" COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR A` COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL UNANI"O S IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL ITEM NO. 16 I MOVE THAT THE RESIGNATION OF MR. TONY VEHON FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET; AND THAT BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SAID UNEXPIRED TERM TO END JUNE 30, 1987. (1----)8E,cHe Jo x O U it ' ., ,Z 'IR/ NP COzty o �: 7Icic�ieunction ZO MEMORANDUM TO. HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS THROUGH: ACTING CITY MANAGER \ k�/ FROM: � DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES SUBJECT. RESIGNATION FROM PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Attached is a letter from Paul Miller stating he must resign his position from the City's Parks and Recreation Commission. Currently there are no Talent Bank Applications on file to fill this vacancy. Your consideration of this request is appreciated. Agenda Approved by 1� Date Item # Consent Agenda — Public Hearing — Old Business New Business . . Postponed Item — 001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 December 8, 1986 Mayor Norman S. Hill City of Apache Junction Mayor Hill, Please accept my resignation from the City's Parks & Recreation Commission. Due to other commitments I can no longer serve in this capacity. I appreciate the opportunity and enjoyed working with your Staff and other Commission Members. Sincerely, Aft. Aokk. ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES W ITEM # \/\ MEET NG F MOT I ON BY: SECONDED BY: YES/ NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER Z COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL MAYOR HILL j UNANIIOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL L IOW a ITEM NO. 17 I MOVE THAT THE RESIGNATION OF MR. PAUL MILLER FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION, BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET. oak oak ?ACHE' ✓G k 2 O 0 i "IP/Z0NP COiti 075 7iacIie &2unction MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL MEMBERS THROUGH: ACTING CITY MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE: DECEMBER 3, 1986 SUBJECT. FACILITY USE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES City resident Jean Perkins has made a request for the use of the Community Center to hold an "Open House" designed at establishing a Republican Club here locally, on January 5, 1987 between the hours of 7:00 and 10:00 p.m. According to our Facility Use Manual, groups wishing to use City facilities for political purposes must obtain City Council approval. Your consideration of this request is appreciated. Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda Public; Nearing Old 31,s ness Nevi BJsin GsS 4L/4 / Postpont;d Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602)982 8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES -t) l �` 1 ,\1\9.J \ 1 4 ITEM # k MEETING OF, MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: .1)// YES/ NO ABSTAINED VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON '•B. COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER i/ / ' COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO V MAYOR HILL UNANI"^ US , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL Ask GMETMA ITEM NO. 18 I MOVE THAT THE REQUEST BY JEAN PERKINS TO USE THE COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY FOR A REPUBLICAN PARTY "OPEN HOUSE" ON JANUARY 5, 1987, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 AND 10:00 P.M., BE APPROVED/DENIED. rn„,,,,,,, psACH G __ c) „t.„ Z DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 'IR/ZpNP c6iiy o 04pache unct20n W E Mc DANIEL December 8, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO- Kathleen Connelly, City Clerk -/ FROM: Chief W.E. McDaniel up&I) SUBJECT. Agenda Item - December 16, 1986 This is to request you place an item on the December 16 , 1986 , Apache Junction City Council meeting agenda. I wish to speak to the Council concerning going to bid for a Computer Aided Dispatch (C.A.D. ) and Records Management System Software Program. Xe— Agenda Approved by Date Item # Consent Agenda WEM/dp s Public Hearing Old Business Q New Business ' Po_tcrJ,,•'v +'`:i" --- 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET A 0 NOTES 6\5' ,•. )2 \, , , ,,,v (v V '\ ry , t ,,,A,,,,,, ITEM # 0 MEETING OF Pit MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: W` Y NO ABSTAINED COUNCILMAN BALJO I VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER I 1,COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR MAYOR HILL UNANIIOUS , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED i _ TOTAL a a ITEM NO. 19 I MOVE THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE ACTING CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH BID PROCEDURES FOR COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH (C.A.D. ) AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SOFTWARE PROGRAM. ?ACHE • 'SRiZpW/ ( it,i ,: �., .1 UnCtiOn December 8, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO; HONORABLE MAYOR AND( MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU; ACTING CITY MANAGiI��/ IRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKSpL1/17 ag, ,FROM; BUILDING OFFICIAL RE; FINAL APPROVAL FOR PZ-67-85 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT ACACIA VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK) AGENDA ITEM Pursuant to Section 19.0103.4.a. of the zoning ordinance, the Building division has no objection to the approval of the final planned development as presented. However, it should be noted that the structure intended for use as a laundry and meeting room facility in this development is intended to be a structure pre-manufactured in Chandler, Arizona. This division has no objection to this plan, as outlined in the attached copy of a letter from the applicant, Mr. Glenn Pratt. Attached also, for your review, is a copy of the preliminary floor plan proposed for this structure. CC:sw Attach: Letter of 12/6/86 Proposed Floor Plan Agenda Approved by Date Item Consent Agenda Public Hearing Old Business New Business f L/"1/`f Postponed Item 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 December 6, 1986 °Ilk oink DEC - 5 I986 Re. Acacia Villa MHP laundry building Sandy Whitten Deputy Zoning Administrator City of Apache Jct. Dear Ms Whitten: Attached is a preliminary drawing of the floor plan for the laundry building. This plan is intended to convey the intent of the developer in a generalized manner, and might have to have minor changes in order to comply with the requirements of the State of Arizona Department of Building & Fire Safety. The building will be constructed by International Homes, Inc., in their factory located in Chandler, Az. Plans for the building will be submitted to the State of Arizona Department of Building and Fire Safety for review and approval, but the plans are not yet completed. Inspection of construct- ion will take place in the factory by the State of Arizona, and a State of Arizona insignia will be placed on the unit before it can be used for the intended purpose. I have discussed the above plan with Charles Coleman, City of Apache Jct., and he has indicated to me that it is an acceptable plan. Thank you, Glenn J Pratt 2555 West Madero Mesa, Az 85202 phone 831 8025 ( -CO._�.k_ ►, _ $ . ` ACACIA VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK Glenn Pratt phone 831 8025 2555 West Madero, Mesa, Az 85202 -- 52' A j < Z.8' 6" h( 6,611 _ co. to'' lc i o' ' A - S'Xis 8oc�a Ar-R S FORA G 5 36 ( i zgil • .0 C 0 , � o ir MEETING ROOM SiNt< I Q LAUNDRY - � ; couNreK� w v I _(' . J W < _____ 1Yv14, , 11 4oxiyy, WINDow IA/I►JDOW '�tI+t$lde- e-OOc1-1-tu 1. ot..ttct PURPOSE: This facility will serve as a meeting room and laundry for use by residents of Acacia Villa MHP, and will not be open for public use. SPECIFICATIONS: This facility must meet all City, County, and Arizona State building codes and all other related regulations regarding the intended use. , Plumbing & electrical services shall accomodate 4 commercial grade wash machines and 2 dryers at the location shown above, and 2 lavatories and one kitchen sink as shown above. Separate heating & cooling units for laundry & meeting room, if practical. Size of doors, windows, partitions, closet, and kitchen cabinet will be indicated and approved on the final construction plans. Use bay window in front. Deadbolt locks on outside doors. r Cathedral ceiling throughout the unit. Use composition roof. CC t_Pv6 FffN 'r ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES C Ov cf.! . \) )WR‘"' ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: Ileir_5! YES NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR , (// COUNCILMAN BALJO , I As' VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL 1� COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER MAYOR HILL UNANI"1OUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL m a a ITEM NO. 20 I MOVE THAT IN THE CASE PZ-67-85, ACACIA VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 19. .0103.4.a. OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SAID APPLICANT HAVING PRESENTED PLANS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND RECEIVING SAID APPROVAL IS NOW SEEKING FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING APPROVAL, WHICH SHALL BE (GRANTED/DENIED) . ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES kyVI � ITEM # MEETING OF l PLOT I ON BY: SECONDED BY: VOI YES NO ABSTAINED CO11 1'EMAN JI1cEt1E�" COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR V .•. COUNCILMAN BALJO VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL COUNCILMAN EIDSON / COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER .MAYOR HILL UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL A • • CZEMILL ITEM NO. 21 I MOVE THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M. , AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. , ON JANUARY 5, 1987, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND A WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M. , ON JANUARY 6, 1987, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Ink Am\ PQACHE Jo U ,,ti, ,('li" oz q,piZUNP c it2 o pache f unction DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Adomik November 12, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH. KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER ' ; FROM• ; /CHARLES R. NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached please find copies of the Board of Adjustment Minutes from their meeting of September 29, 1986 and November 10, 1986 Please have the original Minutes placed in the "Minutes Book" in the City Clerk' s Office. CRN:jl 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 85220-0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982-8002 or-7s BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA SEPTEMBER 29, 1986 7 P M PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs. Blatterspiel Mr Burgess List in Planning Mrs. Perkins Mr Schaffer Office r Mr Setliff �k I Mr Berry, Chairman Mr. Nakagawa, Acting Executive Secretary Mr. Williams, Staff Ms Ortberg, Recording Secretary SYNOPSIS Agenda dated September 29, 1986 approved as submitted Minutes dated September 8, 1986 approved as submitted BA-3-86 recommended for approval 1 Roll Call Four members present with two absent as noted above 2. Blatterspiel/Setliff M/S " I make a motion that we approved the Agenda dated September 29, 1986. Motion passed 4-0-0 3 Perkins/Setliff M/S "I move we approved the Minutes dated September 8, 1986. Motion passed 4-0-0. ' 4 Chairman opened BA-3-86 and asked for staff briefing 5. Mr. Nakagawa briefed the Board regarding this request to provide 36 parking spaces instead of the required 63 parking spaces for a proposed 3,166 gross square feet Dairy Queen restaurant 6. Chairman asked the applicant to speak 7 Steve McClung stated he is the architect representing Jim and Dale Goodman who are the applicants. Stated they currently own the most successful Dairy Queen restaurant in the state, and are desirous of opening a restaurant in ApaL Junction This will be a double drive-through window operation, the first in the state. This should take some of the burden off of the need for required parking They have scaled down the size of this restaurant to the smallest Dairy Queen will allow They would use the basement for storage and an office facility. He has compared parking requirements in other area cities, and Apache Junction has the most stringent. 8. Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in favor S 9 Jim Goodman feels that based on the Mesa store, which is the busiest L in the state, they have spaces that are very rarely used, and they have 41 spaces The proposed store is about 2/3 of the seating capacity of the store Mesa. So they feel this will be more than adequate 10 Mrs Perkins asked how many employees will be on per shift, and how many spaces will their cars take up 11. Dale Goodman feels between 5 - 8 employees. Stated that 35-48% of their business will use the drive- through windows. irrmir Ask Auk BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE TWO 12. Mr. Setliff feels that they should have more than one space for the handicapped, especially given the influx of winter visitors to Apache Junction 13 Chairman asked for staff's recommendations. 14. Mr. Nakagawa according to the criteria they must go by, staff would recommend denial for this variance. They look at the site size, the topography, or physical characteristics .0.111%, that would constrain development from occurring practically and would still meet the zoning requirements. The other restaurants in the area have had to comply with the parking regulations They also desire to put in a basement which adds to the overall floor area which the other restaurants do not have This basement is figured into the required parking 15 Mr Newcomer stated that staff is not so concerned what decision is made, but rather the basis for the decision. If the Board does feel there is room to allow this variance, he mentioned two special conditions that would apply to this case. 1 Our current Zoning Ordinance does not have specific standards for drive-in restaurants; it is based on sit-down restaurant standards. 2 The square footage of the basement in this store j will not be used for business traffic. 16. Mrs. Perkins asked if this would be setting a precedent 17 Mr Nakagawa stated this is of concern to staff. If other businesses come in, will they ask for the same kind of variance I because Dairy Queen got it 18 Mr McClung gave data regarding the ratio of seating spaces inside to parking spaces outside of Burger King and McDonald's. 19 Setliff/Perkins M/S "I'd like to make a motion in two different areas 1) We don't have criteria at the present time to follow because it's not in the statutes, and 2) until we get it from the Zoning Committee, I don't feel justified in denying this request 20. Chairman opened this to discussion. 21 Mrs Perkins asked that they add two more handicapped parking spaces and that they would take out the R.V. spaces and convert these to regular spaces. 22 Mr Setliff feels that this would be discrimination. 23 Board discussed the need for clarification of the above motion, • either to approve or deny this case 24 Chairman asked that Mrs Perkins withdraw the second to the motion in question, which she did. L There being no one else wishing to second this motion, it was defeated. He called for another motion. 25. Mrs Perkins M/ "I move that we accept this with 36 parking spaces, ' and possibly asking the R V parking be taken out and that more handicapped spaces be added. This is based on the fact that their floor space is their basement space s BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES SEPTEMBER 29, 1986 PAGE THREE 26. Chairman There being no second, this motion was defeated He called for another motion 27. Setliff M/ "I make a motion that we table this matter until we get further clarification from the Planning and Zoning Committee. 28 Mr Newcomer stated the he and Zoning Administrator feel that concerning the lack of guidance in the Zoning Ordinance, that unt I it is revised, which will be a minimum of 6 or 7 mont1 that it is the appropriate duty of the Board of Adjust. to offer the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance considering items that are not specifically covered and that staff does not have the proper guidance to carry through on 29. Charles Coleman wanted to point out that this issue is in the hands of the Board, and that failure on the part of the Board to act is equivalent to a denial of this request 30 Chairman there being no second to the above motion, he called for a new motion. 31. Perkins/Setliff M/S "I move that we approve this case. This is based on the fact that their floor space is their basement space Motion passed 3-1-0 with Mrs. Blatterspiel objecting 32. Chairman noted that Mr Bakkedahl, the vice-mayor was present. 33 Setliff/Blatterspiel M/S to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 8 p m IRespectfu/17 submitted, Jim Nakagawa, Acting Execu iv0 Secretary rt err , airm L irony BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA NOVEMBER 10, 1986 7 P.M. PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs Blatterspiel Mrs Perkins List in Planning Mr. Burgess Mr Setliff Office Mr. Sanchez es 1 Mr Schaffer Mr Berry, Chairman Mr. Williams, Staff Mr. Nakagawa, Staff Mr. Newcomer, Executive Secretary SYNOPSIS Agenda dated November 10, 1986 approved as submitted BA-5-86 continued to December 8, 1986 BA-4-86 recommended for approval. 1 Roll Call Five members present with two absent as noted above 2 Blatterspiel/Sanchez M/S "I recommend that we approve the agenda dated November 10, 1986 " Motion passed 5-0-0 3. Schaffer/Burgess M/S "I recommend that we continue BA-5-86 to the meeting of December 8, 1986 at 7 p.m. in these Council Chambers " Motion passed 5-0-0 4 Chairman opened BA 4 86 and asked for staffs briefing 5. Mr. Williams briefed the Board regarding this variance request to permit a six foot minimum distance between main buildings instead of the fourteen foot minimum distance between main buildings required in the CR-5 Multiple Family Residence Zone 6 Chairman asked the applicant to speak. 7. Michael Mecsey responded, stated his request, and answered questions. 8 Charles Coleman stated that the Building Department does not have any problem with this request, except that the awnings must be kept 6 feet apart 9 Chairman there being no one wishing to speak in favor or opposition, he closed this hearing to the public 10. Burgess/Sanchez M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment that a variance to Section 15.0608, allowing a reduction of the fourteen foot minimum distance between main build- ings to a six foot minimum distance between main buildings, is hereby approved The conditions are. 1. Area covered by awnings shall not be enclosed. 2. Awning heights not to exceed nine feet 3 No awnings on the eastern units facing Cedar Drive. 4 Awnings will be made of a non-combustible material r, r► BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES NOV. 10, 1986 PAGE TWO The Findings are 1 The Building Department has no objections 2. The Fire Department has no objections. 3 Surrounding property owners are not here tonight to state any objections 1 4. If these people want to live with these conditions, they should be allowed to do so " Motion passed 4-0-1 with Mr Berry voting present 11. Blatterspiel/Schaffer M/S to adjourn Meeting adjourned at 7 30 p m Respectfully submitted, es w er, xecutive ecretary Art Ber ,; hairman Damar 1 111"^g yP CHF✓G iitk‘p,s7 -6 'IP/Z0t.11)' (6ity o f @ pache 2uncticn DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 10, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL A / THROUGH �KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER 'V FROM. ///(/CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES oft', FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached please find copies of the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of November 25, 1986. Please have the original Minutes placed in the "Minutes Book" in the City Clerk's office. CRN Jl Maur 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE (602) 982 8002 /1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA NOVEMBER 25, 1986 7 P.M. WORK SESSION ON AGENDA ITEMS AT 6 30 P M PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs Conway Ms. Callahan List in Planning ! Mrs. Davies Mr Vanhoy Office Mr Jorgensen r Mr Taylor eilliN Mr. Vehon, Chairman Mr. Williams, Staff Mr Nakagawa, Staff Mr Newcomer, Executive Secretary Ms Ortberg, Recording Secretary SYNOPSIS Agenda dated November 25, 1986 approved with change in order of item 6, and Minutes dated October 28, 1986 approved as submitted. General Plan recommended for approval SUP-5-86 recommended for approval PZ-42-86 recommended for denial PZ-3-86 recommended for approval PZ-43-86 continued to December 9, 1986 1 Roll Call Five members present with two absent as noted above 2 Chairman Asked for a motion to reverse the order of Agenda items 5 and 6 as well as approve this Agenda and the Minutes of October 28, 1986 3 Taylor/Conway M/S "I recommend that the Agenda dated November 25, 1986, be approved as submitted with the exception that items number 5 and 6 be reversed; and that the Minutes dated October 28, 1986, be approved as submitted " Motion passed 5-0-0 on the Agenda and 4-0-1 on the Minutes with Mrs Davies voting present 4. Chairman reopened this hearing on the General Plan that had been continued from October 28, 1986, and asked the representa- tive from the consulting firm BRW, Inc to brief the /lo Commission on any changes made since then. l 5. Mick Tomalczyk Stated two major changes were made to the Land Use figure at the work session. They are mobile home designations for specific areas within the city limits and within the study area of Apache Junction, and a change in the PAD density at the northwest corner of Lost Dutchman and Tomahawk, adjacent to commercial areas 6 Chairman asked if any of the public desired to speak. { 7. John Harambasic stated he had sent a letter in September, 1984, to the Planning Department, requesting that his property be specified high density. It was medium density, but L doesn't understand why it remains medium density in this General Plan. His reasons are because it's next to an R V park, the college is there, as well as several apartments This will have good accessibility to the Freeway, as well. Feels this would be best used as high density 8. Sonny Pickles stated he's the executive director of the Manufactured Housing Association of Arizona. Feels that there needs to be a clearer definition of a mobile home Said it is a house built pre-1976 Feels it should be addressed and the Ordinance upgraded ow sus Ark 9. Cathy Bacon Feels that the discussion about limiting the placement of mobile homes is more for the old trailers rather than newer manufactured housing which looks as nice as permanent homes. 10 Charlene Anderson Feels that if the City goes forward with this General Plan, Apache Junction will lose its exclusive scenic views, as well as disrupting the natural desert land- scaping ^1 I— 11 Harry Cook He admires the idea of planning before having problems, but feels that the steps taken to do this are wrong Stated that definitions must be clear and distinct as to mobile homes, trailers, manufactured housing, site built homes, etc 12 Jim Swanson Concern regarding Section 36 being designated as homes only Currently it is a mixture of mobile homes. What happens if one burns down? Would it have to be replaced with a conventional house? He also asked for reconsideration of density of Section 10 He is a little aggravated, annoyed, and tired of hearing the State Land Department trying to dictate to the City what is best for its citizens 13. M. R. Judah will the P & Z recommend for annexation in the boundaries mentioned in the General Plan, and when is that planned for? 14. Chairman stated that there are no immediate plans to annex these areas These are in the General Plan because in the future they feel this is where the City boundaries may go. I 15. Mr. Newcomer Spoke on behalf of Christin Laraway of the State Land Department Urban Planning Section Stated their preference for the State lands to the north and east were for higher density designations 16 Chairman closed this hearing to the public 17. Commission discussion of density in Section 10. Also traffic flow along that area as well as other areas. /\ 18 Jorgensen/Taylor M/S "I recommend that we submit the General Plan to the City Council with the following change that Section 10 be brought back to a low density of 0-1 dwelling units per acre The reasons for this recommendation are 1 The General Plan looks good with a few problems, and now it's time for the City Council to take up the General Plan. Motion passed 5-0-0. 19 Chairman announced a 10 minute recess L noted the meeting reconvened at 8 30 p.m. reopened SUP-5-86 and asked for any further briefing by staff. 20. Mr. Williams stated that the applicant has taken care of the landscaping requirements, and that he is in compliance with all city requirements, including the Fire Code mrommir 21 Chairman asked the applicant to speak 22 Keith Stachar stated he has taken care of all requirements of the City Showed the Commission pictures of his landscaping. 23. Chairman there being no one wishing to speak in favor or opposition, and there being nothing further from staff, he closed this hearing to the public 24. Conway/Taylor M/S "I move that the Commission recommend the approval r of SUP-5-86, an application of Keith and Kathryn Stacy and R.E. and Lillian Christensen for their property described as a matter of public record This request for a Conditional Use Permit pertains only to the following uses in their respective units I Light Custom Manufacturing in Unit 2 for a sign shop, Light Wholesaling, Storage, and Distribution in Unit 3 for a commercial contractor and in Units 7 and 8 for one to two tire companies, Each business in Units 3, 7, and 8, is limited to 1600 square feet of space for light wholesaling, storage and distribution The conditions are 1 The front, or south, bay doors will remain closed at all times Loading and unloading operations are to be accomplished through the bay doors at the rear or north side of the building 2 Each unit must be occupied by the appropriate business 1 within sixty days or the permit for that unit will become void. The reasons for this decision are 1 It's the highest and best use of the property 2. The request is compatible with surrounding uses Motion passed 4-1-0 with Mrs Davies dissenting and giving the following reason ellill "I appreciate that Keith has done everything that he should do for this but I have to vote no because I believe that we lack the authority to grant such a use, and that granting such a special use permit like this could have a negative effect on future C-2 zoning requests." 25. Chairman opened PZ-42-86 and asked for staff briefing 26 Mr. Williams briefed the Commission regarding this request to rezone from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence Zone He stated that staff must recommend denial of this request based on inconsistency with the General f Plan. The approval could also represent "spot zoning" i_ 27 Chairman asked the applicant to speak. 1 28. Ron Cantrell Stated they would like to place a 1600 square foot single family home with proper landscaping on the property. Feels this will improve the area and that it will help the tax base. 29. Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in favor. 30. Betty Cantrell said they were told by the Planning Department that if they were to put a conventional house in, they would be given a favorable recommendation She also does not feel this is "spot zoning" ... 31 Laura Klebe feels this request would be an asset to the community because they want to put a conventional house in, not a mobile home; and it will help the Stump's who need the help of their daughter and son-in-law, and it would also be advantageous to the tax base 32. Grace Wilson stated she approves of a nice home being put in. 33 Beverly Emerude feels a single family dwelling would be very nice without any detriment to the area. t-- 34 George Gack approves of a single family home there, especially because he has one himself 35 Gil Verley feels that since the General Plan is a policy set up as a guideline for administration, he charged the Commis- sion with the responsibility of deviating in a fair and sane manner. 36 Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition 37. Jim Swanson feels this is a twofold issue, those being improvement of existing structures or building new structures on a piece of property, and subdividing property Feels by allowing this would set a precedent and create a political problem in the community. Feels Commission should be consistent with the General Plan 38. Mike Pegram feels that the problem is larger than one family's health. If you begin deviating from the General Plan, where do you stop. 39. Chairman there being no further staff recommendations, he closed this hearing to the public 40 Mr Taylor commented that improving this property is commendable, but this is a Section designated for one dwelling unit per acre, which is the basic issue 41 Chairman asked staff to comment regarding applicant's being informed of staff's recommendation 42 Mr Newcomer stated that they were told of the recommendation for denial at least one time, and possibly more 43. Mr. Jorgensen asked if a form could be given to applicants to sign when there will be a possible recommendation for denial by staff 44 Taylor/Davies M/S "I move that the Commission recommend to the Apache Junction City Council the denial of rezoning case PZ-42-86, an application of Hoy G and Genevieve Stump for their property described as a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from GR General Rural to CR-2 Single Family Residence Zone The reasons for this recommendation are 1 Even though the parties do intend to improve the property after it is rezoned, we are confronted with the situation that this Section is a one acre designation, and if we start moving from Section 21 into Section 22, it will go on further, if these people want to put this area into a higher density situation, the applicants and those concerned should submit an amendment to the General Plan according procedure, which would be considered, and then possibly change this area through that process To start splitting the lots up, in contra- diction to the General Plan would be a mistake Motion passed 5-0-0 Mrs. Davies gave the following comment "Although I know that would improve that corner, at this point, we need to be bound by the General Plan " 45 Chairman opened PZ-3-86 to the public and asked for staff briefing. 46. Mr. Newcomer briefed the Commission regarding this ordinance regulating adult uses. It had been adopted on March 18, 1986, but the effective date suspended until October 15, 1986 This was further suspended until January 6, 1987 with /N a continued moratorium on issuance of business licenset to adult uses. 47 Mr Alexander stated he is the City attorney He briefed the Commission regarding the information on a recent Supreme Court decision which is relevant to zoning regulations of adult uses Stated the City needs to find some formula to have an accessible and significant area where adult uses can take place 48 Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this issue 49. Frank Grant feels that this ordinance is asking for a lot of lawsuits Feels the whole thing should be dropped { 50. Chairman closed this hearing to the public. 51 Taylor/Jorgensen M/S "I recommend that for PZ-3-86 we send the draft of Ordinance No 486 in relation to adult uses forward to the City Council as submitted with the recommendation that they adopt this, and adding to this the recommendation that we allow these adult uses which are taken care of in this Ordinance, to be conducted only within the zoning districts of C-4 or Industrial The reasons for this recommendation are 1. If it was allowed in the other Local Commercial or General Commercial areas there wouldn't be any place for them to go, so we would be basically not allowing them 2 By allowing them in Industrial and C-4, we're gi them quite a bit of area that's potentially avail. _ for their use 3 By putting them in these areas we will not be infringing on anybody's free speech, we just want to put them in a certain designated area Motion passed 5-0-0. 52. Chairman opened PZ-43-86 and asked for staff briefing 53. Mr Williams briefed the Commission regarding this Council-initiated review of possible amendments to Article 21, the Sign Code. 54 Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this issue. 55 Nancy Koerner feels there needs to be uniformity of these signs, and they should not be higher than eight feet (8') 56 Keith Stachar feels that twelve feet could be a feasible compromise, and limitations could be put on other things about the signs 'OW 00111k 57 Gil Verley questioned whether acreage is the right dimension to use Also feels that twelve feet is not too high, espe- cially along the Apache Trail if a truck pulls up, it can cover the sign. 58 Steve Leach said he favors raising the height to twelve feet so that people can see under it for oncoming traffic. 59 Mrs Conway if other cities can get by with six and eight foot signs, /fth, why can't Apache Junction 60. Mrs. Davies suggested that in order to have the street number on the sign, so many extra square feet be allowed on top of the sign 61. Gil Verley feels the current sign code is too restrictive, especially for businesses offering multi-services 62 John Ayerly showed the Commission a church sign and asked if it could be used as an off-site sign. 63. Chairman because the Ordinance is not specific regarding church signs, it would probably take a change in the Ordinance. 64 Keith Stachar Feels that being allowed only two signs is too restrictive Would like to see this addressed 65. Steve Leach stated agreement with Mr. Stachar. This is especially aM/pS lemma kie f a yomuo ton e tah ab uiwe dicnogn twiintuhe three dsiisdceus sthoat need ignage 66. Davies/Taylor of the sign ordinance and these eight items, and any other items that come before the group, at a public I hearing on December 9, 1986 at 7 p m in these Council Chambers, and at a Work Session on December 4, 1986 at 6.30 in the Chamber of Commerce Building Motion passed 4-1-0 with Mrs Conway dissenting. 67 Chairman Announced a five minute recess. Reconvened at 10.55 p.m i /m\ 68 Mr. Newcomer Under Other Business he explained the Private Street Regulations, and asked for Commission direction. 69. Commission discussed this issue, especially regarding land splitting and upkeep of these private drives. Directed Staff to pursue this with the information given and to present it at the December 9, 1986 meeting. 70 Chairman asked for a motion to authorize a commission-initiative regarding conditional use permit procedures 71. Jorgensen/Taylor M/S "I move that a commission initiated amendment to Section 6.0101 of the Zoning Ordinance be authorized " LMotion passed 5-0-0 72 Mr Newcomer regarding the Mesa sewer systems expansion, he said that Mesa staff would be not be opposed to the City hooking on to the Turner Ranch's system when that is taken over in the future. The problems they have is running a main line along University. They would prefer the lines to run along Southern or Baseline s Also, since they don't own Arizona Water Company, they are hesitant to extend the sewer where they do not have the water. 73. Mr Jorgensen under Commission Request to Staff, he asked that a form be given to and signed by an applicant that he has been advised that staff will recommend denial of their rezoning request. �\ 74. Mr Nakagawa stated that the application form contains a statement that if they are trying to rezone to a higher density than the General Plan designates, their case may be recommended for denial 75. Mrs. Conway asked that a copy of the rezoning application be placed in their packets 76. Taylor/Jorgensen M/S to adjourn Meeting adjourned at 11 22 p m Respectfully submitted, W�( ar es omer, Executive Secretary cloc .---- lony VeLn, airman i_ L Ilk oink r 1O� yPCHE✓G'L ri U ,J ',14�I�,;l"�y Z '41P/ NP V it o ache 26�ZCt2032 Za p C DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 1, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO. THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH KATHY CONNELLY, ACTING CITY MANAGER it/ FROM. ///! CHUCK NEWCOMER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR YOUR INFORMATION p Attached please find copies of the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of October 28, 1986. Please have the original Minutes placed in the "Minutes Book" in the City Clerk's office CRN jl 1001 NORTH IDAHO • APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 0190 • TELEPHONE(602) 982 8002 Omottle eAs es PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION , CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD , APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA OCTOBER 28, 1986 7 P M WORK SESSION ON AGENDA ITEMS AT 6 30 P.M. PRESENT ABSENT GUESTS Mrs. Conway Mrs Davies List in Planning \ Ms Callahan Office Mr Jorgensen Mr. Taylor elliN Mr. Vanhoy Mr Vehon, Chairman , Mr Nakagawa, Staff Mr Williams, Staff Mr Newcomer, Executive Secretary Ms. Ortberg, Recording Secretary SYNOPSIS Agenda dated October 28, 1986 approved as submitted During the course of the meeting, the applicant for SUP-5-86 and PZ-41-86, asked that the order of those two cases be switched Minutes dated October 14, 1986 approved as submitted The hearing of the General Plan was continued to Nov 25, 1986 PZ-41-86 recommended for approval SUP-5-86 continued to November 25, 1986 1. Roll Call Six members present with one absent as noted above 2 Taylor/Conway M/S "I recommend that the Agenda dated October 28, and the Minutes dated October 14, 1986 be approved as submitted IL Motion passed 6-0-0 3. Chairman reopened this case that had been continued from September 23, 1986. He asked the BRW representative, Mick Tomalczyk, to brief the Commission on the changes since then. 4 Mick Tomalczyk Stated there have been eight major changes made He described those changes, along with showing these changes on the map posted on the wall He also showed some examples of a residential plan image. 5 Mike Pegram speaking for the Superstition Horsemen's Association, they support the density changes that have been proposes in Sections 27 and the portion in Section 26 west of the Equestrian Trail to medium density, which is defined as 1 - 6 dwelling units per acre. Would ask for some assurance that this higher density would not leapfrog east of the Equestrian Trail in Section 26, thereby endangering the use of this vital area to the horsemen and other concerned people Also asked for assurance that people living in low density areas (0-1 dwelling units/acre) adjacent to higher density areas will not be encroached upon as well as those who operate a business dependent upon the horse and horsemen will not be pushed or regulated out of business because they are now or Iat some future date adjacent to higher density areas 6 Lillian Diaz representative from the State Land Department She stated her disappointment of the density changes and speaking for the State Land Department, she cannot be in support of these changes. Out of the 48 sections of land in this planning area, the state owns 25, which makes them a majority land owner 7. Denver Conway asked for clarification as to what stage this General Plan is in terms of adoption P & Z MINUTES OCT 28, 1986 PAGE TWO 8. Joe Morvak asked why people can't live compatibly on many thousands of acres. It seems that anything other than what a specific group would like is considered inappropriate. Feels that designing everything for a select few is wrong Land uses should be shared. 9 Ray Hooker stated concern that because the State Land Department is opposed to the changes given tonight, the Commission must give that serious thought, since they are the owners of that land and control its release 1 10. Lillian Diaz restated her disappointment in the repeated changes in density She originally had requested for an increased density range in Sections 10 and 11 and additional consider- ation for Sections 14, 23, and 26 She was surprised that Sections 7, 8, and 9 were now a matter of controversy They were willing to go down from 3-5 dwelling units/acre to 1 to 2 units. But to reduce this to 0-1, especially on Sections 7, 8, and 9 is too restrictive and unacceptable Stated that any development that is to occur on these lands will be highly scrutinized within the State agency prior to application by the City The Plan cannot be supported because of what is being proposed on the north part, the south portion of the plan is fine 11. Larry Anderson feels there are inconsistencies in what the State wants Feels their desire for higher density along certain areas would be spot zoning 12. Frank Langford stated that this land is located at the foot of the mountains rather than being normal, flat desert land. 13 Mr. Jorgensen asked what happens if the Plan is adopted without the State's approval. 14 Mr Newcomer They can sell the land as they please, but it would be overriding the City's objections 15. Mrs Conway feels that Arizona should have some place where the people can have a rural type of living Also, in the foothills, it's difficult to find a flat piece of property to put much density on, so maybe there isn't such a big problem after all 16. Mike Pegram asked if the State has an answer for the water shortage problem, which will become more critical as higher density is allowed in an area 17. Larry Anderson Doesn't want more density which will create more air pollution It is bad enough already 18 Diana Eason Responded to Joe Morvak's comment about sharing the area She feels that a high density at the foothills would ruin what is there to share. 19 Chairman asked for BRW's comments regarding mobile homes coming in to areas that are restricted for single family homes. 20. Mick Tomalczyk The Plan is to allow development of mobile homes in i areas consistent with current zoning that meet the same criteria as single family homes do They want to give equal opportunity for mobile home development Feels the problem is splitting land into small lots and putting mobiles on them They want to encourage mobile homes in areas that are developed as mobile home areas. 21 Chairman Sees a discrepancy in the General Plan and the Ordinance regarding building heights 1 P & Z MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1986 PAGE THREE 22 Mick Tomalczyk feels that height limitation might be more important than a story limitation. 23 Chairman asked how the Plan addresses air pollution, especially dirt roads 24 Mick Tomalczyk feels that all city roads should be paved 25 Mr Taylor feels there needs to be a basic policy because homeowner's lose their property value when mobile homes are moved in. 26. Rich Unger representative for BRW Stated there are three types of areas that deal with the mobile home issue This plan is a density plan, not a plan for types of development This will be a policy statement 27. Commission much discussion regarding the mobile home issue 28 Chairman asked for staff's recommendations 29. Mr. Nakagawa staff feels that the P & Z has brought up the major issues, such as the mobile home development issue, the issue regarding public improvements by developers, the State Land Departments stand, etc It's up to the P&Z to decide if they want to make a recommendation tonight and if so, with what stipulations. 30. Nancy Koerner stated she doesn't feel that a policy will work in the limiting of mobile homes Feels that if a few mobile homes are in, they will have to continue letting them in Feels the City needs certain areas with certain types of zoning [ 31 Commission discussed the need for a work session before forwarding to the Council [[ 32 Taylor/Conway M/S "I recommend that we continue this public hearing to November 25, 1986, in these Chambers at 7 p m Also to have a work session November 13, 1986 at 6.30 p.m in the Chamber of Commerce Building or another building to be assigned and posted to address a residential overlay and any other topics that staff finds necessary " Motion passed 6-0-0 33 Chairman called for a 10 minute recess Meeting reconvened at 9 30 p.m. Stated that the applicant for the next two cases requested the order of hearing be switched He asked for a motion to do this. 1 34 Jorgensen/Vanhoy M/S "I make a motion to change the order of those two cases " Motion passed 6-0-0 35 Chairman opened PZ-41-86 and asked for staff's briefing. 36. Mr Williams briefed the Commission regarding this rezoning request to rezone from CR-5 Multiple Family Residence Zone to C-2 Local Commercial District He also gave the staff's recommendations stating that this rezoning would be in compliance with the General Plan. If approved, staff recommends stipulating the dedication of rights-of-way. 37 Chairman asked the applicant to speak. ipmmor P & Z MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1986 PAGE FOUR 38 Keith Stachar responded, stated request, and answered questions 39 Chairman there being no one wishing to speak in favor or opposition, and staff having no further comments, he closed this case to the public. 40 Conway/Vanhoy M/S "I move that the Commission recommend to the Apache Junction City Council the approval of rezoning case PZ-41-86, an application of Fred and Louise Fehrenkamp, elk for their property described as, a matter of public record, requesting rezoning from CR-5 Multiple Family Residence to C-2 Local Commercial Any stipulations are• 1 The applicant dedicate a twenty foot (20') by twenty foot (20') cutoff at the intersection of Superstition Blvd. and Delaware Dr. 2 Applicant is requested to submit a site plan with a landscape plan prior to development for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The reasons for this recommendation are 1 It is the highest and best use of the property 2 With the substation next to it, commercial would be far better than residential Motion passed 6-0-0. 41 Chairman reopened to the public SUP-5-86 and asked for staff's briefing 42 Mr Williams briefed the Commission regarding this request for a Special Use Permit to allow light custom manufacturing in Unit 2 where a sign shop is now located, and also to allow light wholesaling, storage and distribution uses in Units 3, 7, and 8 He also gave staff's recommendations at this time They feel that if this request is approved, there would be a possibility of setting a precedent that could have ..� a negative impact on the community. They feel that light warehousing activities would be better suited to locations with suitable buffering to screen loading areas from residences and passing motorists. If the Commission approves this request, staff recommended stipulations as a means of alleviating some of the negative aspects associated with the requested industrial uses. 43 Mr Newcomer added that there has been considerable discussion between the Zoning Administrator, City Attorney and himself, regarding the processes and procedures for Conditional Use Permits If this case is approved, they would like to see this reviewed within a one year period, during which time staff will be revising the specific Conditional . Use Permit processes and procedures At that time, the Commission can reaffirm their decision of this evening and have a means of handling future applications Until this is revised and there is a stricter set of guidelines to go by, they will recommend a continuance of future applications. 44 Chairman asked the applicant to speak Aft. "oak P & Z MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1986 PAGE FIVE 45 Keith Stachar responded and showed a map of the existing commercial zonings along Superstition Blvd He feels his uses are limited as far as CB-2 goes. He has designed his building so that in the future it can be converted into an office building, etc. but while Apache Junction is growing, he feels the interim uses need to be accepted. Stated that the C-2 zoning allows many uses that require delivery by large trucks. Stated he will be constructing a 3z foot masonary warliS with landscaping along the front property line to pro, for screening that staff has recommended. Stated he has made arrangements with his tenant to do his major unloading from the rear 46 Commission asked Mr. Stachar questions with discussion following. 47. Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of this appli- cation 48 Denver Conway feels this development is a plus to the area 49 Chairman asked if staff had further recommendations. 50. Mr. Williams reminded the Commission that the wholesaling and ware- housing distribution uses are not even allowed in C-3 and C-4 zoning districts 51 Chairman closed this hearing to the public 52. Taylor/Vanhoy M/S "I move that the Commission recommend the approval of SUP-5-86, an application of Keith and Kathryn Stachar and R.E. and Lillian Christensen for their property described as a matter of public record. This request for a Conditional Use Permit pertains only to the following uses in their respective units Light Custom Manufacturing in Unit 2 for a sign shop, Light Wholesaling, Storage and Distribution in Unit 3 for a commercial contractor and in Units 7 and 8 for one to two tire companies, Each business in Units 3, 7, and 8 is limited to 1600 square feet of space for light wholesaling, storage and distribution The conditions are 1 The frontage along Superstition Blvd is to be extensively landscaped with drought-resistant plants and trees and a berm or wall less than four feet (4') will be placed at the southern edge of the parking area. Landscaping plan is to be as presented. 2 The front, or south, bay doors will remain closed { at all times Loading and unloading operations are to be accomplished through the bay doors at the rear or north side of the building 3 The applicant must comply with all Fire Code require- ments pertaining to the storage of tires before the permit will be issued by the Building Department 4 Each unit must be occupied by the appropriate business within sixty days or the permit for that unit will become void 5. There be a one year review on this. Ark Agi P & Z MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1986 PAGE SIX The reasons for this recommendation are. 1 What we're looking at in the Conditional Permit is a use that's less than he would be entitled to under the actual zoning he has now. 2 This is compatible to about 60% of what Superstition Blvd is currently zoned Amok 53 Commission discussion followed this motion. Motion was 3-3-0 with Ms Callahan, Mrs. Conway, and Mr Jorgensen dissenting. 54. Chairman Since the above motion was not carried, he asked for another motion 55 Taylor/Jorgensen M/S "I make a motion that we continue this case to November 25, 1986 at 7 p m in the City Council Chambers. Motion carried 6-0-0. 56. Commission requested this case be put on the Work Session of November 13, 1986 57. Chairman Announced the "Call to the Public" 58 Denver Conway in view of the last case, he suggested that the Zoning Ordinance be looked at as far as what is in each class of a zoning classification 59 Mr Taylor under Commission Requests to Staff, he asked that staff review the zoning district classifications and what is allowed IL60 Vanhoy/Jorgensen M/S to adjourn Meeting adjourned at 11 05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, a es we Bier, Executive Secretary omia Pony Vehon Chairman ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 7- a ITEM ## O MEETING OF f ((/ MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: CP YE NO ABSTAINED COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER L N ""' COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR COUNCILMAN BALJO 1.1 VICE MAYOR BAKKEDAHL ky - COUNCILMAN EIDSON MAYOR HILL V UNANI1O S , IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL V ITEM NO. 23 I MOVE THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT P.M. i ROLL CALL l'I'V 111\M ROLL CALL IPRESENT I ABSENT 1 w.s. ' vi v w.v MAYOR HILL j VICE—P�.AYOR BAKKEDAHL ! V � _ ^COUNCI LMAN 611ViiREAA ! [WOMAN Y 'V L COUNCI _ ._ TACRL COUNCILWOMAN GARDNER COUNCILMAN B_AL]O ✓ />COUNCILMAN EIDsON TOTAL I 6 0 1 tv! iit STAFF PRESENT W.S. CITY MANAGER • C Viti k-/ CITY CLERK Kathy Connelly / 7-- 4. FINANCE CONTROLLER Keith Lewis , ' ./ i/ DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Chuck Newcomer ` DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY Bill McDaniel ✓ • _ DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS Rich Broman CITY ATTORNEY Mr. AlexanderiMr. Hirsch ii4°5-/-� V0-11' ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST John Schoeph n14 SUPERINTENDENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES Jeff Bell ✓ DIRECTOR OF LIBRARY Pam Loui ✓ CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: � t G � � E,�'?/q4/ DATE: /�//6�A7 ADDRESS: / g "%-c/* �2 AGENDA ITEM: p, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION eitu- -() ''�w . --------------- REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: �! L4" {��l�'"!r24 DATE: / /1 - ADDRES . ,/6 -.,d ga( _,,e. (3 /. AGENDA ITEM: ( "(ieL7 !lZe' ) ?IA AAAti ) t7Ac U-b " ) 'J ‘ \ RMd (.t./721-€A2 �� c Y?-t-0 zSS (HO r► CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION Iillr REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: 0 DATE: a> j 6 0-rl �11Lr h`� ) , ADDRESS: 61 ( & "ift,,,,Y O p c t AGENDA ITEM• CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION 5ii5:(.1 REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: 1/%t/1f' /17!/1,GC.,1 DATE: toc, 1 lam/'pJ ADDRESS: /‘ 3 q AGENDA ITEM: ^� �, c b 6 ��-/tom CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: 792-/l'/— 02_5 li DATE: /2"/� ADDRESS: /185 L p AGENDA ITEM: JL L 1- ./C>97) DV y 14.0 y 57111r//� / 1C'D p• (J/e • 1�1d S S O