The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1981 01.21 City Council Regular Agenda O%iPQACHF ✓e ( MCA ki r r= 0 :P, 0k z I9,.s_.--." . _i,. --- ::- p/ZON1/4 "Oily o &4pac e 09ZLnCtZUn CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JANUARY 21 , 1981 7:00 P.M. 6:00 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION "INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ' ROLL CALL (1 ) ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA (2) ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS CALL TO THE PUBLIC CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS (3) TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE, CACTUS CLUB, HOWARD D. KELLER "'�' OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS (4) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 73, PZ-18-80, INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT •= - CLASSIFICATION (SECOND READING) (5) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 82, PZ-20-80, STACHAR REZONING (SECOND ; READING) (6) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 80, PZ-21-80, BROOKS REZONING (SECOND READING) (7) PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 81-01 , DIRECTING THE INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS IN APACHE VILLA III 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 (8) PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 81-02, ESTABLISHING OFFICIAL PLACES OF POSTING FOR PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. (9) EXECUTIVE SESSION, FEBRUARY 4, 1981 (10) INFORMATION AND REPORTS REQUESTS OF COUNCIL (11 ) ADJOURNMENT t ! F �tt J _t ROLL CALL ROLL CALL I PRESENT ► ABSENT MAYOR SEEMAN �.. VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN DAMI ANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN SHANKS �! j TOTAL tt111( 0 STAFF PRESENT CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ✓ r DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ✓ DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFTEY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ✓ CITY ATTORNEY OTHER ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES .J� ITEM # 1 MEETING OF MOTION BY: ) SECONDED BY: YTS NQ ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN BURCESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON ✓ VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO 1 - MAYOR SEEMAN I i UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: \ _ Adik .. • ITEM NO. 1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 7, 1981 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on January 7, 1981, at the Apache Junction Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law CALL TO ORDER Mayor Seeman called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m INVOCATION Councilman Eidson led the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilman Damiano led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present Mayor Virginia Seeman, Councilman Thomas Damiano, Councilman Jimmy Eidson, and Councilman Marie Shanks Councilmembers Absent• Vice Mayor John Granillo, Councilman Jerry Burgess, and Councilman Norman Hill Staff Present: City Manager G Ray Lee City Clerk/Director of Administrative Services Marlis J. Davis Director of Planning Joe Gero Director of Public Safety Bill McDaniel Director of Public Works Rich Broman City Attorney Michael Curtis Assistant City Attorney Susan Goodwin Building Official Leo Frazier Others with Council Business: Don Andrews, 1975 N. LaBarge, Apache Junction Mr. Brill, 1029 W 6th, Mesa Keith Stachar, 6301 E Roundup, Apache Junction Harvey Morrison, 1834 W. Roundup, Apache Junction Mayor Seeman recognized Director of Public Works Richard Broman who wished to address a request made by the Airport Commission Mr. Broman, Director of Public Works, stated the Airport Commission, at its last meeting, discussed the agenda item to increase the membership of the Airport Commission. He stated, based upon the discussion on this item at the last Council meeting, the Commission decided they would prefer to maintain the present number of positions on the commission, and when the need arose they would request some other persons to serve in an advisory capacity. Mr. Broman requested on behalf of the Airport Conmission,that agenda item No 7 be deleted from the agenda. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA Councilman Shanks MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS AMENDED TO DELETE AGENDA ITEM NO. 7, AIRPORT COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP. An. Ask Councilman Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 17, 1980 Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT ^� THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 1980 BE, AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED Councilman Damiano seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Seeman presented Certificates of Appreciation to the five volunteer members of the Citizens Street-naming and Address Committee for their many hours spent on this project. The members of the committee were Robert Spargo, J Henry Benson, Clarence Semly, Ron Bennett, and John Smith. Mr. Clay Wurst was also recognized for his involvement in the Chamber of Commerce's work in originating a street-naming system for the Apache Junction area in 1977, the many hours he spent working with the City staff and the Citizens Committee explaining the working procedures used by the Chamber, and in turning over their files and records to the City Mrs. Lorraine Kraus, Apache Junction Postmaster, was also recognized for her assistance to, and cooperation with, City staff. CCALL TO THE PUBLIC Mayor Seeman opened the meeting to the public and recognized Dan H. Andrews Mr. Dan Andrews, 1975 N LaBarge Road, stated he resides outside the City and lives within the zone-of-influence He stated that approximately six weeks ago at a Council meeting he made a complaint to the Council concerning the zone-of- influence. He stated at that time he was informed that the City Attorney would meet with the Pinal County attorneys and would then communicate to Mr Andrews whether or not the City is in any way influencing the property outside the City limits He stated he has still not heard anything and feels that the City is glossing over his complaints and he is being ignored. Mayor Seeman recognized City Attorney Michael Curtis. City Attorney Michael Curtis stated the Attorney's office has recently finished their analysis of the zone-of-influence and will be forwarding those opinions to Mr. Andrews shortly He stated that while he did not have the opinion with him, he could report to the Council that Resolution 80-10, consistent with what the Council was previously advised, contained no power to influence. Mr. Curtis stated the attorneys concluded that since Maricopa and Pinal Counties were, under the concept of comity, referring matters to the City before Resolution 80-10 was adopted, even if the Resolution were removed the timid would still fear because Pinal and Maricopa counties would still refer these items to the City even though the City would continue to have no power to act He further stated by abandoning Resolution 80-10 the City would be vulnerable to strip annexation, the prohibition of which was the purpose of the initial adoption of the Resolution. Mr. Curtis stated that the City has subsequently undertaken to consider the adoption of an Ordinance regarding subdivisions He stated under the provisions of A.R.S 9-474, once the City has adopted a subdivision Ordinance people intending REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE TWO Aft. Anw to develop real estate by subdividing within three miles of the City are required by State Statute to ask the City to approve the subdivision He stated that as a result, in the event of the withdrawal of Resolution 80-10, not only would Pinal County and Maricopa County continue, as a matter of comity, to refer matters to the City over which the City has no power, but once the subdivision Ordinance was adopted, and even if Resolution 80-10 was repealed, subdividers outside the City would still be required to seek authorization from the City on intended developments if their subdivisions were within three miles. .•. Mr. Curtis stated that in answer to Mr Andrews question, until the subdivision ordinance is adopted the City has no power to intimidate, or make fearful, those outside the City; however, the Counties of Pinal and Maricopa will, as a matter of comity, continue to ask the City for their advice although in a great number of instances, if not the majority of instances, the advice of the City, sought under the principles of comity, have been rejected. He stated the legal opinion will be provided to Mr. Andrews and Mr Condra Mr. Curtis added that because the City has no power to change the feelings of Maricopa County and Pinal County on extending courtesys to the City, the only way in which this matter can be redressed to Mr Andrews satisfaction would be if Mr Andrews would propose some type of legislative amendment saying that the effect of Resolutions like 80-10 should not be construed to require adjoining counties to act under the principles of comity and that they should not gratuitously refer matters to a City because by so doing the Counties are in effect causing Mr. Andrews to conclude that the City intends to act toward him Mr Curtis stated the City is powerless to turn aside the questions that are referred to it by Maricopa and Pinal County and, to that extent, Mr Curtis stated he felt there may have been some misunderstandings Mr. Curtis added that once a subdivision Ordinance is adopted by the City, the law will apply to this City as it does to every other City; people outside the City will be required to file matters with the City. Mayor Seeman asked if there were any other members of the public wishing to address the Council There being none, Mayor Seeman closed the meeting to the public ( CITY MANAGER'S REPORT l Mayor Seeman called upon City Manager Ray Lee to give the City Manager's Report. City Manager Ray Lee called upon the Director of Public Works to brief the Council on the status of the Community Services building construction. Director of Public Works Rich Broman reported that the City has been re- ceiving a great deal of assistance from the community in the way of donations and f contributions of time and material He stated the City has received some contri- butions of time and material. He stated the City has received contributions from Bob Holder of Mountain States Electric, Ed Jenson, Jenson Plumbing; Jim Bryan General Contracting, and Joe Morvak, Morvak Construction Company. Mr. Broman extended his thanks for the donations of materials, time, and effort in showing a better way to design and construct the building and to build it in an economical way. He stated that the building is being constructed mostly in-house with the CETA workers and staff who have graciously volunteered their time. He added that it is hoped that the building will be completed within the next 60 to 90 days Director of Public Works Rich Broman further added that the AORCC project with the School District is progressing, the ballfields are graded, the tennis courts are paved although the surface coats still need to be put on, and the basis for the lights are in, work is on schedule and should be completed some time next month City Manager Ray Lee called upon the Planning Director to address groundwater rights. Director of Planning Joe Gero referred to the meeting to be held on January 13th, at which Senator Stan Turley will meet with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr Gero stated that in the State of Arizona the last legislative session where the groundwater legislation was passed has created an immense problem, subdivisions inside the City of Apache Junction and in Pinal County cannot be approved at this time He stated Senator Turley, who was chairman of the Senate Committee that handled the Groundwater legislation, has accepted an invitation to come and speak to the community about the possibility of the legislation being amended Mr Gero invited the public to attend, ask questions, and hear the discussion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE THREE — o1111%, PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE 73, PZ-19-80 INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION (FIRST READING) Mayor Seeman opened the public hearing on the item. She stated it is a Planning and Zoning Commission initiative and asked the Planning Director to brief the Council and public on the petition City Planner Joe Gero reviewed for the Council and public the rationale behind the item He stated the one-square- mile, bounded by Ironwood (called Vineyard in the County) Southern, Tomahawk, and Baseline, was annexed to the City in June 1980 He stated the Arizona Revised Statutes require that the Council take action to adopt a zoning classification within a reasonable period of time for territory that has been annexed Mr Gero explained that the north half would be CR-1, the southern half is proposed to be left GR, and added the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of proposed Ordinance 73. Mr. Gero added that the second reading of the Ordinance would be at the next meeting of the City Council to be held on January 21st. Mayor Seeman asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of, or in opposition to, the petition. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Seeman closed the meeting to the public Mayor Seeman opened the meeting to Council discussion. There being no discussion Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read the title of proposed Ordinance no. 73. City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows "ORDINANCE NO. 73, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80 FOR THE PROPERTY ANNEXED EFFECTIVE JUNE 7, 1980, TO THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY ORDINANCE NO 42, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Mayor Seeman stated this item would be on the agenda of January 21st and would be voted on at that time. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 82, PZ-20-80 STACHAR REZONING (FIRST READING) Mayor Seeman opened the public hearing on the item. She stated the applicant is Keith Stachar and asked the Planning Director to brief the Council and public on the item Director of Planning Joe Gero addressed the item, the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the rationale behind those recommendations The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the rezoning with the one amendment. Mayor Seeman recognized Mr. Stachar who stated that he would be happy to answer any questions the Council might have with regard to this item There being no questions of Mr. Stachar, Mayor Seeman asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of, or in opposition to, the petition. Mr. Morrison, 1834 W. Roundup, addressed the petition and questioned the accuracy of the map referred to by Mr. Gero and Mr Stachar Mayor Seeman asked if there was anyone else wishing to address the petition City Manager Ray Lee called upon the Building Official to address the question presented by Mr. Morrison. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE FOUR Building Official Leo Frazier stated he has checked the easements and the only easements are on Saguaro, Ironwood, and Superstition. He stated the new and accurate right-of-way maps were the ones that were checked. He explained that the confusion concerning the easements was caused by the confusion between the County and the City surrounding the street names. Director of Planning Joe Gero stated he would give his recommendations at the next meeting. There being no one else wishing to address the item, Mayor Seeman closed the meeting to the public. Mayor Seeman asked if there was any Council discussion. Hearing none, Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read proposed Ordinance No. 82 by title only for the first reading. City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows. "ORDINANCE NO. 82, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-80 FOR THREE (3) PARCELS PARCEL #1 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO GENERAL BUSINESS (CB-2) BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PARCEL #2 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1), AND PARCEL #3 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1), REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY PROPOSED ORDINANCE 80, PZ-21-80 BROOKS REZONING (FIRST READING) Mayor Seeman opened the public hearing on the item She stated the applicant was Mr. Sumner Brooks and that it was a first reading She called upon the Director of Planning to brief the Council and public on the item. ( Director of Planning Joe Gero gave background on the item, and stated the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the Council their approval of this request. He stated Mr Bliss, who had Mr Brooks' power-of-attorney in the matter, was in attendance at the meeting and would be glad to represent the applicant Mr. Bliss, 1029 W 6th St., Mesa, explained Mr. Brooks' efforts in beautifying the property, and explained Mr. Brooks' reasons for seeking the rezoning. Mayor Seeman asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of, or in opposition to, the petition. There being no one wishing to address the Council, Mayor Seeman closed the meeting to the public Mayor Seeman called upon City Clerk Marlis Davis to read the title of proposed Ordinance No. 80 City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows: "ORDINANCE NO 80, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-80 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE (CR-5); REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY." OLD BUSINESS There was no old business REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE FIVE NEW BUSINESS RATIFICATION OF CITY CLERK'S APPOINTMENT Mayor Seeman stated that with the resignation of Rich Oesterle, the City Manager appointed Marlis Davis to fulfill the functions and duties of the City Clerk in addition to her regularly assigned duties. Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT THE APPOINTMENT OF MARLIS J. DAVIS AS CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 1980 BE, AND HEREBY IS, RATIFIED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 84, ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMISSION (SECOND READING) ) Mayor Seeman stated this proposed Ordinance is to create a commission to address health problems, to review and make recommendations to the City Council, to aid in the development of health facilities, and to study the needs and plans for a possible hospital site in the future. Councilman Shanks MOVED THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 84, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY, AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilman Damiano seconded the { motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed Ordinance for the second reading City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows "ORDINANCE NO. 84, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE BY ADDING ARTICLE 2-10 ESTABLISHING THE APACHE JUNCTION COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMISSION PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY." Councilman Shanks MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT ORDINANCE NO 84, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE BY ADDING ARTICLE 2-10 ESTABLISHING THE APACHE JUNCTION COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMISSION, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 80-40 INTERGOVERN- MENTAL AGREEMENT WITH STATE DIVISION OF MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOUSING STANDARDS Mayor Seeman asked if there were any questions on the proposed Resolution There being no questions, Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read the title of Resolution 80-40. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE SIX City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows: "RESOLUTION NO. 80-40, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER IN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, TO AMEND THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION OF MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOUSING STANDARDS AND THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 80-40, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER IN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, TO AMEND THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF ARIZONA, DIVISION OF MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOUSING STANDARDS AND THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED Councilman Shanks seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO 80-41 PROVIDING FOR THE SUBMISSION OF FOUR-YEAR STAGGERED TERMS TO QUALIFIED ELECTORS Mayor Seeman stated that this proposal would establish staggered terms for Councilmembers; the first class would consist of three members who would serve until 1983, the second class would hold office until the next regular election in 1985. Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read the title of proposed Resolution 80-41. City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows "RESOLUTION 80-41, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, FINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, FINDING AND DECLARING THAT SAID MAYOR AND SELECT COUNCIL DEEM THAT FOUR- YEAR STAGGERED TERMS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND ORDERING THAT THERE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF SAID CITY, THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT STAGGERED ANN. TERMS FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BE ADOPTED IN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PROVIDING FOR THE GIVING OF NOTICE OF SAID ELECTION AND THAT ALL QUALIFIED VOTERS OF SAID CITY SHALL BE ENTITLED AND QUALIFIED TO VOTE AT SAID ELECTION." Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION NO 80-41, A RESOLUTON OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, FINDING AND DECLARING THAT SAID MAYOR AND SELECT COUNCIL DEEM THAT FOUR-YEAR STAGGERED TERMS FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND ORDERING THAT THERE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF SAID CITY, THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT STAGGERED TERMS FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BE ADOPTED IN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, PROVIDING FOR THE GIVING OF NOTICE OF SAID ELECTION AND THAT ALL QUALIFIED VOTERS OF SAID CITY SHALL BE ENTITLED AND QUALIFIED TO VOTE AT SAID ELECTION BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED Councilman Shanks seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE SEVEN i• i►. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 80-42, PROVIDING FOR PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTION Mayor Seeman stated that in accordance with the Arizona Revised Statutes, the resolution is submitted for adoption and provides for the holding of the primary and general elections, election officials and their compensation, and a change in the polling places Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read the title of Resolution 80-42. City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows: "RESOLUTION NO 80-42, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, COUNTY OF PINAL, AUTHORIZING THE HOLDING OF THE REGULAR PRIMARY ELECTION ON MARCH 24, 1981, AND THE GENERAL ELECTION ON MAY 18, 1981, ESTABLISHING POLLING PLACES AND VOTING DISTRICTS, PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF THE ELECTOR'S CHOICE, PROVIDING FOR ELECTION OFFICIALS AND FIXING THEIR COMPENSATION BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED." Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION NO 80-42, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, COUNTY OF PINAL, AUTHORIZING THE HOLDING OF THE REGULAR PRIMARY ELECTION ON MARCH 24, 1981, AND THE GENERAL ELECTION ON MAY 19, 1981, ESTABLISHING POLLING PLACES AND VOTING DISTRICTS, PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF THE ELECTOR'S CHOICE, PROVIDING FOR ELECTION OFFICIALS AND FIXING THEIR COMPENSATION BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. EXECUTIVE SESSION, JANUARY 21, 1981 Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PERSONNEL AND LEGAL ADVICE BE HELD ON THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1981, AT 6:00 P M IN THE CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilman Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS There were no information or reports. REQUESTS OF COUNCIL Councilman Damiano wished everyone a happy new year ADJOURNMENT Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 8 05 P M. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE EIGHT Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1981, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. VIRGINIA SEEMAN Mayor ATTEST: MARLIS J DAVIS City Clerk r l pi REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 7, 1981 PAGE NINE ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: ` SECONDED BY : YES NN ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN EIDSON- COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN BURGESS V 1 COUNCILMAN DAMIANO VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN V UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO, 2 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JANUARY 7, 1981, BE, AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. PUBLIC HEARING 1, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A transfer of I iquor ► icenee for the Cactus Club THE APPLICANT IS Howard Dewayne Keller 2, IF THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, THE APPLICANT MAY SPEAK ON HIS BEHALF AT THIS TIME, 3, ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? 4, IF NO ONE WISHES TO SPEAK, THIS HEARING IS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC, PQACHE✓ �• _ t O V • �"' Z q,plZONP ity &4rache 09unction January 14, 1981 Rom' NEMDRANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU: CITY MANAGER CITY CLORK2_7% FROM. DEPUTY CITY CLERK SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE - Howard Keller, The Cactus Club Pursuant to A.R.S. Section 4-201 the governing body of a City or town shall recommend approval or disapproval of the application for transfer of license to the State Department of Liquor License and Control. The liquor license was, in accordance with State law posted in a conspicuous place on the front of the premises for the required period of time. The City Clerk's office has not received any written arguments in favor of, or in opposition to, the issuance of this license. This agenda item is respectfully submitted for your action. • yaelizuJ JACKIE TREVINO Deputy City Clerk Approver for Agenda jdt Date Item # F:r r,= d.n^J !— J - ......� ' - ,r_ .- ----- x c is•� , e rr:r<3 0;J r teSS N^w business 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 P�ACHE✓ ko ' G,yy `if 0 OI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY s3e 'IRizo ' amity oe. &4pache 09unction W E McDANIEL January 6, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Deputy City Clerk THRU: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Safety bolt, REFERENCE: Liquor License Application of Howard Dewayne Keller Please be advised that the Apache Junction Police Department has investigated the attached applicant for Liquor License Transfer from Donald Brooke to Howard Keller. The Police Department finds no reason why such transfer should not be granted. 001. 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD.•POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 elk Auk (1I Z "IPIZOO' (pity 4 C pache cOunction January 14, 1981 Mr Howard Dewayne Keller Cactus Club P 0 Box 477 Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Dear Mr. Keller. This is to advise you that the hearing date for your Application for Transfer of Liquor License, for Cactus Club, is set for January 21, 1981, at 7 00 p m It would be appreciated if either yourself or your representative would attend this public hearing Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me Sincerely, JACKIE TREVINO Deputy City Clerk jdt 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K.APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 PIN 41111%. FORM 120 -D L L C USE ONLY- STATE'OF ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL 1645 WEST JEFFERSON,SUITE 227 PHOENIX AZ 85007 11 H'' 602/255-5141 3APPLICATION FOR LIQUOR LICENSE D=C I6 _?Pit 1 80 Type or print with black ink _ NOTE PROCESSING OF MOST APPLICATIONS TAKES 60 DAYS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OFTEN RESULT IN A LONGER WAITING PERIOD THEREFORE, YOU ARE CAUTIONED REGARDING EXTENSIVE FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS PLANS FOR ON A GRAND OPENING,ETC.,BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL AND ISSUANCE OF THE LICENSE SECTION 1 THIS APPLICATION IS FOR A ATTACH A XEROX COPY OF CHECK M.O. ETC 0 NEW LICENSE Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 14 15 Reviewed by Accepted by X PERSON TRANSFER Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 9 14 15 Current file flagged by ❑LOCATION TRANSFER Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 10 14 15 Copies made for posting by ❑NEW AGENT FOR CORP OR CLUB Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 11 14 15 Copies mailed for posting by Date ❑PROBATE/WILL ASSIGNMENT Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 12 14 15(fee not required) Copies for background by Dare. ❑GOVERNMENT LICENSE Complete Sections 2 3 4 5 13 14 15 Comments SECTION 2 TYPE OF OWNERSHIP REF DATA 14(INDIVIDUAL Complete Section 7 0 CLUB Complete Section B CLAIM or r R A MATE oArE CODE Ater ❑PARTNERSHIP Complete Section 7 0 GOVERNMENT ❑'CORPORATION Complete Section 8 0 OTHER explain SECTION 3 APPLICANT (All applicants must complete this Section) 1 APPLICANT'S OR AGENT'S NAME KP1 1 nr Howard Dssurayna (Insert one name only-to appear on License) Last Name First Name Middle 2 CORPORATION OR PARTNERSHIP NAME Line/exact name is it µµx'ars on Articles of Inc or Partnership Agreement 3. BUSINESS NAME Cactus Club - Enter exact name'is it ri pears on the exterior of premises 4 BUSINESS ADDRESS. 650 West Apache Trail, Do not use P O Box Number 5. CITY- Apache Junction COUNTY Pinal zip coin.85220 6. MAILING ADDRESS P.O.Box 477 CITY. Apache Junction STATE AZ ZIP CODER5220 7 IS THE BUSINESS LOCATED WITHIN THE INCORPORATED LIMITS OF THE ABOVE CITY OR TOWN [A YES ❑NO SECTION 4 INDICATE LICENSE SERIES Check only one•use separate form for each license NEW LICENSE FEES Total Due if Filed' Total Due if Filed Person to Person Location SERIES Nov 1 May 15 May 16 Oct 31 Transfer Fee Annual Renewal Transfer Fee _ ❑1 DISTILLERS LICENSE(IN STATE) 1 900.00 1 725.00 550.00 350.00 150.00 0 2 BREWERS LICENSE(IN STATE) 1.900.00 I 1 725.00 550.00 350.00 150.00 ❑3 VINTNERS LICENSE TIN STATE) 1 700.00 I 1,625.00 350.00 150.00 150.00 ❑4 WHOLESALER,ALL LIQUORS 1 800.00 1 675.00 550.00 250.00 150.00 ❑45 WHOLESALER,WINE AND BEER 1,650.00 r 1 600.00 250.00 100.00 150.00 ( 6 ON-SALE RETAILER ALL LIQUORS 1 700.00 I 1,65000 ' 350.00° 150.00 150.00 0 7 ON-SALE RETAILER,WINE AN))11EL11 4,5.18) r J8/50 200.00 75.00 150.00 ❑8 ON•SALE RETAILER BEER 2/5.00 I 26250 100.00 25.00 150.00 ❑9 OFF SALE RETAILER ALL LIQUORS 1 100.00 1 050.00 150.00 50.00 150.00 ❑10 OFF SALE RETAILER WINE AND BEER 400.00 375.00 150.00 50.00 150.00 ❑11 OFF SALE RETAILER REFIT 1/5.00 I 28210 100.00 25.00 150.00 ❑12 RAILROAD TRAIN LICENSE 1 775.00 1 66250 500.00 225.00 150.00 0 13 AIRLINE LICENSE 1,775.00 I 1,662.50 500.00 225.00 150.00 ❑14 PRIVATE CLUB LICENSE 1 2(800 I 1175.00 150.00 150.00 ❑15 HOTEL/MOTEL LICENSE Complete Section li 2050.00 I800.00 500.00 ❑ 16 RESTAURANT LICENSE Complete Section 6 2,050.00 I 1,800.00 • 500.00 • ❑ 17G GOVERNMENT LICENSE 250.00 I 200.00 • 100.00 ' ❑ 171 DISTILLERS LICENSE(OUT OF STATE) 300.00 r 275.00 150.00 50.00 150.00 0 18 BREWERS LICENSE(OUT OF STATE) 300.00 276.00 150.00 50.00 - 150.00 ❑19 VINTNERS LICENSE(OUT OF STATE) 300.00 I 275.00 150.00 50.00 150.00 ❑20 IMPORTER EXPORTER OR RECTIFIER 300.00 I 275.00 150.00 50.00 150.00 Not Permitted • SECTION 6 QUESTIONS FOR ALL APPLICANTS 1 Do local zoning laws permit the sale of alcoholic beverages at the location you seek iti license.[RYES ONO 2 Distance to the nearest church CC.in Name/Address of church 3. Distance to the nearest school 4- Name/address of school &AA Le4.r. p 4. Are you the DOWNER ffi•LESSEE ❑SU LESSEE ❑PURCHASER of thr remises 5. If the premises is leased gee nem'.and Address nil lessor N.J. Southard Name 5g17--East_Piwa-- —_ __._ _Tucson Az. 85712 Address City State Zip 6. What date was lease/sublease sagned. 1 T 19f 19riO Term of lease is 14 years 7 Does the loam iu,tilde provision in rob uasle the liquor liran•.rr box:k ill die li••:,ni II im min,ibnn l(Vl i DIND ys B. Has a license or transfer of license for tire premises reps esentel herein born dentist liy the St:to within the past sixty months DYES CJ NO If yes,attach an explanation 9 Who will manage this business. Keller {toward Dewayne Last Name First Name Middle OWON Each manager other than owner(s) must complete Form 134 120A And submit An 'applicant fingerprint card. 10. Does any alcoholic beverage manufacturer wholesaler or employee thereof have any interest in your business OYES ZJNO 11 Is the premises licensed with a license other than the one for which you are Applying ❑YES ❑NO If so give license No /6 11/////6/f J/ licensee lexactly as it appears on License) Rrooke- -__Donald_E.-_and Theresa. c Last Namc First Name Middle 12 What is your Arizona Stave Sales Tax(Privilege)Licensr.No_I_I—.BC/ 5 .-- 13 Do you understand that a portion of the fees such as Application Fee($50.00)and Interim Permit Fee(if applicable)is not refundable RYES ONO SECTION 6 FOR SERIES 15 OR 16 APPLICANTS 1 Is there a valid Series 15 or 16 license currently issued at the proposed location OYES ❑NO If so enter licensee's name exactly as it appears on license' License No / / / / / / / Last Name First Name Middle NOTE• If the answer to question 1 above is "yes you may qualify for an Interim Permit to operate while your application is pending consult Section 4.203.01 A.R.S. complete a Form 176 attach appropriate fee attach the current license and submit with this application 2. What percentage of your gross sales represents the purchase of 'meals' 3 How much of your floor space as designed for restaurant dining(sq ft) _ Seating capacity for dining purposes 4 Have you attache)a copy of your menu that Mncludes prices OYES ONO Of not explain) SECTION 7 INDIVIDUAL OR PARTNERSHIP OWNERS. ere 1 Answer the following questions (II applicants Ate m;nried urswer each question for both husband and wile) Percentage Owned Last Rattle Pdrsl Nance Middle by n;e:fi err.nu Ile,idenr:1.Address City State,Zip laiiitir4r- HestircT Dina ne- --4 OZ. P-.O—Bax-477. -Apache Tttnrt,an.{ Az Applicant(enter here and in section 3) Keller Howard Dewayne 100J. P.O. Box 477 Aparhe .THnrtion, Az 8577* Partner(or Spouse) skl!!/1f e _ —�29Y-S`Mi-ida-lldr—Hest-L ,-ttm-6x�-470Fi3 Partner Partner Attach additional sheet if necessary EACH PERSON LISTED MUST COMPLETE FORM 120 AN PPLICANT TYPE FINGERPRINT CARD 2 Is each person listed above a bona fide resident of Arizona YE 3 Is any person,other than the above,going to share in the profits/losses of the business OYES NO SECTION 8 CORPORATION OR CLUB APPLICANTS 1 Name of corporation or club. (Enter exactly Is it appears on Articles of Inc or Club Charter) 2 Date incorporated or chartered State where incorporate) 3 Arizona Corporation Commission File No. Dare authorize)to do business in Arizona 4 Is corporation or club nonprofit OYES ONO If so give I R.S tax exempt No 5. If a club refer to Section 4 101.4 A.R S. and enter the subparagraph under which you-ire•ipplying 6. List officers and directors Last Name First Name Middle Title Residence Address City State Zip Attach additional sheet if necessary 7 List stockholders owning 10%or more EACH PERSON LISTED MUST COMPLETE FORM 120A AND SUBMIT AN APPLICANT TYPE FINGERPRINT CARD Last Name First Name Middle Percentage owned Residence Address City/State/Zip If this carp is owned by another corp.,attach an OWrrCn ship of ficer/director Illsr:Iosee for doe parent corporation Attach additional sheets as necessary ara. t SECTION 9 PERSON TO PERSON TRANM. !QUESTIONS TO BE COMPLETED BY CURRENT LYSEE I Current licensee Brooke Donald E and_Theresa_S. __Entity ETkI Exactly as it appears oft Ircensc Last Name First Name Middle Etal Agl etc 2 Corporate name. —^ II Curtmu license is in the nine of a corporation enter exactly as it appears on license 3 Current business name.Cactus..Club - Exactly as it°poems on licenst. 4 Current business address. 650 West Apashe Trail. county. Pinel Exactly as it appears on license City Apache Junction _ _ ___ ZIP CODE 85220 5. License Series. 6 License Number e)/Gr/C..//;//O/6/Sj Date of last renewal. eV"' 6. Have you complied with the Uniform Commercial Curti.cones bulk salt ti musters MYES ONO II not ,teach to explanation 7 Have all creditors lien holders interest holders etc been notified of this t anslet 1ES (7NO 8. Does the applicant intend to operate the business while this application is pending YE5 ONO. If so complete Form 176 attach appropriate lee altar current license •md submit with this application(for Series 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 or 13 only) 9 To be completed by the CURRENT LICENSEE I HEREBY RELINQUISH MY RIGHTS TO THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LICENSE TO THE APPLICANT NAMED HEREIN AND HEREBY DEPO' AND SAY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS SECTION ARE TRUE/CORRECT AND COMLETE Ik:. r P�,{itrill�XCr"�4' .//�vLs J,2- K�^r� - /?-/6-SO .r Signature of curren licensee Date signed STATE OF /�nll��eL� S COUNTY OF � •.% > OrrIC.i�A�L�S�rArIs�s(s�s �/ SUBSCRIBED AND SWC ., a tI�IZaS.Lllala''ll day of � ��' -c6I . 19•J� ' +.) (} re l.i y r,hl t ,l ell cola i 'Signal osr f DT ARY PUBLIC s. My Commission expires ore •1 SECTION 10 LOCATION TO LOCATION TRANSFER QUESTIONS (Does not apply to Series 15 16 or 17G) APPLICANTS CANNOT OPERATE UNDER A LOCATION TRANSFER UNTIL IT IS FINALLY APPROVED BY THE STATE 1 Current businass address. County Exactly as it appears on license City ZIP Code. • 2 Current business name Exactly as tr:grpr.ms un litmus. 3 New business address County Also enter in Section 3 Do not use P 0 Box Number City ZIP Code 4 New business name Also enter in Section 3 5. License Series License Number / / / / / / / Date of last renewal 6. What date do you plan to move. Date of planned opening: SECTION 11 APPOINTMENT OF NEW AGENT FOR CORPORATION OR CLUB LICENSE. 1 Current Agents name Exactly as it appears on license Last Name First Name Middle 2 New Agent s name. Also enter in Section 3 Last Name First Name Middle 3 License Series. License number / / / / / / / Date of last renewal 4 Does this transaction involve the salt.of any portion of the corporate.stock OYES ONO If so Complete Section 8 5. To be completed by a CORPORATE OFFICER 1 HEREBY CONSENT TO THE AGENT APPOINTMEF • Printed Name of Corporate Officer NAMED HEREIN AND AGREE TO IMMEDIATELY ASSIGN A NEW AGENT IN THE EVENT OF THE DEATH RESIGNATION C DISCHARGE OF THIS AGENT I ALSO UNDFIISTAND THAT IF THE BACKGROUND REPORT SHOWS THAT I THE CORPORATION C ANY OFFICEH DIRECTOR OH SIOCKIlOLULH IIAVI BEEN LONVILIED OF A FELONY IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS OR A LIOUC VIOLATION IN THE PAST YEAR I WILL IMMEDIATELY SURRENDER THE LICENSE TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIOUC LICENSES AND CONTROL AND HEREBY WAIVE ALL RIGHTS TO APPEAL SUCH ACTION STATE OF Signature of corporate/club ollicer COUNTY OF SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before tee this day of 19_ My Commission expires on• Sionatine of NOTARY PUBLIC SECTION 12 PROBATE OR WILL ASSIGNMENT OF AN EXISTING LICENSE(Does not apply to corporations) 1 Current licensee's name. (Exactly as it appears on license) Last Name First Name Middle 2 Assignee s name. (Also enter in Section 3) Last Name First Name Middle 3 License Series License number / / f / / / / Date of last renewal. 4 Attach a ccrtilir.d ropy of the will or piub.ito dc;o ibnrum ur•.0 unu•n1 111.0.pa iln.ally distiibuera this liquor!Wens. to Ihrt rmgnne SECTION 13 GOVERNMENT LICENSE(for cities towns or counties only/ 1 Person to administer this license (Also enter in Section 3) List Name a First Name Middle 2 Applfr:aot_ An.,r is r..L,x ov.mwnnanq hotly s:nuluru itt n N:enc ul City Town or Lousily 3 Have you answered ALL questions in Section 3 including the locution to be licensed OYES ONO 4 Do you understand that you can only serve alcoholic leverages for consumption on the licensed premises.OYES ONO 5. Will a concessionaire be using this license OYES ONO If so attach the agreement and appropriate authorizations required by Section 4 205.03 A.R 6 Do you understand a sytaroe hr.nnsr must Ixr rtlitainr.rl lie mull ptomnns hunt whir Is alm uhahc bever:rfnts ore its let served ❑YES 0 NO r o FORM I20A —D L L C USE ONLY— STATE OF ARIZONA DEI'AR I'MFN'I OF LIQUOR I.1(FNSFS AND('ONTIt01. 1: l Ii:lit( DEFT 1645 WEST JEFFERSON SUITE 227 p PHOENIX AZ 85007 602/255 5141 DEC I 3 it 1 IJ ,0U0 I7 QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED BY EACH OWNER, PARTNER, STOCKHOLDER (10% OR MORE), AND MANAGER ALSO, EACH PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM ^ MUST SUBMIT AN APPI!CANT"TYPE FINGERPRINT CARD,WIIR II MAY RE OBTAINED AT ANY BONA FIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY READ CAREFULLY,THIS INSTRUMENT IS A SWORN DOCUMENT 1 Name Keller Howard Dewayne Datenfhirth 2--5-32 Last First Middle Month,day year 2 Business Name Cactus Club Place of birth.Douglas Gouty, His (As it appears in Section 3 of Form 1201 City State 3 Business address 650 West Apache Trail, Apache Junction Pinal 85220 (Do not use P O Box number/ City /� p County Zip Codep 4 Drivers license No Height. 5 r 10 Weght. 110 JCQ..Eye color. 84.G'�w,-tlau color:f ^r" • State Barbara Ann Keller Rossman 10-16-37 5 Name of spouse Date of birth. First Muldld. Last Maiden f� 6 Of what state are you a bona fide resident Arizona If Arizona date of residency. 1.2-jI-"0 7 Indicate your employment or business engaged in during the past five years If unemployed part of the time so state Time Describe Position Employer's Name or Name of Business Employed or Business (Give Street Address City State.and Zip Code/ industrial A 4_7QATES Waste Keller Drop Box Present Position or business engaged to E 291 S. Wilda Rd. { n Present Ownerng West Linn, Or 97068 6 DATES Position held or lousiness engaged in immediately preceding above(Al C DATES Position held or business engaged in immediately preceding above(B) OUN Attach additional sheet if necessary 8 Indicate where you have resoled for the last live years FROM TO RESIDENCE Month Year Month Year Street City State Zip Code 9 68 12 80 291 S. Wilda Rd West Linn Or 9iUbb Attach additional sheet if necessary 9 How many hours per day will you personally spend managing the business related hereto—15 to 16 hours a day 10 Give Telephone Numbers for_982-1148 _982=6/00 Business Residence 11 Have you ever been detained cited arrested indicted or summoned into court for violations of any law or ordinance including traffic violations and liquor violations 7' # .F/G 7/0 eS r 14 ES '❑NO 12 Have you ever posted bond been ordered to deposit bail been fined imprisoned had sentence suspended or placed on probation for Jf violation of any law or ordinance .P YES =NO 13 Have you evet luxl a bnSiness professional or liquor license rejected denied evoke/ suspended or lined in this or any other state DYES IXO 14 Have you ever had an application for any business professional or liquor license rejected or denied DYES 4NO 15 Has anyone ever filed suit or obtained a judgment against you in ivy civil action the subject of which involved fraud or misrepresentation of n liquor related matter DYES >`NO PIN ell4A I , 16 II any answer to Questions 9 through 15 is YES' attach a signed statement giving complete details. 17 Areyou familiar with Arizona State Liquor Laws and Regulations CNC I Ju )(YES C 18 Do you agree to keep your Arizona State Sales(Privilege)Tax Account and your city permit fees(if applicable)current 1$YES CNC 19 Do you agree to notify the Department of Liquor of any I voposivl change of business name prior to making any such eh(mules EYES CNC 20 Do you agree to post the permit or license if issued in a cinelntauus place on thi.;itemises and within view of the toner if public %YES ❑N( 21 Do you agree to purchase all liquor wine and beer supplies only fruits licensed Arizona wholesalers YES CNC 22 Do you agree to keep all records invoices and ocher documents relating to the Purchase sale or delivery of alcoholic beverages for a period of two years and to have them easily accessible for ex nnination t'ES Di 23 Do you consent for the duration of the permit or license if issued to the entrance,inspection and search by any law enforcement official without a warrant or other process of your licensed premises to determine whether you are complying with the provisions of the State Liquor Laws Regulations and Board Directives $%YES CNC 24 Do you consent to an investigation of your background including all records of every kind end description including police records and to waive any rights or causes of action that you may have against the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and any other individual or agency disclosing or releasing said inhumation to the Depai intent of Liquor Licenses and Control NIYES CNC 25 If any answer to Questions 17 through 24 is 'NO' attach a signed statement giving the reasons for such answers. FALSE OR INCOMPLETE ANSWERS COULD RESULT IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AND THE DENIAL, O,.OR SUBSEQUENT REVOCATION, OF A LICENSE OR PERMIT. STATE OF Ji77gly' l ) J ) ss COUNTY OF /"7^�-"'/!/I�' - ) 1 //4,)4 4°c3J I mo l/ C 1 I E/T,y BEING FIRST DULY SWORN UPON OATH HER ES` Printed nam of applicant DEPOSE SWEAR AND DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.THAT 1 AM THE APPLICANT MAKING THE FOREGOING QUESTIONNAIRI AND THAT SAID QUESTIONNAIRE HAS BEEN READ AND THAT THE CONTENTS THEREOF AND ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED THEREII ARE TRUE CORRECT AND COMPLETE Slur,iurr- 7 SUBSCRIBED IN MY PRESENCE AND SWORN TO before me this /% dai/ol Gi-l :'.'/ e' 19 C f- -j;' • /745)1 Signature of NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission expires on Offlcixl SCAA HELEN. WESTBRJOK eiN .t,gip_ Nobly P. —S:..L.cl Arizona �' 1.ialtit:OPA COUNTY •a • My Comm Expires lune 1 1982 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF 1 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY; YFS NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN Sl�ANK�_ COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN 3URGESS1/.// COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: � r . ITEM NO . 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF SPIRITUOUS LIQUOR LICENSE, SERIES 6, FOR THE CACTUS CLUB, BY HOWARD DEWAYNE KELLER, BE, AND HEREBY IS, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSE AND CONTROL, FOR APPROVAL BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE APPLICATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF SPIRITUOUS LIQUOR LICENSE, SERIES 6, FOR THE CACTUS CLUB, BY HOWARD DEWAYNE KELLER, BE, AND HEREBY IS, RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSE AND CONTROL, FOR DFNIA( PQACHE✓U !0 ,F O U �ij Z '1P/ZONP ity e o4pache cOunction DECEMBER 15, 1980 Auk MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER- FROM: JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNINGt4.9 SUBJECT' REQUEST FOR AGENDA ITEM: PZ-19-80 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE #73) BACKGROUND: Applicant: Commission Initiative Advertised: November 23, 1980 Notification: additionally sent to: Apache Junction Schools Central Arizona College Pinal County Planning and Zoning Ap,,7r:wer for Ancnz!a ...... Arizona State Land Commissioner °''° I►em #Proposed: "" a) NZ Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 8 East -- .(2--8 ----"--.--. to be CR-1 zoning district - Area: 2 square mile b) S z Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 8 East Oid Casinss to be GR zoning district - Area: z square mile -- - Nay, Business As you will recall earlier this year, the City approved the annexation of Section 32 which is the site which includes the High School , proposed new Junior High School , and the proposed site for Central Arizona College. The rest is State land property. As such, all the lands in Section 32 are in the public ownership. Following annexation, it is the responsibility of the City within a reasonable period of time to establish the zoning for such areas. In consultation with Mr. Bill Wright, Apache Junction Schools, he has indicated his preference for zoning of the north half which includes the sites for the High School , Junior High and the proposed Community college should be CR-1 - Single Family Residence. Such a zoning district would permit schools, churches, public parks and single family dwellings. The land that is south of the proposed Superstition Freeway is State land and may be the subject of a commercial grazing lease. Therefore, we would recommend that this area be retained as General Rural for the interim time until appropriate plans for the area can be developed. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 December 15, 1980 PZ-19-80 (Proposed Ordinance # 73) Page 2 Letter to Commissioner Fallini , Arizona Land Department, has been sent with regard to this matter requesting his opinion. The County zoning for all of Section 32 has been General Rural . The Commission authorized this initiative during the November 18, 1980, meeting. Mr. Roy Hudson indicated during the Commission hearing on December 9th, that Dr. Everingham, President, Pinal County Community College District, did not object to the proposed rezoning. Further, it is the District's desire that the proposed site in Section 32, be their first choice for a campus although it will be up to the State Board to make the final decision. STAFF COMMENTS• The following staff comments have been received and are attached: 1. Zoning Administrator 2. Fire Chief ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATION: The County zoning has been General Rural (GR) . The section is undeveloped except for the school property. The proposed Superstition Freeway is projected to be extended through the east-west mid-section line of Section 32. The proposed zoning CR-1 would be to the north and GR to the south. GR is a holding zone until development is proposed. CR-1 permits schools among other uses. ALTERNATIVES: In this case the Council has the following alternatives: 1. Recommend approval 2. Recommend denial 3. Table the action 4. Other Please include a statement of reasons for your motion. RECOMMENDATION: Following their advertised public hearing on December 9, 1980, the Planning and Zoning Commission unamimously voted to recommend the proposed establish- ment of zoning in Section 32 as set forth in Proposed Ordinance # 73. The reasons for the recommendation were: 1. The south half has been and should continue as General Rural (GR) until a future time when planning of the area south of the proposed freeway can be accomplished. 2. The north half should be CR-1, the district which reflects existing and proposed educational uses. The City has a statutory obligation to establish the zoning for annexed territory. Retaining the County classification of GR in the south half until development is proposed, is recommended. CR-1 in the north half allows schools. With the existing and proposed school facilities, CR-1 in the north half is therefore recommended. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Ordinance and map 2. Zoning Administrator's comments 3. Fire Chief's comments ORDINANCE NO 73 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80 FOR THE PROPERTY ANNEXED EFFECTIVE JUNE 7, 1980, TO THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY ORDINANCE NO. 42; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING oink FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT- SECTION I IN GENERAL The Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by amending the "Zoning District Map, City of Apache Junction, Arizona", by establishing the initial zoning district classification in zoning case PZ-19-80 for the following described parcels of land. 1 The North one-half (;) of Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, be and hereby is established as CR-1 Single Residence Zone zoning district; 2 The South one-half (%) of Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, be and hereby is established as GR General Rural zoning district, all located in Apache Junction, Pinal County, Arizona. ( SECTION II. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES 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 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, this day of , 19 Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. Ci y Attorney PZ - 19 - 80 ( C I ) (PROPosE D oRbinl A&CE NO '73) 0dy or ApaCke 7JNC4a.1 CITY .[.//n/T souTH6RN AVCNuc CITY L'm,75 �3 A?ACNE ?u a e rp on1 q Hi&H 4 scH OL IOREA PRoPosED ,=oR CR-/ a E P 3 V e F 2 aA o i � ly v PROPOSED - _ -'4/ SUPeRST/T/on/ o FREE'Amy O L ZAREA PR., POSED F4R GI • S V `� V CITY Ainr.T R o.a' aAseLIN6 AvEnJu6 NORTH COUwIT Y P/NRL SEG 7-ion/ L/Nc, SECT/on/ 3Z, ro 'nisi/P / NORTH, h \ RANGE 8 EAST., G .1 SR"3 f /f , I I 1 II I 0 %y Ii. Yy I 1.4.1e. SQAIQ 1).2ACH6 4 ... .•. O Cam, QO '9RiZoNQ' C6ity o75 C cache 09unction c NOVEMBER 25, 1980 TO. Executive Secretary, Planning & Zoning Commission ( JL.J7 THR-)c( U: Director of Public Works FROM: Zoning Administrator li7 RE. PZ 19-80 (Proposed Ordinance # 73) Because the City of Apache Junction recently annexed Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 8 East of the Gila & Salt River Rase & Meridian, and because since the annexation the City has not yet adopted a zoning classification for Section 32, it is most appro- priate to do so at this time to be in compliance with State law. Accordingly, it is recommended that proposed Ordinance # 73, PZ 19-80 be approved, LF:sw cc: Director of Public Works C_ 150 NORTH OCOTILLO • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-6154 cJpacl a junction Volunteer Spire lepartmnent / POST OFFICE BOX 829 • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 ( I December 3, 1980 lk City of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Road Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Attention: Mr. Joseph Gero RE: PZ-19-80 (C.I.) Planning Director Proposed Ordinance # 73 Dear Mr. Gero: Adequate Fire Protection can be supplied for either zoning in that area. Sincerely, &N- 3 Chief L. Miller, Jr. U HM:sb 1 1 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: Tk5 • SECONDED BY : 'Tic) YFS / , NO _ ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN DAMIANO f COUNCILMAN D Rg COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HILL //COUNCILMAN SHANKS U VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO V /'✓ MAYOR SEEMAN ✓ UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: '�,, ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: i\(\5SECONDED BY: 1 iA44 YFS Nn ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN DAMIANO1:///j///E COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HILL .•. COUNCILMAN SHANKS VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN I UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: II '4 ft nit ITEM N0 , 4 Step 1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE C1'TYAPACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA , THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO( 73, BE READ 3Y TITLE ONLY, AND THE READING OF THE ENTI RE RE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED , (Note: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the Clerk must read the ordinance in full . ) — 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO/: 78 FOR THE SECOND READING) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR step 3 AND CITY COUNCIL OF T-E CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZ_ONA, THAT TN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80, BY COMMISSION INITIATIVE ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO , 73, AN ORDINANCE OF THE `'AYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AvENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80 FOR PROPERTY ANNEXED EFFECTIVE JUNE 7, 1980, TO THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY ORDINANCE NO , 42; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERA3ILITY BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED AND ADOPTED , BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS vOTION ARE : TIONS. / (CHOOSE ONE) A. \\THOSE REASONS AS SET FORTH BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHICH ARE HEREBY ADOPTED BY �E� rr B . (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ONLY SOME OF THE COMMISSION REASONS , IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL NEED TO READ THOSE SPECIFIC REASONS) C. (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ALL NEW REASONS OR OTHER REASONS IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE , IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL NEED TO READ THEM AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO WRITE THEM OUT FOR THE CITY CLERK. ) FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO, 4 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Step 1 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO, 73, 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 Ordinance in full ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO , 78 FOR THE SECOND READING) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR ste'® AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80, BY COMMISSION INITIATIVE ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO, 73, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN ZONING CASE PZ-19-80 FOR PROPERTY ANNEXED EFFECTIVE JUNE 7, 1980, TO THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, BY ORDINANCE NO, 42; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE, AND HEREBY IS, DENIED, FOR DENIAL PQAOHE✓G p , 7,M +i4t 7, • AIR IZONP `6itf o C979ac/ e 2unction DECEMBER 16. 1980 .•. MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH- RAY LEE, CITY MANAGE FROM: JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING < SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM REQUEST: PZ-20-80 (Stachar) PROPOSED ORDINANCE F 82 BACKGROUND: Applicant: Keith Stachar Advertised: November 23, 1980 Existing Zoning: General Rural (GR) Proposed Zoning:* Parcel 1 - CB-2 (Planned Development) Parcel 2 - CB-1 Parcel 3 - CB-1 *See proposed zoning map The applicant is requesting the site be considered for three (3) rezonings, as per the attached map. With regard to the proposed planned development area, the applicant has submitted all the required materials as per Article 33 of the Zoning Ordinance, in either letter or map form. Please review the .. requirements of Article 33 and Council obligations, particularly Section 33.09, prior to the City Council meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: The following staff comments have been received and are attached: 1. City Engineer 2. Zonina Administrator 3. Fire Chief Arpr_rcr fer Ag^ r!a, / G'0, '' Care Item #�'" Fir-t r. ,. ^g I—?g! LI Sacon-, c,cum1 1:=:21_'I J .._ ---- Yelliic Hearing u_ Old E«;fl:eSs .!\ Nca EuSiRCSs 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 December 16, 1980 PZ-20-80 (Starcha^ .•. Page 2 ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATION: The parcel is at the intersection of two Section-line roads which will carry substantial traffic. There are a substantial number of mobile home parks in the area, many of which have been developed for some years and do not necessarily provide adequate storage areas. The Planned Develop- ment is a specific proposal and would meet a demand in the area. .•. Please review the permitted uses of CB-1 and CB-2 to determine what might be placed in such zones. Alternatives. In this case, the council has the following alternatives, (please feel free to handle each separately until the final motion) . 1. Recommend approval . 2. Recommend denial . 3. Amend and recommend approval for several alternatives. 4. Other RECOMMENDATION: Following the advertised public hearing on December 9, 1980, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council the following: Parcel # 1 - Approval of the proposed planned development with staff stipulations. Parcel # 2 - Amend the application from CB-2 to CB-1 and aprove. Parcel # 3 Approve CB-1 Ink The reasons for approval are: General 1. The properties are at the intersection of two arterials which, when fully developed, will carry the generated traffic safety. Parcel # 1 1. The Commission finds the applicant complies with Section 33.09 of the Zoning Ordinance 2. Storage is needed in the vicinity particularly to service the numerous mobile home and travel trailer parks in the area. December lb, 193U PZ-20-80 Page 3 Parcel # 2 The reduction from CB-1 is warranted because. 1. Industrial uses in this area would be spot zoning in terms of land use and therefore inappropriate. 2. CB-2 permits such uses as a bar, cocktail lounge, night club or tavern which would be inappropriate for the area as demonstrated by public comment during the public hear- .... ing. CB-1 does not permit such uses. Parcel #2 & 3 Commercial uses such as those permitted in CB-1 would provide service to the local area and would be located at the intersection of two arterial streets. The staff concurs with the Commission recommendation; provided further that the staff recommendations for the Planned Development be included during the Planned Development final stage consideration. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that in rezoning case PZ-20-80, application of Keith Stachar, also known as Ordinance No. 82, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-80 FOR THREE (3) PARCELS: PARCEL #1 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO GENERAL BUSINESS (CB-2)BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; PARCEL # 2 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1) ; AND PARCEL # 3 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1) ; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for approval as set forth by the Planning and Zoning Commission are incorporated by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the approval of the Planned Development is subject to and includes by reference the documentation as submitted by the applicant". ORDINANCE NO. 82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-80 FOR THREE (3) PARCELS: PARCEL #1 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO GENERAL BUSINESS (CB-2) BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PARCEL #2 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1), AND PARCEL #3 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1), REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT- SECTION I IN GENERAL The zoning district classification on the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Map for the parcels of land described below as: PARCEL #1 1. From General Rural (GR) to General Business (CB-2) by Planned Development for mini-storage for the property described as .ram u ,: ._.•� The North 125' of the East 270' of the North 145' of the West 290' of the South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal County, Arizona. 2. The approval of the zoning district classification incorporates, by reference, the preliminary approval of the Planned Development Plans as submitted by the applicant, and the development of the said property shall be in accordance with said Planned Development, and as provided in Ordinance No. 33. 3. Applicant shall install, at his expense, fire hydrants as per approved plans of the Apache Junction Township emk Fire Chief for this Planned Development. 4. Applicant shall install, at his expense, off-site street improvements as set forth on the Planned Development Plans in compliance with design details approved by the Director of Public Works • __., e.. .....,- PARCEL #2 From General Rural (GR) to Local Business (CB-1) for the property described as: The West 290' of the South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal County, Arizona PARCEL #3 From General Rural (GR) to Local Business (CB-1) for the property described as ORDINANCE NO. 82 Page 2 The East 270' of the South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 1 North, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended as set forth in this Ordinance. SECTION II. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, are hereby repealed SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM MA A ' 0• ��sz-cam City Attorney PZ - 20- 80 (STACHER) (PROPoscv OKD/NAn'CE NO 82.) z:•A?�Se'�Ti`eai:;Yap:£-.:'..- _ �.-.. OIN 6R6A5E Wood s - - -7- —I- W NORTH TH ci A o A Z szi' 'fib 0 .. PARc6L No / °t j ?' G2 ,/o C8-2 PGA,./NcD DEae-[eP�tia'T Zo `2 N y ` M/w/ - s ro AGv .13'7 6 k 210' I PAeceh n40•3 62 PA24 c L No.z • Illilk G2 , ea-1 s GR cs-y i $ h7' --- � _... - I- SUPERSTT7a✓ 82-v1) 1.5-Or + —1 I GR I I G2 APgcHE �c,..,cno..1, Ae/2.0,44 SEcnon/ /8, Tin" .e 86 TO .8E DED.CATED PoR R/GHr - of-u/Ay PoRPvs6s t Nov. 17, 1980 We, Donald C. Bethke, Keith H. and Kathryn J. Stachar, owners of property located at the H. W. corner of Superstition Dr. and Ironwood, express our intent to apply for a zoning change to allow CB-2, Planned Development with /'1 adjacent CB-2 and CB-1. The following information to general information concerning the Planned Development for Mini-Storage. Our intension is to plan the development to be compatable with and to serve the growth of the immediate area and community. The subject property is not in a flood area, as determined by the Federal Emergency :ianagement Agency. CAttached are documents showing ownership of subject property. Currently the property is subject to the following easements for night-Sways and Public Utilities; East Boundry Line(Ironwood) 331 South Boundry Line (Superstition Blvd.) 40' (Roth street easements to be widened to 50 feet, each) The property is served by Arizona .rater Co. with a 6 " main. The Development /, Plans call for Fire Hydrant to be located at the entrance of development. Serage di^;:osal to be approved Septic Tank for only one management office and/or ',onagers laving quarters. Total rlanned Development Laid area to ve ap rox. 68,800 sq. ft. or apirox. 1.6 acres. - Building • o cover ar,rrox. 505 of land area. Plans call for 7-8 seperate I \ buildings, divided into various size units for storage use. Building to oe lo'r profile, constn cted of block, Iietal, and frame construction. Entrance and Exit on Ironwood to be ac roved designed with curbs and paved drives. see page 2. Page 2 Driveway in the development to be designed for proper on site drainage, surfaced ' Cand dust free. The Planned Development to be designed for on site retension of rain water as per recuirements of B! ilding Department. The Planned Development will be aesigned for required Security and Lighting. Upon approval of the Planned Development, the owners intend to begin development with-:n 6 months and individual units will constructed in approx. 3sta es over a 2 ,year period. Donald C. e Uhke Keith . Stachar h ia d az Kat Tn Stachar C „Ark Aaiwk. , e ( ,:!--4,';',.tr-,, -',, - -- - 14., -.. .-•' - ...z..,! - _.: .', ~:".4t7.34' .. if - .:,4.-.: . . ... --= ... ..- - 4.- - 'A441.r--..---,-, -- ....,' '”. _ ''. .. ' • i.,..,..e...-e `-'t., -.7_ . - ---'---- ... .......—... .„,,,,......„.,...... oak til•-",:.:-.$ •.:411 :„. .,. _. ... 0 1. -i.,:t- -- -- - . . .--. .. . ,, , -, ..,. i _... .,m . . . - ...... i.,-.. - ria•- z.: . . . _: _... , -•• -'1 i ,,: ' • •--41 • -. 7....................:............,.r. 4- _______...„-' -ihtto' ,..z. ..-.' ...,..,,__,..._ ' _' T,•, ..--•••'--.,:. rr? fr-'-.4 •• •-4.;-• •-''•-. ... --.„.-. ._,.., :-:5:i"a•-f.pik'''''i-A ' - ,•.i.-,-.0.:',i- .• -.1,, - - ,. • i 771 ---.. ,;iflTirflTr i 7W':S,--;2'),..-;"'7„%`i•:'.v4.g',;•'•••,' ,'e0".,t•,i-:I );,°.4,-.,;i•.'9.,2,7,t-;4.1,;:;-.;-,,,A;I.,-„ ',K%g-,,-z1t;-1,,,-,ziinkr,!t:,r-!;,,c-.-'-.'_1.'.,-'f-e.'Afi',r''''L;:f4s,144...:,,,-;-,f',;'"-:•. f•,_r,-.-4,..Ia 1: i" 4 -t.g,iii41''i ". ,,..:. ..;k:4 •: - 1* A ; . ..i " 11: *1VV4 ,tlt•e"' . 4p 7z , m . ,1 r 7Li 4•'. „...4.,:„.*:,.. 44... --).:,i,r,....toost-,_*-44.&,, - 4:. ,-f",•.,,,tt•i,,-;:1 -170.... .4t,SM"ril_.,,,,,- ''.'*-4-;`-'-_• : 477-'-"k!T-4**.ii. W.S.11t -e' - ..; ' •,- .t.-7a0.:,.-A-.,,-.. ,-.7 -•-•-•-.-.:'*.IPite. ,far.-ti:.--q.:-A,..tv...-..'... .., ss. —,-—. .... . ,.. , ..•4. •••,..... ...i.,f ii.. ;'.-•...1 1 . • :7•••:-.--: -*". :1,1I-, - ;aft. . ....' :. itsi, 1 1 • i I ,.4. 1 , ,-- F,,:- •.1 . .-,;,4i..-....fk, :re..?5,zi)i - ' ' -t• . 4 2 '-; ,- • ' . .••••-•''',.`',-?••••--•:,•,'.'4,•;,4J;-L.,-: .' ' ' I • • -:. ' '•,• -'`'f'; •••• •'•••• ••.: ',- .::`!,")-0"1.;:$,, ,N41,-. re.',., ,,; r. -1, *-- ' - givi''-•' '-':-'1*-te4'.• '-.:-.;4.et.77:::`,,,-1344.."-. ,1 - -.1 . .:-c;. ii.olfetei ,''''.. 7,...A ,,. A ..V1,A,.....,A .A ..„.4,,,, k..4,,s-. .,.?.f.-,..„.., _ •'44,.. Aa•VS4-'-4 ''Ai etft.!4T&,, i ...--.-- "''''''‘NN...''.'V•-'''*.."'''L.'W",Ailc-7-•' (-_- "" 't,a4f. .. -4.• -kV.- . _--,....!..-. ''' 'V•4`Pi.14,,,,,,,744. ,,A.ot ..,,V4 _..-:.:7-. •.,.•,...f,..,. •_.-'1;4.1457'1‘,• tit;-.% -4-11,14-:.-1._.4-0,,,... -,.,...,....,-... -...,,,,,..,)k.-; 4.1Z4.6 ..5k.. .-...fte., ..-.--"N•41.‘s - , •,.--. •. ,...s. :'-44,40,n*! •-7.4;.1-•,-...:.,r!: ,.....-, 4z,4 ii.g4-11r/- ' *h.. ''-0-1'14,,.....,- ,-, ., .,, ,,,,, ,c4 - i- i -.--, ,It—' - -0,--• .tkat . ," •*':r ";,.*.--,.-•-,-,r-' • V---• • •--•*.r--..,,,,- • '--4,"- .- -,--744.• .. - f . te r ,_" *4rOle$4;r"- , ..,.-1,'-i'..;44, g:: W.,,,,."4:. -..`''.F'''nA.:&,... ,1441:_ ,t!.-''''''`." •.s, q 4.:44 - ,.-:..nirv73.11WM.r*. -1;,--: 1.:.:',„..i,-:-.-Att,t4.4707-47. :*4;!1•. °-(i% -..Ni.;?4t*/`-.0 ,.'-2.':., ''.--, fte't_i3.(44tettf4/1...40.0, , c.-,;, oi. y.2;,-AL'7,,e, • ., 'ie. :.;,,:, -._ -; , •:;.-.,...... - 3;:th.:-..;.-.. -:-. .'"_.- ...•.":.-7.4--;,-.1,,r-.. --te,.-.... esN oink CAPPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOR APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA Cash Receipt .3$ rr-/Amoin4e.aDate ` ,Case Number /72 — — ^ TO APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL I hereby request a change of zoning classification, an amendment to the zoning regulations, or approval of a Special Permit as follows (list the present zon- ing classification & then the proposed classification, using separate parcel numbers if more than one change of zoning is proposed) Parcel 1 Fran GR To. CB-2 Planned Development (-iini-Storage) Parcel 2 Ult ub-1 Parcel 3 GR CB-2 Parcel 4 Parcel 5 The legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned by this application / is as follows (if more space is needed, attach separate sheet) j` S�.SE,SE,SE, of Sec. 18 Tld R8E G&SRB8N -E'{CEPT W. 100' and EXCEPT S. 50' and E. 33' for Roadway. The size (to nearest tenth of an acre) & general location of the subject Property is as follows (give direction & distance rarest mapped street) Anrrox. 3.50 ac. At NW Corner of Superstition Dr. and Ironwood (Please answer the following questions in the space provided or submit a separate signed statement if additional space is needed.) 1 Why is the property in question not reasonably suited for uses permitted under ON present zoning districting? -'resent zon ng GR (1 residence per 1%; ac or commercial agriculture uses) is not the hsghest and nest use. 2 Are there any known changes in land use, street arrangement, or other physical conditions that have altered the character of your property, or adjoining property, since the present zoning was adopted? Please explain "Yes" answer Yes. Tie "1, of 51 -e,stlt,on Dr. along t'e South of s?b:lect ro_rert;* has ',eon wide ed to L0 ft for 7ublic Pighury. ( docl-et 73 page 591) 3 If your requested change is to provide additional commercial or industrial zon- ing, is there a demonstrable need for this zoning in order to serve the community or neighborhood, as the case may be? Explain There has been extensive residential growth of the area, both single family and :ob.1e Home Parks, schools. The neighborhood location would conveniently serve the existing and future growth. 4 Other reasons for the subject request Page 1 of 2 pages Describe existing & proposed future use of subject property, buildings and C structures PARCEL 1 -lini-Stora,-e to be attractive low profile buildirrxior public rental storage. PARCEL 2 -Reserved for `ruilti unit office type buildings for Business and/or retail. PARCEL 3 -Reserved fo a Single tenant building; E.:a-rnle cony ence store-bank branch. Attach any supporting information, statements or plans* to this application & submit same inperson to• Apache Junction Zoning Administrator's Office, Apache Junction, Arizona Note The land owner(s) must sign below or else the appli- cant must submit a letter signed by the owner authorizing him to apply for this change of zoning) Tceth Ti. Stecher D r)_ 3n,. Oe'' ^arj„ .Tn-Trt.'-n 9P2.,8220 (Name of applicant or representatives (Address) (Phone) (Name of applicant or representative) (Address) (Phone) C ieith H. Stachar T. 0. Box 995, Apache junction, 982-8220 (Name & Address of person to wham petition &notices should be mailed) / e' 4 (Signature-of applicant) (Date) *Note. Plans are required when application is filed for following. Special Use Permits under Section 2302, Area & Neighborhood Plans, Article 32, Indus- trial CI-2, Article 18, Trailer Courts, Article 20, Section 2001-c DO NOT FILL OUT FOLLOUING (for office records only) LEGAL PUBLICATION Date filed Applicant Zoning Case Census Division & Tract No Application received by Remarks Page 2 of 2 pages elS 'IN PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803 CINITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT Any person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- trict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed On\ change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district. In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Cocunussion may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months I Vo,tr L Gyanyl T, , being the (owner or-ham-poc e of rr +-hp c ner n hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to rezone the property described below from GR to CB-2 Plerred Develoneraent / CB-2 / CB-1 ( irzi-St-Irnm.y LOCATION. N. W. Corner of Iron*•'ood and University LEGAL S1,SE,SE,SE, Sec. 18 TIN R8E Gc SRDcM (e_.cert the 'est 100') SUE USES PERMIT1ED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT Professional office, Detail Shops, Storage �uilnings 'd Stor;:e Yard. We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE Please use Iot No , Block No , or , Symbol as indicated on attached map ) DATE SIGNATURE TAT BLOCK SYMBOL i /d/74 ,o ��j/ L'c�� ii, .��:t" s...,��'-SI. /6'0 �s cab1� /D,/o�i=d ?��." ...Z d....--aA-4 /O) 3 3 A- /0li4%0 /a / -- a 2 5.6 10 / i / d D gp /o Iii)c (,P y e ire&Q# io( - o 2- el /? /' /'( _ e-z Z9A(-9--,-t-c,e9-2ri /D/ g/ 7i.8-0 /o h, v 4/i_,.,,,/` -4.4-e-vc / l O el 7`-Fly /'LA c / .�.�? ) - e'. �. - /0/— 35 — ,,2 s /y/_l-' ;Z'�/Le(--, -. Jo - 7s - ? ice•, i+. PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803- INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT. Any person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- trict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change. If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not �^ be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months I, C, tr H , being the (owner or having power of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to rezone the property described below from a? to CB-2 Planned Developement / CB-2 / CB-1 LOCATION N. W. Corner of Ironvood end University LEGAL Slli,SE,SE,SE, Sec. 18 T1N R8E (e:cer t the lest 100') SOME USES PERMILIEU IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT Professional Office, Retail Shops, Stora;_,e .uilc1fLe d _,t,or e We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described ,property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal. (NOTE. Please use Lot No , Block No , or Symbol as indicated on attached map ) DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK S1'\SOL /.'d 7 :�v , %',�// ./ter'.'/ % /ea R ,14,44 12- /0/ oa /4/7% Z�✓ >o I - F�:1 �'_�/1 ,u✓r � ! - 0 - g' 7 77? , 00 - — _ a t~ s PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803 INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSEIir• ( .ny person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- trict bondaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 517. of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district. In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months • I, xP;t>, H sta b-r , being the (owner or having power of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to rezone the property described below from GR to CB-2 Planned Developement / CB-2 / CB-1 (:1Ini-Storag ) LOCATION N. W. Corner of Ironvood and University LEGAL. SIII,SE,SE,SE, Sec. 18 T]IJ RBE G&SRBS1.1 (e.,cer t the'vest 1001) SOME USES PERMITTED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT Professional Office, Retail Shops, Stora,,e iuildin,s a (1 tor^ e Y;rd. 'We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we . do not object to the proposal (NOTE Please use Lot No , Block No , or Symbol as indicated on attached map.) DATE SIG>IATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL osik /60 )1 4) . /ea 36 it/ / 6 ��/� 7,� n k4 /D O 3s /6/,a/5- jo I C . ..6.11. .011•1k , - .c-`...2. ", . - -,-•- '..,- . r.,- ...- . . - Z PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE . . As provided for in'the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803. • •I INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT- 1 /- Any person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- k„ trict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, 2 of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not be counted, either intraiibers or area, the owners of the land of the same or 1 '. less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless elk i , the proposed 'change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent _,... and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district ,,.. including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing , '.' • ' NO petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within . . the previous 6 months. , • ., . • . 1, )(pith y r , being the (owner or having power - of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to l' -,' rezone the property described below from OR to ( CB-2 Planned Developement / CB-2 / CB-1 (:.inf_ Cto=go) . . ";_LOCATION• N. W. Corner of Ironwood and University • :LEGAL S1/4SE,SE,SE, Sec, 18 TIN R8E G&SR2ZM (except the West 1001) SOME USES PERMITTED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT , , . ,.: Professional Office, Retail Shops, Storage Buildings ad Stora e Yard. , 1 . , . We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described i property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE. Please use Lot No , Block No , or ''.:Symhol as indicated an attached map.) • ' . • . - .. - . DATE . SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL : .•_„'l .. .( O S .... v. i /Ao ...? .76.6- - . , . R i_11<i. ,(5,0 sz- (76, ., . , . 1-----T Jo% 0 0 ... ,..,1 _' 1' Llts /o/ 1 j___ (34 . -it...eezii—cz, 1 b LI) - , . . • , , • 7 'A-."- .' • , • • (, - • • .,,,4. • •.:-,,l'If-- ' , .. • . . ,. •- Ark, r PlTITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803 INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT Ceny person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- trict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not Amok be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Comanission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months I, KP,t}. a $+ rb-r , being the (owner or having power of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to C rezone the property described below from CP to CB-2 Planned Developement / CB-2 / CB-1 (Mini-StnraEn) LOCATION• N. W. Corner of Iron ood cnd Lnivers_ty LEGAL. S<,S E,SE,SE, Sec. 18 TiN PEE Cn S.w'',�'J (e:_ce•t the est 100') SOME USES PERNITIED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT rrofcssional Office, Petal). Shous, Stora,e uild'_^ts a a fsrd. We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE. Please use Lot No , Block No , •r Symbol as indicated on attached map ) DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL /eP ) /S v // /LL�Ic'1 l /Oa 3S 36 ' /v/ file2/d , � v tvv, /4 3.5 &G 0 /b//0710 2 �.�-�.� /d 0 3 d 3.Z 10/I 4 n ys�e-�-v'? /D / -- D 2 S6 /00/id 51 irGeT%UZe/ /0 / v Z s6 1' iv1/cF d9 ��i'�6G�G/ 'Z..._ 0'e A boo - 30 - 3 / / ) y/h _ ,3 — 3 fl PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803 INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONS== C Any person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- trict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not Adak be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners. Unless the proposed'change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district. In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months I, Kaitth u st ,h=, , being the (owner or having pcuer of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to (: rezone the property described below from Oa to CB-2 Planned Development / CB-2 / CB-1 pini—Stil"n.Se) LOCATION N. W. Corner of Iron::ood and Lnivers_ty LEGAL. S1/2,SE,SE,SE, Sec. 18 T1N R8E G&SRP1M (e_.cert the 'est 100') SOME USES PECdMICILD IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT. Professional Office, Retail Shops, Storae d Mora e Yard. We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE Please use Lot No , Block No., or Symbol as indicated on attached map.) DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL / /7 / 7L/:C7/441. ' /Ql 1S 31 r>: I Ph;11'rjON FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803 INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENOME1JT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT ( y person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning dis- ..z-ict boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Zoning Administrator the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed 1 change If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute '� a zoning district. In the event that the area of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing. No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a peti- I tion which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months. - I, VP,+.r p g+arh-r , being the (owner or having power of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent to rezone the property described below from :1P to CB-2 Pla.rned Developement / CB-2 / CS-1 (Mini-.Store e) LOCATION N. W. Corner of Irom-ood end University i •.' "' LEGAL S',SE,SE,SE, Sec. 18 Till R8E G S-L< n( (e.ce t the Jest 100') y SOME USES PERMITTED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT• f Professional Office, Petall Shors, Stora_e :.uilc`_r_s £ a Store lard. • We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE. Please use Lot No , Block No., •r ; Symbol as indicated on attached map.) 3 DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL 11/? O pi / c, `'�, 2l ,��, f c`' ��'z�- nk4 /BO 3s �6,Cs' in//o77o .,Z c.�a-�.4 /O D 36 2 A- _____ /0//d/eo e„.„..- ,--? AO 1 -- d 2 S6 R • X//// ' , r �—e, I - .3 s .33- 1 D/tq/ (4,4&51 GLL, 4.) I DO • .3 r 3 s' i -- • ...1 A C, We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zong change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal (NOTE Please use Lot No , Block No , or Symbol as indicated on attached map ) DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK S\MBOL r" " • II'I Irm ' ' __gL, g__„?3(5_ .:1a2. 2 OF PERSON CIR TING FvT:TIO% • AFFIDAVIT STATE OF ARIZONA • ss COMM: OF PINAL ` On this SC day of f/(/d'zn/n/E , 19 g , personally appeared before me C/7`-/' /� s' : , -`%`who upon oath deposes and says thlt he is the person who circulated the foregoing petition and that to the best of his . knowledge and belief the signatures contained therein are those of real property owners within 300 feet from the exterior boundaries of the legally described -,ro',erC\ wherein the change of districts is being requested . a4''414'\ L A44 TZ/12 My Commission Ex➢ires UM.9..190 lie fnn 7 t I :4 .. e r. yi APPRO\IMATE SCALL �` ` } : 1000 0 1000 FEET A .}ti. a — 1 it -- 0 F . -„, .z. .. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM •+IPROCK sT n e I y II -..-7:_-- -.4 77:• FHBM ..... 0, .,._____ _, ......„ .. . • • •.• r. • ZONE Z " . A #' FLOOD HAZARD BOUNDARY MAP (( ; .. CITY OF II A: APACHE _...... ti; ri-d-.1 UNCTION . : .J.__ ,u PERSTITION � J ARIZONA oH►o ' .�, ST of Q PINAL COUNTY TMI a _ CCDYl1 „ .II, p c :: v O W I. VI A ,PG .. ST �' w z _ ,. OC ST I '.'.. ` I� I BELMAR o ONLY PANEL PRINTED CACTuswHfNS1 Il 1_r < .;•.. _.� d. C O. • :rr"'- Al GREGORY ST I i••. l Iw GREGORY ST ••` /) ... E___--1 j ,:-.•-•;_:_- if' '' ZON 11 II ` � III r ; f I =1. COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER W 1 ;.• 040120 0001 A is i EFFECTIVE DATE 1r JJ m :. ; .;y: ,;R I:'\ JUNE 10 1980 . LLII_ r - -_ 1O�: .„.......,19 4" tati• t le- f' U S DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING :: II II IiI 1II , AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 1.___. :/3::.,.. i. •• y}#•. .. 1 II II ..` �_._J s I rE:EGa tiS..RaN E Apt,. ti.STR Cti 7- I, �, __._„ t .:41,.....id ' , 7 CIlea zl II II ¢�. .. en II II o • J I 1N 12114 AVf ICI a I.) 1L fir.. - t iI .. - ii—xvp.CH6 de/ ,_ n n "-i'izolAi" Vity o . 04/Jude 02unction ,,� November 26, 1980 Memorandum to: Planning Director - Building Official LI From: �AiCity Engineer 0 &-7 Thru: Director of Public Works Subject: PZ-20-80 (Stachar) No objection to rezoning request, however, when improvements are designed: C1 . Street improvements for frontage on Ironwood are required and should be shown on plan. 2. Correction and consideration to information as provided on plan: a. Total retention required shall be 14,708 cu. ft. b. Maximum depth of retention area in Southwest corner shall not exceed 3.5 feet in depth. c. Further consideration should be given by the developer to eliminate the ponding of water in the paved areas as shown, for reasons of convenience to the users and .. maintenance. In order to obtain the average depth as shown in the paved areas, asphalt berms would have to be a minimum of 7 inches high. d. Consideration should be given for drainage at the base of all perimeter block walls. 3. Provisions for septic installations should be shown for management office. 4. Planned developed land acreage of 1 .6 acres is correct as stated. (69,550 sq. ft. ) RCB/an 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Jpache junction Volunteer gire !bepartment POST OFFICE BOX 829 • APACHE JUNCTION. ARIZONA 85220 (r December 3, 1980 City of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Road Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Attention: Mr. Joseph Gero, RE: PZ-20-80 (Stacher) Planning Director Proposed Ordinance # 82 Dear Mr. Gero: If the Standard and Uniform requirements for Mini Storage and Water Protection on each Parcel are met, adequate fire protection can be provided on each. Sincerely, Gr\v\aQs,L, Chief H. L. Miller,'Jr. HM:sb rrs.ACI-Is ✓G "^ 44),ZoNP nib/ on &4pache . unction .011 December 4, 1980 TO: Executive Secretary, Planning & Zoning Commission THRU: Director of Public Works 7. FROM. Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: PZ 20-80 The property for which the rezoning is requested is 760 '+ east of the centerline of N. Main Drive , The property fronting on Superstition and bounded by Grand Drive on the west and Main Drive on the east is currently zoned CB-2. The future street indicated 67 ' west of the property to be rezoned, is Saguaro, not Main as indicated on the plot plan which accompanies the rezoning application, With the implementation of the corrections noted by the City Engineer, we would recommend approval . LF• sw C 150 NORTH OCOTILLO • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE (602)982 6154 ROLL CALL. VOTE SHEET NOTES r, jilr AaNC r A/4/ ITEM # ' MEETING - 1 ''r'i OF -O MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: D YFS NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN BURGESS f://///> COUNCILMAN DAMIANO • COUNCILMAN EIDSON /// COUNCILMAN HILL i///COUNCILMAN SHANKS k.// VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES r .11"(A, ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: --"( SECONDED BY : C -- y Nn ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON . 11/7 VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN L I UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO, 5 Step 1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO, 82, 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 ordinance in full . ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO, 82 FOR THE SECOND READING , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR Step 3 AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-20-80, APPLICATION OF KEITH STACHAR, ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO , 82, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-80 FOR THREE (3) PARCELS : PARCEL #1 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO GENERAL BUSINESS (CB-2) BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; PARCEL #2 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1); AND PARCEL #3 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1); REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS MOTION ARE : OPTIONS: (CHOOSE ONE) A, "THOSE REASONS AS SET FORTH BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHICH ARE HEREBY ADOPTED BY REFERENCE ," B. (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ONLY SOME OF THE COMMISSION REASONS , IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL HAVE TO READ THOSE SPECIFIC REASONS) C, (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ALL NEW REASONS OR OTHER REASONS IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE , IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL HAVE TO READ THEM AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO WRITE THEM OUT FOR THE CITY CLERK. ) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE APPROVAL OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IS SUBJECT TO, AND INCLUDES BY REFERENCE, THE DOCUMENTATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, FOR APPROVAL ITEM NO, 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR Step l AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO , 82, 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 ordinance in full ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO , 82 FOR THE SECOND READING , Step 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-20-80, APPLICATION OF KEITH STACHAR, ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO , 82, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-20-80 FOR THREE (3) PARCELS : PARCEL #1 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO GENERAL BUSINESS (CB-2) BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT; PARCEL #2 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1); AND PARCEL #3 GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO LOCAL BUSINESS (CB-1); REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE, AND HEREBY IS, DENIED , FOR DENIAL PQACHF✓ ... vi. , z 4P/ZONP `Oity 4 &.4pache 09unction December 12, 1980 p MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGEP,' - FROM. JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING --1.0 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM REQUEST: PZ-21-80 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE #80) BACKGROUND: Applicant: Sumner Brooks Area: 21,335 square feet (about 0.5 acres) Current Zoning: General Rural (GR) Proposed Zoning: CR-5 Multiple Family Residence Advertised: November 23, 1980 The subject site has an existing duplex and single family dwelling upon it. The parcel was previously 42 feet wider to the east. However, a portion of the lot was sold to the owner of the adjacent restaurant to increase their lot size. The applicant indicates the area as 0.6 acres . However, the City Engineer's review shows the applicant using the 33 feet of the right-of-way (Scenic Street) as part of the lot area. .•. The subject site was recently purchased by the applicant. A review of the Ordinance map will indicate other CR-5 parcels in the affected area. STAFF COMMENTS: The following staff comments have been received and are attached: 1 City Engineer 2. Fire Chief Approver for Aoorc?� ,E :-±9"., � Date Item # First Rca:''ng 1-7- 2S J Seccic Rcc,:iinj 1—.21"A .___.._.... 1 `. .c.L.!:c }..... .^ ... O!.1 Dusir;css Y• Naw C�;mcss 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 December 12, 1980 PZ-21-80 Proposed dinance #80 Page 2 ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATION: There are several implications which should be considered. They are: 1. The Zoning Ordinance permits one (1) multiple family dwelling unit per 2,000 square feet of lot area. Approval of this application would be a granting of a maximun of eleven (11 ) units on the site, or eight (8) more than now exist; provided the other provisions of the CR-5 district are met by the developer. 2. Such a size development would require a substantial area for the septic system, thereby reducing the surface area. 3. Scenic Street is a quarter-section or collector street with a sixty (60) feet right-of-way. ALTERNATIVES: In this case the Council has the following alternatives: 1. Recommend approval . 2. Recommend denial . 3. Table to allow the applicant, at the suggestion of the applicant, to amend the application to a Planned Development. 4. Other. Please include a statement of reasons for your motion. RECOMMENDATION: Following the advertised public hearing held on December 9, 1980, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council the approval of proposed Ordinance No. 80. The reasons for the recommendation are: 1. There are several contigious or near-by properties already zoned CR-5 Multiple Family Residence, therefore, this would not be out of character as an apartment project. 2. There is an adjacent commercial use which would be compatible with multiple family uses. 3. Scenic Street, a quarter-section road, is classified a collector and will be adequate when fully developed to carry the extra traffic generated. 4. Such a project would add to the upgrading of the area. Should the Council choose to approve this case, there are no requested stipulations from staff. t PQACHF 0 :t0.A. *pi 0,, xiPizoo- . : (6ity o I` pache 2unctian December 12, 1980 0.. The Honorable Al Brooks Mesa City Council P.O. Box 1466 Mesa, Arizona, 85201 Re: PZ-21-80 (Proposed Ordinance #80) Dear Mr. Brooks: The City of Apache Junction Planning and Zoning Commission has sent to the City Council its recommendation concerning your requested rezoning. Accordingly, a public hearing has been advertised for 7:00 p.m. on January 7, 1981, to consider your request. The hearing will be held at the City Hall Complex, 1001 North Idaho Road, Apache Junction, Arizona. You or your agent should be in attendance to present your case. Should you not be present, your agent should have a written power of attorney authorizing him to represent you on this matter. Our Planning Director, Joe Gero, requested I enclose the attached reports which you requested. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Joe Gero, Department of Planning at 982-8002. Sincerely yours, r.--" ,"/C 6tel,„Ottc Rich Oesterle City Clerk RO/jl cc: Mr. George Bliss Administrative Services Dept. of Planning 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ORDINANCE NO 80 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-80 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE (CR-5); REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT SECTION I. IN GENERAL • The zoning district classification on the Apache Junction, Arizona, Zoning Map for the parcel of land described as The Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of the North- east 1/4 of Section 21, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, except the East forty-two (42') feet, and the North 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the South- west 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21, Township 1 North, Range 8 East, except the East forty-two (42') feet, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, located in Pinal County, Arizona, be and hereby is amended from General Rural (GR) to Multiple Residence l (CR-5) SECTION II REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, are hereby repealed SECTION III PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY If any section, sub-section, sentence, phrase, clause or portion of this Ordinance or any part of the code adopted herein by reference, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof _. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THIS DAY OF , 19 Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM \ (/) City Attorney PZ-2I - 80 ( BROOKS) PR'oPOSCD ORD/NANCE ND $O PRESENT ZONING - G.6,NcsiCAL leuRAL NoRrH REQUcSTeD 2.oNiN6 - CR-S [ C2"S SCEO/c SiRee7- I. 27� >< 97 ?{ /fib A.>��23X 207 f 28 'o / o ,z5. .. • o 2y M z 3 Ss 27 29 ,� j/ GQ Cs,2 ,soa.),cr Z ' /i -i 2:- L'R-S 30 �t GR. 2. t 4 Y G2 Q k CR-S J e a ^1 C. 33 M 39 35c M 330' < Y 3 3v' AP/i eye- JuNCT/on AR/Z.o. A 5ECTice✓ 2/, T-'N R 8. 1 OS ON November 10, 1980 0.1 Apache Junction Planning 8 Zoning Dept. Apache Junction, Arizona Subject: Rezoning Application 945 East Scenic Drive Gentlemen: Here are the reasons for my request for a change of zoning at the above mentioned address : 1 . When I recently purchased the property, there were three rental units on it. 2. When I took over the property, it was zoned CGeneral Rural, despite the existence of a large restaurant next door and a mobile home park adjacent in the rear. 3. I now wish to add two more rental units to my property. 4. I need the CR-5 zoning to make these additional units conforming. /1 I shall appreciate your earnest consideration of my request. I feel it is reasonable under the circum- stances, and in view of CR-5 zoning directly across the street. Respectfully submitted , _ _. eta, t, ./- * Sumner A. Brooks p Z / — gel APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OR CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOR APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA Cash Receipt No. 33`l`I Amount 100 Date/i-iy- Case No -.= "" TO APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL I hereby request a change of zoning classification, an amendment to the zoning regulations, or approval of a Special Permit as follows (list the present zoning classification & then the proposed classi- fication, using separate parcel numbers if more than one change of zoning is proposed) . Parcel 1 From: General Rural To• C1-5 Parcel 2 CParcel 3 Parcel 4 Parcel 5 The legal description of the property proposed to be rezoned by this __�.. application is as follows (if more space is needed, attach separate a sheet) - SEE ATTACi-ED DESCRI=TIOP, The size (to nearest tenth of an acre) & general location of the subject property is as follows (give direction & distance from nearest mapped street) : Six tenths of an acre (amrroximately) 123.29' X 206.0c' . . located at 945 East Scenic Drive (Please answer the following questions in the space provided or submit a separate signed statement if additional space is needed.) 1. Why is the property in question not reasonable suited for uses permitted under present zoning districting? General Rural does -»---� _ not permit multiple family dwellin.zs, as presently exist on Property. 2. Are there any known changes in land use, street arrangement, or other physical conditions that have altered the character of your property, or adjoining property, since the present zoning was adopted" Please explain "Yes" answer. No. areviously county zoninh allowed existins multiple family dwelling units. .ie request permission to add two more units to Present three. 3. If your requested change is to provide additional commercial or industrial zoning, is there a demonstrable need for this zoning in order to serve the community or neighborhood, as the case may be' Explain. The Trozected E.ro.vth patterns of Apache Junction demonstrate an obvious need for more rental facilities in the near future. Page 1 of 2 pages C 4 Other reasons for the subject request. Economic. Describe existing ;& proposed future use of subject property, buildings and structures: There are presently three rental units (one duplex apartment and one single family house) on the rremi.ses. le rrnnose two additional rental units. Attach any supporting information, statements or plans* to this (I Zoning & submit same in person to: Apache Junction Planning & Zoning Commission Department, Apache Junction, Arizona. (Note: The land owner (s) must sign below or else the applicant must submit a letter signed by the owner authorizing him to apply for this change of zoning) . George F Bliss, agent 1029 W. 6th St. : esa. 834-6017 (Name of applicant or representative) (Address) (Phone) Sunner A. Broo'ts 104 W. -lain St. "esa 964-4587 (Name of land owner) (Address) (Phone) Geor-e F. Bliss 1029 W. 6th St. lege, Az. 85201 (Name7& Address of person to whom petition & notices should be mailed) A1 natu of apecay�t) �ff (Dal e)J41 � u Ys , //f rt *Note Plans are required when application is filed for following. Special Use Permits under Section 2302; Area & Neighborhood Plans, Article_32t. Industrial CI-2, Article ,18; Trailer - - - -- Courts, Article 20, Section 2001-c. DO NOT FILL OUT FOLLOWING (for office records only) - LEGAL PUBLICATION Date filed Applicant Zoning Case Census Division & Tract No. Application received by Remarks. Page 2 of 2 pages it c PETITION FOR HEARING TO REZONE As provided for in the Apache Junction Zoning Ordinance, Section 2803. INITIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - BY PETITION AND CONSENT• Any person may initiate a zoning ordinance amendment changing the zoning district boundaries within an area previously zoned by filing with the City Clerk the proposed amendment, a petition in favor of such change, and also the written consents of at least 51% of the owners, by number and by area, of all other properties any part of which is within 300 feet of the proposed change. If the petition is for a change of classification, there shall not be counted, either in numbers or area, the owners of the land of the same or less restrictive zoning classification as sought by the petitioners. Unless the proposed change is an extension of an existing zoning district, the extent and boundaries of the area proposed to be changed shall be such as to constitute a zoning district. In the event that the area ( of the proposed change does not constitute a zoning district, the Commission may delimit a zoning district including the petitioned area before the amendment is set for public hearing. No petition shall be received for amendment reclassifying property if a petition which included the property has been denied by the City Council within the previous 6 months. I, Sumner A. Proo'�s , being the (owner or having power of attorney for the owner or owners) hereby indicate (my) (their) intent rezone the property described below from Ceneral Rural to C1-5 LOCATION: 945 E. Scenic Drive LEGAL.•'14-;^•E4-'•',14-5'J4-',E4 SEC 21-T1N-R5E EXCEPT THE EAST 42 FEET Ai D N2-F2-SW4-T,E4-; :J4-S'•!4-1 E4-SEC 21-T1m-R8E EXCEPT ThE EAST 42 FEET SOME USES PERMITTED IN PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT• C' We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal. (NOTE. Please use Lot No , Bloc, No. , or Symbol as indicated on attached map.) �( DATE/ SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL I- J-ll i �w,/1v1.� •=� �/• �� Yn r it l �Il �' <'�-(/. 11,. , • ICE- I Si -7--3 aka 3'- / — 9- ?, ,t : ' �G�,,_ to►- t -a 3e• b Yam•�;,_-, - Hof to A v C) 1 c We, the undersigned owners of property surrounding that legally described property wherein the zone change is being requested, hereby certify that we do not object to the proposal. (NOTE- Please use Lot No. , Block No. , or Symbol as indicated on attached map.) DATE SIGNATURE LOT BLOCK SYMBOL C C SIGNATURE OF ERSON IRCULTING PETITION i AFFIDAVIT STATE OF ARIZONA ss COUNTY OF FINAL On this ( � day of crrt$E4_ ,1W0 , personally appeared before me CEO 2gE 13 Liss , who upon oath deposes and says that he is the person who circulated the foregoing petition and that to the best of his knowledge and belief the signatures contained therein are ( those of real property owners within 300 feet from the exterior boundaries of the legally described property wherein the change of districts is beign requested. rrip.CHE Fez s- O i0 '. "414),Z0NiX Wily o75 cG , uc/2e L9unction November 26, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Department - Building Department FROM: City Engineer THRU:(1-) Director of Public Works SUBJECT: PZ-21-80 (Brooks) 1 . Request the developer submit a site plan to scale, indicating existing and proposed building location, parking areas and retention provisions. (The site appears restrictive to the ( improvements suggested by the applicant. ) 2. Street improvements are required in accordance with MAG standards and specifications 1979 edition. 3. All utilities and utility extensions shall be underground. 4. On-site retention shall be provided to retain a 50-year storm of 24-hour duration (approximately 3 inches over entire site) . 5. Actual parcel size is 0.5 acre (21 ,335 sw. ft. ) when when 33 ft. right-of-way is deducted. Department approval for two (2) additional units pending further plan and data. RCB/an 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 jpracl e Junction Volunteer .` ire citepartment POST OFFICE 80X 829 • APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA 85220 December 3, 1980 City of Apache Junction 1001 N. Idaho Road Apache Junction, AZ 85220 Attention: Mr. Joseph Gero, RE: PZ-21-80 (Brooks) Planning Director Proposed Ordinance # 80 Dear Mr. Gero: If the Standard and Uniform Requirements are followed for Apai hnent Buildings adequate fire protection can be supplied. Sincerely, ' ' 9)\,--UL Chief H. L. Miller, Jr. HM:sb 4 C)o eK .s kG TC/71 P2-2/- 8o 4 Sext.),c_ STREET , r ( 14( /z3.29' 42'-91 M s. Q O.u). W A "' fi A FRD'J' yAie o 1 I NORrN I I I e� ri.i H Ai k' , ►� Du FL Ex !it n I o I fi 1 '4'I `v N� 10 1 ,P 1w '� 71 4- I • ( .7 t IIII7 1`1; 4 ' Lor ARe-A= ,21 33o 5 OR ± 0 S. Ac,e. 0 R- S Dis TRi C i M"%"m um ResO ui Rczi,743.-,Ts eon/T 9/ RD _ .2 s- /-eeT ,wu► s/D C: yA,eD — 9 1,-C4-7- R 6-42 41A-eD - 3 s Fr'a r tETwccn/ /ytA.../ i6"i'. iN6- - /',/ Ftt-T PARR S,O4c - 9' .J'Dv A- .20' LaNG oNc FA♦rio Y Ds ' c.' ')a. - 2 s/vAee s Du?z.Cx //hu4.T,.2i r / Rezi.eoowr = / % ♦l ee-s 2t acD2vdw• = 2. 61-',9cEs DRiva WA y AR FA/P.4,ex,0,0 15,01) - ADv 206- Sod 5i Sila4ca ri Aw,wuw• $UI'-D ING F}ErcH - 2 SToQ,es a2 3o FEET O ZO Flo LO 80 '00 / "sSD ' Ink December 4, 1980 PZ-21-80 (Proposed Ordinance #80) Data Sheet C SITE ANALYSIS: PZ-21-80 (If no units on site) ,.. Lot Area 21,335.33 Front Yard 123.29 x 25 = 3,082.25 Rear Yard 123.29 x 35 = 4,315.15 Side Yard 2 x 113.95 x 7 = 1,582.70 Subtotal -8,980. 10 Parking 9 x 20 x 1.5 x 11 = 2,970 Access @ 200 sq. ft. x 16.5 = 3,300 Subtotal -6,270 OR Parking 9 x 20 x 2 x 11 = 3,960 Access @ 200 sq. ft. x 22 = 4,400 Subtotal -8,360 Available building envelope - no separation between units p 11 - one bedroom - 6,085 sq.ft. OR 1,014 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (one story) 11 - 2+ bedroom - 3,995 sq.ft. OR 666 sq.ft. per dwelling unit (one story) With Existing Units Has 5,470 sq. ft. behind (south) of the duplex unit, being between 20 to 49 feet in width. JWG/kmc ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES JP) Irlij\ ITEM # (t2 MEETING OF : I ' /?- I MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: + � YFy/ NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN EIDSON_ COUNCILMAN SHANKS_ COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN D::r:o CE-MYOR G • MAYOR SEEMAN UNANjMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 147v(f.3L \ Pr- "") e/19- 0\ ) fi ITEM # MFETING OF ) -MOTION BY: , SECONDED BY: YF. NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN SHANKS__ COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN BURGESS /// COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO % VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN _ UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO, 6 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Step 1 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO , 80, 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 ordinance in full ) ste—' CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO, 80 FOR THE SECOND READING , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-21-80, APPLICATION OF SUMNER BROOKS, ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO , 80, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-80 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE (CR-5); REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED AND ADOPTED , BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REASONS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS MOTION ARE: OPTIONS: (CHOOSE ONE) A, "THOSE REASONS AS SET FORTH BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHICH ARE HEREBY ADOPTED BY REFERENCE ," B. (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ONLY SOME OF THE COMMISSION REASONS , IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL HAVE TO READ THOSE SPECIFIC REASONS) C. (COUNCIL MAY WISH TO USE ALL NEW REASONS OR OTHER REASONS IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE, IF THIS IS THE CASE, YOU WILL HAVE TO READ THEM AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO WRITE THEM OUT FOR THE CITY CLERK. ) FOR APPROVAL /1 .•r1YeYd'ytl :.'... ..P`FO�•r CYl'.'+Y.L:'i...' n"v... '.... :.,... ... - ,. . ITEM NO . 6 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VAYOR Step 1 AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO , 80, 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 ordinance in full ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO , 80, FOR THE SECOND READING , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Ste 3 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT IN ZONING CASE PZ-21-80, APPLICATION OF SUMNER BROOKS, ALSO KNOWN AS ORDINANCE NO . 80, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ZONING MAP, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-21-80 FROM GENERAL RURAL (GR) TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE (CR-5) ; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, BE, AND HEREBY IS, DENIED , FOR DENIAL AMIlk CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION C)77L REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: -a iJ . DATE: / ADDRESS. //9 g Ma nii/OT421ie/, AGENDA ITEM. IA/Li D12, Jo-LA.) l/i 'J g' e CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: DATE: ADDRESS: " AGENDA ITEM: CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION ��Q_ REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: / ,,��c.a/ DATE• Z- ' a / / ei7/ ADDRESS: /2 4 J 4/, AGENDA ITEM• T, 4/..e.__J2,-/ fJ/' /1"/ '`,cam Geet/ Aft. Auk CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: /`✓ DATE: W P/7 ADDRESS: /,Z AGENDA ITEM' PQACNF ✓ .� t (c3 jz �Rl .„- c4ucieitt' o unction P December 31, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: City Manager 4 FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Street Lighting Improvement District Agenda Item # '7 Council Meeting of 1-21-81. Attached is a proposed Resolution to order the installation of eight (8) street lights on South Main Drive between West 9th Avenue and West 16th Avenue. Out of 64 property owners, only two have filed protests. This department recommends passage of the resolution,due to the benefits to be derived and in response to overwhelming taxpayer support. RCB/an Approver for Agenda ....,,_. Date Item #, First!loading I c2I-?L (7 Second ;',-�_,rg -- PL.':c 1 .c .''] _ Cld fLsIncs3 ._._ Nzw Eus.nes 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 PQp,CHE✓, r. ........9 gRizoNP 'Oily o c4pache cOunctaon January 9, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Street Light Protests (Apache Villa III) Pursuant to the provisions of Article 2, Chapter 6, Title 9, Arizona Revised Statutes and amendments thereto, the period allowed for protest under Resolution No. SL 8011-1 of the City of Apache Junction expired December 25, 1980. The Resolution established Apache Junction Improvement District SL No. 1, consisting of Apache Villa Three, Lots 75-138, for the installation of eight street lights along Main Drive between 9th Avenue and 16th Avenue. RWB/an 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 yar .'x•�"�"m' ti - ek . F ssat�at y y l • s k•,k'a a e �r a',+ 'tin=6,�° .. Xa= r .. , t .4. .+;Atk"S3-�4a, ; $ • tc .:a?'y„C.F "'4',�,rf"w�th. '#?,�,.'»±sE`r� l?Y Y • RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO SL 8011-1 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO PURCHASE ELECTRICITY, WHICH INCLUDES A CHARGE FOR THE USE OF LIGHTING FACILITIES, FOR LIGHTING PUBLIC STREETS WITHIN AN AREA: Described as Apache Villa Three Lots 75-138 ALL WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF APACHE JUNCTION, PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA, PURSUANT TO A.R.S. 9-713 and 9-714 DECLARING THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRICITY TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFIT, AND THAT THE COST OF SAID ELECTRICITY SHALL BE ASSESSED ON A CERTAIN DISTRICT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the type of lighting facilities to be installed and has considered the rate to be paid for purchasing the electricity for the proposed district, • NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, as follows SECTION 1 That the public interest and convenience requires, and it is the in- tention of the governing body of the City of Apache Junction to order the purchase of the electricity which includes a charge for the use of lighting facilities within an area bounded by; Described as Apache Villa Three Lots 75-138 SECTION 2 The cost of the electricity shall be the established rate of the Salt River Project for street lighting service. SECTION 3 That the lighting of the streets in the area described in Section 1 of this Resolution shall be in accordance with the plan hereby approved and adopted by the Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, and on file in the office of the City Engineer, known as the Apache Junction Improvement District SL No 1. SECTION 4 In no event will the City of Apache Junction or any officer thereof, be liable for any portion of the cost of supplying electricity to said Improvement District, nor for any delinquency of persons or property assessed unless the assessment for district purposes against the property within such district exceeds the assessment maximum contained in A R S Sec 9-713 (D), in which event the City of Apache Junction shall be liable for the cost in excess of said statuatory maximums SECTION 5 That said purchase of electricity in the opinion of the Council of the City of Apache Junction is of more than local or ordinary benefit, and • the cost is hereby made chargeable upon the District, and the District benefitted by said street lights is legally described in Section 1 Any portion of any public street, avenue, alley or right-of way that may be — included in the above described district is excepted from any such - . _ assessment 5. 4lt- fixw" ,>� .`y+ii t',I"4- c' Fv �,• ,57.-'"` , '--1:7:7 7 zlK.e ;' 4 ;,, s v y, ' ¢ U f 1 - • ;. a JK* s •,-y s r .•>A', k 4 } '" .r Iir +,y R f a f � j ? w. " '.:.. * 4w 1 ' .ds ! -::: Resolution of intention Pg 2 SL 8011-1 SECTION 6 The City Council shall make an annual statement and estimate of the expenses of the District which shall be provided for by the levy and collection of the ad valorem taxes of the assessed value of all prop- erty, real and personal, in the District as provided in A R S. Sec 9-713 (C) and amendments thereto, which taxes shall be collected as county taxes are collected in the amount shown by the statement and estimate adopted by the City Council 4110 SECTION 7 The City Clerk shall cause this Resolution to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of A.R.S. Sec 9-675, and unless protests received pursuant to A R S Sec. 676 are sufficient to bar further proceedings, the Director of Public Works shall there- after proceed with the improvement as petitioned and described above WHEREAS, the immediate operation of the provisions of this resolution is necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency declared to exist, and this resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its final passage and adoption by the City Council of the City of Apache Junction PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Apache Junction, and APPROVED by the Mayor this 19th day of November 1980 c-ef-, ,c.%r Mayor ATTEST. l• Ul t!.� -E - City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: // /� / City Attorney ` tri„ , I a or . _ .,‘---/ - --- _ cz_e_ZycY aiLr _a_ 16-,2,2-6' Jo.. Pcic ec/so.r./esc j .1201 — - - 1261 So. Main Drive Apache Villa III December 17, 1980 City of Apache Junction Richard W. Broman Director of Public Works Dear Sir: In regard to your notice of light improvement in Apache Villa III, Lots 75 trru 138. I would like to offer a pro- t est. In my o-inion lights are not needed on South Main Dr. in Apache Villa III on said lots. First reason would be So . Main Drive is not a trru way. It is two blocks long and fairly well lit up with Lawn pole lights , and still in my OD- inionlighted area such as this street would ',ave a tendancy to invite vandalizm in the early evenings . Also by not in- stalling lights would be a boost in energy conservation. My home is of block construction, five rooms, on Lot 122 wi'h 65 foot frontage. William Ferris 1261 So . Main Drive Apache Jct . /1/i Qe � �c p'� y RESOLUTION NO 81-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS WITHIN A PORTION OF THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS APACHE VILLA THREE OWN WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council on November 19, 1980, did pass Resolution of Intention No SL 8011-1, declaring the in- tention of the City to purchase electricity including a charge for the use of lighting facilities, for lighting South Main Drive within an area described as Apache Villa Three, Lots 75 through 138, and WHEREAS, the cost of the lighting is to be assessed on a cer- tain district, known as the Apache Junction Improvement District SL No. 1, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. SL 8011-1 was published and posted pursuant to A.R.S. Sec 9-675, and WHEREAS, the time period allowed for protests pursuant to A R S Sec. 9-676 expired on December 25, 1980, and WHEREAS, the protests received are insufficient to bar further proceedings; NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, that the Director of Public Works be empowered and directed to proceed with the improvement L PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, this day of 1981. Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. ty Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: 'S. SECONDED BY : Y�. l A CTp N COUNCILMAN DA'HANO COUNCILMAN DURESS COUNCILMAN EtDsoN /XI/ COUNC I LMAN HILL COUNCILMMAN SHANKSl7:// VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEE?•1AN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: • Asik AffikiN ITE1 NO , 7 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ RESOLUTION NO , 81-01 BY TITLE ONLY, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION NO , 81-01, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS WITHIN A PORTION OF THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS APACHE VILLA THREE BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED , FOR APPROVAL �., Aakk • CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ RESOLUTION NO , 81-01 BY TITLE ONLY, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION NO , 81-01, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS WITHIN A PORTION OF THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS APACHE VILLA THREE BE, AND HEREBY IS, DENIED, FOR DENIAL cj, 11 �C Z sr=_1ZONP C6ity 4 C4 pache unction January 14, 1981 MEMORANDUM T0: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND HERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THRU. CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK CG � FROM: DEPUTY CITY CLERK SUBJECT. RESOLUTION NO. 81-02, OFFICIAL PLACES OF POSTING Recently the City was informed that because of federal regulations we would no longer be permitted to post public notices in the Post Office. We have, therefore, received permission from Pinal County to utilize the Health Department at 150 N. Ocotillo as one of our three official places of posting. Although it is not a requirement that official places of posting be adopted by Resolution, the City does publish resolutions and as '� a result citizens are more likely to become aware that Notices of Public meetings, ordinances and various other documents of the City are on display at: City Hall, 1001 N. Idaho Road, Apache Junction A.J. Bayless, Store No. 32, Apache Junction, and Pinal County Health DeparLuetit, 150 N. Ocotillo, Apache Junction The attached Resolution is respectfully submitted for your action. 91(Yeto Ash;nv ar for Agenda __ Date Item # JACKIE TREVINO /-;z I 1 LC Deputy City Clerk �' =' n `''' Se_:,nd Rc 7.ding -------- . _........_. jdt P.,':I c Pce,,.i7g ad C-.-ness N3w Bu.iness . 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 elok RESOLUTION NO. 81-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING OFFICIAL PLACFS FOR THE POSTING OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS WHEREAS, the City is required by the City Code to post all public notices, meetings, ordinances, and various other documents in three locations throughout the City, and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City to post these documents in locations where the greatest number of people will have access to the information contained therein; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that three official places of posting be identified as. City Hall, 1001 N. Idaho Road, Apache Junction, A.J. Bayless, Store No 32, Apache Junction, and Pinal County Health Department, 150 N. Ocotillo, Apache Junction VIRGINIA SEEMAN Mayor AIThST MARLIS J DAVIS l City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM SUSAN GOODWIN City Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES .40 ITEM # MEETING OF ( MOTION BY: 1- 9 SECONDED BY : YF NQ _,AYTAIN COUNCILMAN H ILL_ COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO, 8 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ RESOLUTION 81-02 BY TITLE ONLY, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION 81-02, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING OFFICIAL PLACES FOR THE POSTING OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED, FOR APPROVAI CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ RESOLUTION 81-02 BY TITLE ONLY, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT RESOLUTION 81-02, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING OFFICIAL PLACES FOR THE POSTING OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS BE, AND HEREBY IS, DENIED, FOR DENIAL ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF r _ ( MOTION BY: ' SECONDED BY: YF NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN FIDSON_ COUNCILMAN SHANKS v COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN DAMIANO ///: VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN T . UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO, 9 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARIDNG PERSONNEL AND LEGAL ADVICE BE HELD ON THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1981, AT 6 : 00 P.M. IN THE CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. ACHF✓ --. 1i.' �. { y )) a i'ITS li � - --► 'I P/ZOO' COitj o . 4pc/e 09unction January 7, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: City Clerk THRU: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works V SUBJECT: Airport Commission Minutes We are enclosing, herewith, a copy of the minutes of the meetings of October 6, November 4th, and December 6, 1980 for the Airport Commission. Please include these on the next Council agenda under "reports". Also enclosed is the original of each of these minutes to be inserted in the minutes book. enclosures cc: Airport Commission Chairman RWB/an !rife / Pf ° `-' r. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 MINUTES AIRPORT COMMISSION CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA OCTOBER 6, 1980 Meeting was called to order at 5.08 p m by Dr David Robinson, Chairman Present Excused Dr. David Robinson, Chairman William Wright . _ John Drummond, Secretary John Forsberg, Vice Chairman Dr Howard Downs Richard Oltman Richard Broman, Advisor Althea Nunn, Recording Secretary Guests Mr James Harris, Buell, Winter Mousel and Associates Mr Kenneth Brust, Coffman and Associates, both of above representing the Airport Consultants 1. Acceptance of minutes Motion for acceptance by J Forsberg, of Sept 3, 1980 seconded by J. Drummond. Unanimously approved. 2. Discussion and motion By J Drummond, seconded by R Oltman, "Be it resolved by the Airport Commission to recommend to the City Council of the City of Apache Junction to increase the number of members on the Airport Commission from five (5) to seven (7) Two (2) voting members may be from outside the City limits. These two members must live within ten (10) miles of the boundaries of the City Unanimously approved by the Commission. 3. Ken Brust, Consultant Gave a presentation on "Forecast 2" of the Airport Study The basic points of this excellent visual report were the need for a large parcel of land, preferably 460 acres, and the choice of the correct site Many sites were outlined, all within 15 minutes of the City It was the general opinion of the Commission that Site F is preferred, with E, G, H also good sites. A, B & C were thought to cause possible conflict with Williams A F B flight patterns. Mr. Brust suggested the Airport Commission should accept the open invitation from the Director of the Scottsdale Airport as soon as possible Consultant inquired as to availability of city money for land, to which Mr. Broman replied "very little". It is not possible to predict whether or not the community would support a bond issue at this time Mr Brust suggested a copy of the second phase of the forecast should go to Mr. Bresnanah, W.A.F.B., and to the State. 4. Meeting adjourned at 6.40 p m Motion made by J Forsberg, seconded by J Drummond, voted unanimously Respectfully submitted, JCL— kOrt-e-1- 0*---LoS2— John Drummond, Secretary Approved by• Dr D' H Rob nson, Chairman /'\ MINUTES AIRPORT COMMISSION CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA NOVFMBER 4, 1980 Meeting called to order at 5 07 by Chairman, Dr. D. H. Robinson -•. , , PRESENT EXCUSED ^ Dr David H Robinson, Chairman John Drummond, Secretary John Forsberg, Vice Chairman Dr Howard Downs Richard Oltman Richard Braman, Advisor William Wright Althea Nunn, Recording Secretary 1. Acceptance of minutes of Motion made to accept the minutes as October 6, 1980 read by John Forsberg, seconded by Richard Oltman Passed unanimously 2 Change of meeting date Discussion was held regarding this item The first Monday of each month still seems to be the best possible date for all Comm- ission lllembers. Accepting the possibility that there might at some future time be a conflict with the court, William Wright made a motion to reaffirm the meeting date as the first Monday of each annth at 5 00 p m in the Council chambers Seconded by John Forsberg, unanimously approved 3 Review of working paper Forms for this purpose were distributed number 2 and reviewed Commission voted to approve Il the use of these forms Forms are to be can- pleted and returned to the Public Works office no later than Monday, November 10, 1980. William Wright made a motion to review work- ing paper number 1 and working paper number 2 and respond in writing, on forms pro- vided, not later than November 10, 1980. Seconded by John Forsberg, passed unan- imously. In relation to above, Dr. Downs urged all to really look at Site F suggested at the foot of Kings Ranch Road, stating there is a 30'-40' 'knoll" there that would make an excellent spot for an administrative building, the only problem might be Sand Tanks 4. Commission discussed flight into Scottsdale Airport on November 10 Members will meet at the Administration Building at Falcon Field just before 11 aim , with take off time [_ scheduled for 11. Rich Braman is to send a memo to Jim Harris about this meeting, John Drum►nnd to contact Mr. lagasse at Scottsdale 1 Minutes Page 2 Airport Commission November 4, 1980 5 Chairman thanked Advisor for submitting information and literature. 6 Mr Wright explained he had not received a copy of working paper #2. (Recording Secretary to provide ) 7. Recording Secretary directed to check minutes of last meeting for action approved reference Commission membership 8 Commission discussed possibility of a public meeting with the next working paper. Rich Braman was requested to further discuss this prospect with the consultant. 9. Meeting adjourned at 6 10 p m Respectfully submitted, Jem Drummond, Secretary Drf D •.buns. , Chairman oink A . Amok MINUTES OF MEETING AIRPORT COMMISSION DEC 1, 1980 Meeting called to order by Chairman, Dr D H Robinson, at 5 00 p.m. PRESENT EXCUSED Dr D H. Robinson, Chairman John Forsberg, Vice Chairman William Wright (illness) Richard Oltman Dr D H. Downs R Broman R Bryant A. Nunn Dr. Downs is a non-voting member, with the absence of John Drummond the Commission did not have a quorum The meeting was postponed until 5 45 when Mr Drummond arrived, giving the Commission a quorum and the meeting was officially opened ened at that time 1. Acceptance of Agenda Motion/Seconded by William Wright, Richard Oltman to accept agenda as presented, passed unanimously by the Commission 2 Minutes of meeting Motion/Seconded by William Wright, Nov 3, 1980 Richard Oltman Passed Unanimously to accept minutes as presented. 3 Membership Change Mayor Seeman explained the reason she had asked to have the request from the Commission to change the membership and to include persons from outside the City limits as voting members of the Commission deleted from the Council agenda Basically, this is to eliminate setting a precedence throughout the Boards and Commissions in the City She suggested the Commission might wish to increase the membership or to ask members to resign and let others be appointed if they cannot find the time to actively participate Mr Wright stated he did not think this to be the problem, as the Commission has not had a problem with a quorum being present, merely that the Commission members would like to include Dr Downs as a voting member because of his knowledge of aviation. Each Commission member was invited by the Chairman to add his in- put to the d'scussion. It was decided that a letter will ue wricten to the Council to increase the membership. Motion/Seconded William Wright Richard Oltman to request the City Council to expand membership to seven (7) members, one of which may be from outside the City limits and to have voting privileges and to be a licensed pilot in the State of Arizona, and to reside within ten (10) miles of the City limits. Passed unanim- ously. 4. Five Year Plan Richard Broman gavea brief overview of changes basically the Fiscal Years will change, and the preliminary budget figure of + $ 9,000,000 will increase to + $ 12,000,000 In '86 we would extend and widen the existing runway, extend taxiway, MITL "If it is your pleasure to approve, I will submit to the State for their transmittal to the State Transportation Board for purposes of modifying the five (5) year plan. William Wright in- '" quired if it is possible to "compress" this time frame? Mr Broman explained the State budgeting procedure itself would not allow this, and that there were also other factors to consider that could not be changed He also pointed out the possible problem the Commission should address soon is the $132,000 that will need to be raised to match the funds for land acquisition John Drummond/William Wright motion made and seconded to pass the five (5) year development program as presented by Mr Broman Passed unanimously. 5 Public Meeting Chairman called for discussion of this item Richard Broman read letter received late today from Steve Coffman (consultants) suggesting that the public meeting should be held sometime late in January Chairman asked if Jim Harris could come ahead of that time and explain things to the Commission to better educate thenfor the meeting Chairman suggested the Public meeting be held at the Superstition Elementary School as before, also that John C Forsberg is publicity chairman and that he would contact him about the publicity for the public meeting. 6 Mr Wright Asked to be excused from the November 17th flight to Scottsdale This had originally been scheduled for November 10th, and because of the change to the 17th he was unable to attend. 7. Chairman Thanked Mr Broman for writing the letter to Mr. LaGasse, Scottsdale Municipal Airport Director. 8. Mr. Broman Read letter received late today from Dr Greves, President of the Chamber of Commerce re their suggestions on the airport (See copy attached). One of the things mentioned in this letter is the need for an adequate fuel storage area to begin with Mr Broman suggested someone contact the consultant to investigate this more fully. He will contact consultant about this Mr Drummond suggested recommending to the Consultant that an easy access through the Industrial Park area be investigated, rather than having to go around the entire park to get to the airport. Chairman would like consultant to gather information on this Mr. Wright suggested a letter be for- warded to the consultant and give his evaluation and advise the Commission accordingly Also, a letter to Dr Greves advising him that the letter is being forwarded to the Consultant for consider- ation /IN 9. Chairman Asked for a volunteer to be secretary to the Commission as Mr Drummond has indicated he cannot continue in this capacity due to his work schedule. Mr Wright volunteered to help John Drummond until a new secretary is appointed. It was suggested that this appointment wait until the new Commission members are appointed by the Council to appoint the new secretary 41111/4 Reminded the Commission members of the City t Christmas Party and invited all the members to attend. 10 Mr Broman Introduced Richard Bryant, the new City Engineer and stated Mr Bryant may take Mr. Broman's place at the meetings occasionally, and that he will be involved in the airport development as City Engineer 11 Meeting adjourned at 6.30 p.m. Respectfully submitted 9 -7A-12Crinr?-71(9--x-i/09 ohn Drummond, Secretary 1_ Approved 't.7) Dr D. H. Robinson, Chairman Attachments State 5 year Budget Letter from Coffman & Assoc Letter from A J Chander of Commerce (Mailed to all Commissioners 12-3-80) IN lb. gRIZONP V ity 4 C= pache 2unctian January 14, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGE FROM: JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Attached you will find copies of the approved "Minutes" from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of December 9, 1980. Please have the original "Minutes" entered into the official Minutes Book. Any questions on these "Minutes" should be directed to the 'Director of ,.. Planning (Executive Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission) . JWG/kmc Info/ Repo is 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA CITY HALL COMPLEX 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA DECEMBER 9, 1980 4101. oak 7.00 P.M. _ In Attendance Ilene Taylor, Absent Guests George Bal Vice, Chairman Chairman Richard Oltman Gordon and Mary Brown Roy Hudson (illness) Inez and Edward Rudny John Hutchens Clifford Kolasinski Ron Kell Keith H. Stachar Henry Steelsmith Marjorie S. Darling Sumner Brooks Sim Strickler George F Bliss Mildred Baker Lorna Allison Joe Gero, Executive Secretary Kathy Connelly, Secretary Jesse and Shirley Humphrey Donabelle Allison J Underwood Diane Helleckson Carl Snyder Victoria Fraily Dean F Ashworth Diane B. Blair 1. Chairman opened the meeting at 7:06 P.M. and requested the Executive Secretary to call the roll 2 Mr Gero called the roll and determined eight (8) members present as indicated above. 3 Chairman requested that the Commission members review the "Minutes" from the previous meeting and stated that he would entertain a motion on them. 4 Steelsmith/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the "Minutes" from the meeting of November 18, 1980 be approved as submitted" OlikA The motion passed 7-0-1 with Mr. Kell abstaining since he had not attended the meeting in question 5 Chairman announced that the section for public hearings was open and that the first hearing would be on case PZ- -80 He asked the Executive Secretary to brief the members on the case 6. Mr. Gero explained that the application was for three parcels of land as indicated on the maps. All of the parcels were proposed to be rezoned from General Rural to commercial He added that Parcel #1, which was applied for as a Planned Development, met the criteria for the Planned Development, as set forth in Section 3309 of the Zoning Ordinance 7 Chairman called on the applicant to present his case 8. Mr. Stachar explained that he was the owner of the property in question and that he wished to rezone all of the parcels to commercial. He added that Parcel #1 was the Planned Development and that he wished to use this to construct a mini-storage operation with the entrance on Ironwood Drive Parcel #2 he wished to rezone to CB-2 with the pos- Page 2 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 sibility of constructing a long building with 4 or 5 business tenants Parcel #3 he wished to rezone to CB-1 to house one structure and one tenant ar► 9 Mr Hudson asked if the proposed buildings would be leased to others 10 Mr Stachar replied that he had no specific plans as to who would be renting the spaces. He added that on Parcel #3 there was the possibility of a convenience market or bank branch since it was a central location 11. Mr. Gero added that on Parcel #1, the applicant had met the criteria for the Planned Development and had the required number of signatures He asked Mr. Stachar if a block wall would be placed on the property line 12. Mr Stachar replied that he wished to screen the mini-storage buildings as much as possible, and that the block wall would also serve for security purposes 13 Mr Hudson asked what was on the south side of Superstition, across from the proposed project. 14. Mr Stachar explained that the area was vacant land and single- family homes. 15. Mrs Taylor asked if there would be a caretaker on the property ( 16. Mr. Stachar replied that there would be on-site security and that the quarters would be a part of the building design 17 Mr Kell asked how much commercial property was along Super- stition in that particular area. 18 Mr Gero replied that there was some at present He added that Superstition was planned to be an arterial street in the future and would be expected to carry the commercial businesses that met the needs of the neighborhood He pointed out that there were mobile home parks in the area, many of which did not have storage facilities. He concluded that the proposed mini-storage was compatible with the area 19 Mr Steelsmith asked Mr. Stachar why he had chosen CB-1 for one parcel and CB-2 for the other. 20 Mr Stachar replied that he felt the corner area would be better as CB-1 since the one tenant would make the corner cleaner and less congested. 21 Mr Steelsmith asked how large of an area was Parcels #2 and #3. 22 Mr Stachar replied that it was just under four (4) acres 23 Mr Gero pointed out that there were recommendations from the Zoning Administrator and other department heads on the proposed rezonings, including one from the Fire Chief. 24 Mr Hudson asked what was to the west of the parcels 25. Mr Stachar replied that it was a single family house. He added that these people were the former owners of the land and were in agreement with the proposals Page 3 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 26 Mrs Darling spoke in opposition to the proposal because she felt that commercial proposals would depreciate the value of the surrounding prop- erty. She added that it was also important for the water to have proper drainage so that the adjoining property owners were not flooded 27 Mr Gero asked Mrs Darling where her property was located 28 Mrs Darling explained that she lived at 719 N Sahuaro 29. Mr. Gero pointed out that the commercial areas as pro- posed would be oriented toward the neighbor- hood and would not necessarily generate traffic from outside of the area. 30 Mrs Darling asked how the type of business and tenants could be limited or controlled 31 Mr Gero explained that under the Planned Development, the actual project was reserved to the plans submitted with the application. In the case of the other parcels, the businesses were limited to those outlined in each zone 32. Mrs Darling added that she objected to those businesses which would sell or have liquor available 33. Mr. Gero pointed out that any business involved in the sale of liquor would also be subject to liquor license requirements as set forth by the City Council and State 34. Mr Steelsmith asked if the parcels could be considered on an individual basis. 35. Mr. Gero explained that the application could always be amended to what had been fully advertised, but could not be raised. 36 Mr Hutchens asked if there was any time plan involved. 37. Mr. Stachar explained that the Planned Development would take from 6 months to one year, while the others would be at least one year. 38 Mr. Hudson asked if businesses such as gas stations and metal shops would be permitted in a CB-2 zone. 39 Mr Gero stated that they were and reminded the members that they could consider a motion in separate parts 40 Kell/Hudson M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning 7317mission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona. that in rezoning case PZ-20-80, also known as proposed Ordinance No 82, application of Keith Stachar, that the Commission recommend approval of the following to the City Council Parcel #1 - to be rezoned from General Rural to CB-2 by Planned Development Parcel #2 - to be rezoned from General Rural to CB-1 Parcel #3 - to be rezoned from General Rural to CB-1 The Commission makes these recommendations based on the following reasons: AN. Asift. Page 4 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 Generally, the parcels would not create a traffic problem since they are located at the intersection of two arterial streets. Parcel #1 complies with Section 33 09 of the Zoning Ordinance and the proposed use is compatible with the needs of the mobile home and travel trailer parks in the surrounding area ON Parcel #2 should be reduced to CB-1 because an industrial use would be considered spot zoning and the CB-2 uses such as a bar or night club would not be suitable for the area as reflected by public input during the hearing. In both Parcel #2 and #3, the CB-1 uses would be compatible with the needs of the neighborhood area 41 Mr Hutchens asked Mr Stachar's opinion on the motion. 42. Mr Stachar replied that he understood the reasoning and was in agree- ment that he would have liked to eliminate some of the uses permitted in the CB-2 zone 43 Mr Hudson asked if there would be a problem in selling the parcel if zoned to CB-1 44. Mr Stachar replied that he was satisfied with the CB-1 classification. 45 Chairman added that the CB-1 zone fitted into the neighborhood, but yet protected the area He called for a vote on the motion. 46 Mr. Gero called the roll for a vote on the motion on case PZ- 20-80 The motion passed 8-0 47. Chairman announced that the next item to be considered would be case PZ-21-80 and asked the Executive Secretary to brief the Commission on the case 48. Mr Gero located the property on the map for the members and ex- plained that the applicant wished to rezone from General Rural to Multiple Family Residence in order to place apartments on the parcel. He pointed out that it was possible to build up to eleven units on the property 49 Chairman called on the applicant to present his case. '^ 50 Mr Brooks announced that he was the applicant but that he was giving his verbal power of attorney to George F Bliss to act on his behalf 51 Mr. Bliss explained that there was a substantial investment invol- ved and that Mr. Brooks was going to improve the area. He added that the additional units would be in compliance with the area and that all regulations would be complied with. 52 Mr Baljo asked the reason for the real estate sign that had been seen on the property. 53 Mr Bliss explained that the sign had been there prior to Mr Brooks' purchase and that the sign had been removed that evening. 54. Mr. Gero asked how many bedrooms were planned for each unit and how long had the horse, which was first seen during his inspection, been on the property. 55. Mr Bliss replied that there would be two bedrooms for each unit, and that the horse had been placed there only two days before He had not been sure if it was appropriate for the horse to be there He added that the animal would be removed, if necessary Page 5 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 3, 1980 56. Mr. Gero stated that he would pass the imformation to the Zoning Administrator and that he would get in touch with Mr Bliss 57. Mrs. Baker asked if parking would be provided A 58 Mr Bliss explained that there would be parking areas to the front and rear of the building 59 Mr Hudson asked what kind of construction would be involved. 60. Mr. Bliss replied that the buildings would probably be both frame and stucco. 61. Steelsmith/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of rezoning case PZ-21-80 to the City Council for the following reasons. 1) that there are already CR-5 areas adjacent to the subject property 2) that there already exists a commercial use adjacent to the subject property 3) that no traffic problem would be created by the rezoning. 4) that the CR-5 zoning classification would upgrade the area and increase the tax base 62 Mr Kell asked if the recommendations of the Director of Public Works should be included as part of the motion. 63 Mr Gero replied that if the rezoning was approved, the recommendations of the Director would be handled at the time of the building permit issuance. 64 Chairman called for a vote on the motion The motion passed 8-0 �► 65. Chairman announced that the next item on the agenda was the State Land lease application from the Ashworth-Snyder organization and called upon the Executive Secretary to brief the members. 66 Mr Gero explained that this was an informal public hear- ing requested by the State Land Department to obtain a recommendation from the governmental agencies adjacent to the proposed use He added that they had already obtained the lease and that the Land Department wanted the concept reviewed before Ashworth-Snyder proceeded. He pointed out that Ashworth-Snyder had submitted information to the City on their project, but that the map did not locate the actual site. He added that Pinal County Rezoning case #357 had previously rezoned two of the parcels from GR to TH, but that the third parcel was still zoned GR He questioned whether or not it was proper to proceed without first having that rezoning 67 Mr Ashworth explained that this project had been thought of several years ago, but had only been in the re- search stage for the past year He added that it would be an enclosed mobile home park with a regulation golf course and sewer treatment facility. Page 6 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 He pointed out that there would be asphalt roads, access for fire control, and deed restrictions that would limit lot size to an average of 5,000 square feet He added that there were no encumbrances on the property or Adak the project and that Mesa Grande was owned by eight individuals He informed the Commission the construction and the initial ground work was scheduled to begin after the first of the year and that they did not fore see any problems in gaining State approval 68 Mrs Taylor asked if the park would be all mobile homes and if they would be double or single widths 69 Mr Ashworth explained that there would not be any travel trailers 70 Mrs Taylor asked what size the lots would be 71 Mr. Ashworth replied that they could not restrict the size of the mobile homes, but that the smallest lots would be from 4,800 to 4,900 square feet 72 Mrs Taylor asked if there was an option to renew the lease after the ten year period 73 Mr. Ashworth explained that the lease was renewable after ten years and that anyone could bid against them for it 74 Mr. Hudson asked how the water would be furnished. 75 Mr Ashworth explained that Arizona Water Co had informed them that they could supply the area, and that the wastewater would be used to irrigate the golf course 76. Mr. Kell asked whether or not the necessary certification for the assured 100-year water supply had been secured 77 Mr Gero explained that the Arizona Water Co must obtain Central Arizona Project allocations in order to contract for future obligations 78 Mr Kell asked what effect this had on the project 79 Mr Gero pointed out that he understood that an application could not be approved until the certification had been obtained. 80 Mr Hudson asked if the project would cut off the roads running North and South from the City. 81 Mr. Gero pointed out that a flood control project was planned for north of Mesa Grande, but that the length of Mesa Grande would cut off Dela- ware Drive north of the City 82 Mrs Taylor asked if the lots would be purchased or rented 83 Mr Gero explained that since it was only a commercial lease, the lots could not be sold 84. Mr. Kell asked if the units would be mobile homes or manufactured housing units m ,... Page 7 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 85. Mr. Ashworth explained that they would be modified mobile homes with energy saving features 86. Mrs. Baker asked what the approximate width of the entire project was eiN 87. Mr. Ashworth explained that it was about 1/4 mile wide 88 Chairman pointed out that the recommendation of the approval of disapproval was for the site plan only and that the recommendations of the Departments of Planning and Public Works should be included 89 Mr Gero added that they were awaiting information from Pinal County on the rezoning and pointed out that the Commission could make a recommendation on Phase I only since it could not presume what the vote of the County Board of Supervisors might be on the case 90 Mr Ashworth explained that they intended to do the golf course as part of Phase I and that it only re- quired the General Rural zoning He pointed out that since it was a State Land lease, all State stipulations must be abided by 91 Mr Gero pointed out that the requirements were such that the project conform with local zoning and meet local approval. 92. Mr. Ashworth added that he had been discussing the matter with Terry Smith from Pinal County and that the ques- tion of the rezoning would be taken up when the County had their new Zoning Ordinance completed 93. Chairman called for a motion 94 Kell/Hutchens M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning ,Ialk C61—mission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of the Mesa Grande site plan to the State Land Department with the following stipulations* 1) Fire hydrants be installed as per the Apache Junction Fire Department 2) Water utilities be installed to provide adequate water supply to the site and adequate fire flow as per the Apache Junction Fire Dept. 3) Clearance be obtained from the Maricopa County Flood Control District for the impact of the Mesa-Buckhorn Watershed Projects in the area, including Signal Butte Dam and Bulldog Flood- way 4) Street dedications be provided to include the following right-of-ways: Meridian Road- 50 feet, Lost Dutchman Blvd -50', Ironwood Drive-50' 5) Off-site street improvements for the above right-of-ways should include pavement (1/2 street), vertical curb and gutter, 5' con- crete sidewalks 6) On-site retention should be provided to retain a 50-year storm of 24-hour duration 7) All utilities should be underground 8) The Meridian Road main entrance shall be at Page 8 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 right angles and should be no closer than 225' from center-line intersections 9) Residential lots shall be at least 200' from the sewer treatment plant 10) The treatment plant shall be set back 100' ow. from the future right-of-way line on peri- meter streets 11) Drainage easements and provisions shall be provided for the routing of off-site drain- age through the property 12) A wall shall be constructed at the develop- ment boundary " The motion passed 6-2 with Mrs. Baker and Mr. Hudson voting "no" 95. Chairman announced that the next case was Pinal County rezoning PZ-23-80 and asked the Planning Director to brief the members on the case 96. Mr. Gero explained that the applicant was Frank Sabaski and that the property in question was located north of Baseline, about 1/4 mile west of Tomahawk Road The request was from General Rural to Light Industrial He added that Keith Stachar was representing the property owner. 97 Mr Stachar explained that the applicant wished to have the property rezoned to light industrial so that he could use it for his asphalt paving business [ 98. Mrs. Taylor asked Mr Stachar if he had all of the required signatures 99 Mr Stachar replied that of the 4 owners involved, he had obtained the approval of 3 He pointed out that the remaining owner lived out-of-state 100 Mr Taylor asked how many trucks and equipment would be involved 101 Mr Stachar explained that there would be 4 trucks plus various equipment and that the storage area would be enclosed as per County requirements 102. Mr. Gero pointed out that the rezoning applied for only permitted the use as a storage and operation yard only, not the manufacture of asphalt 103. Chairman asked if a right-of-way existed to the east 104 Mr Stachar replied that the County had not mentioned the existence of any 105 Mr Gero explained that there wasn't any right-of-way indicated in the title report. 106 Chairman stated that if the Commission decided to rec- ommend approval of the rezoning, that it re- quest Pinal County to research the question of the right-of-way and, if none exists, than one be dedicated 107 Baker/Steelsmith M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning LW-mission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of rezoning case PZ- 23-80 to Pinal County with the following stip- ulations: Page 9 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 1) Baseline Avenue be opened at Tomahawk Road westerly, provided that dedication or im- provements be obtained, if necessary 2) Safety devices be placed on Baseline Avenue west of the site where Baseline is washed out, and that the required 50' right-of- way is requested. 3) The applicant comply with the Pinal County Zoning Ordinance, especially Article 17 The motion passed 8-0 108 Mr Gero pointed out that the next item involved the zoning of Section 32. He added that the State Statutes required that newly annexed land be zoned within a "reasonable period of time" and that six months had passed since the annexation of Section 32. He explained that the proposed rezoning was for CR-1 for the north half and GR for the south half He reminded the members that they had approved this measure by a Com- mission Initiative at the last meeting. 109 Mr Allison informed the Commission that he was at the meeting for information and that he wanted to be sure that the land wouldn't be developed without the surrounding property owners' know- ledge and notification He added that the people in the area wanted nice homes and paved streets, and did not want prefabricated houses or mobile homes (L 110 Chairman explained that the CR-1 zoning was the highest classification for single family homes and required the largest lot size 111. Mr. Hudson added that Central Arizona College was in agree- ment with the proposed zoning and that they were planning on using a site in the north half of Section 32 for a college campus location 112 Mr Allison replied that they were satisfied with the proposed rezoning 113 Kell/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of case PZ-19-80 to the Council since the south half should continue as GR until future planning can be accomplished, and the north half as CR-1 would reflect present and future educational use. The motion passed 8-0 114. Chairman called for a five minute recess from 9 50 P M to 9 55 P M 115 Mr Gero explained that the next item was case PZ-18-80, the Commission Inititative on Section 23.02 (o) of the Zoning Ordinance, as applied to Special Use Permits He explained that under this Section, the Com- mission could grant a Special Use Permit The opinion of the City Attorney was that this would be, in effect, a rezoning and that this power was reserved under the State Statutes to the City Council only Auk Page 10 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 Therefore, this was an unlawful delegation of powers, and it was recommended that the subsection be removed from the Zoning Or- dinance at this time 116. Taylor/Kell M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning '.. commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of case PZ-18-80 to the City Council since Section 23 02 (o) of the Zoning Ordinance was an un- lawful delegation of powers and placed the Commission in a compromising position " The motion passed 8-0 117 Mr Gero explained that the next item was case PZ-22-80 and involved the definitions as appeared in Section 470 of the Zoning Ordinance He added that the definition of travel trailer and recreational vehicle were considered to be synonomous 118 Chairman stated that he had a problem with accepting the proposed #3 in Ordinance No 81 He felt that the definition needed expanding and sug- gested that #3 be deleted and tabled for further study 119. Mr. Kell asked if the ease could be tabled until the next meeting. 120 Mr Steelsmith agreed with Mr Kell 121 Kell/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning emission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that case PZ-22-80 be tabled until the Commission meeting of January 13, 1981 " The motion passed 8-0 122. Chairman announced that the public hearing on case PZ- 22-80 was continued until the next meeting and asked Mr. Gero to explain the next case 123. Mr. Gero explained that the next case was Maricopa County rezoning case Z-80-71, a rezoning application submitted by the Nielson Lumber Company to increase the area of their oper- ation He pointed out that the area proposed to be rezoned was to the north of the present _.,.... operation He added that there appeared to be a need for a deceleration lane at the entrance to the yard and that the highway entrance was in need of repair If the business was to see an inten- sified use, then these items would be needed 124 Steelsmith/Hudson M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it recommend approval of rezoning case Z-80-71 to Maricopa County with the following stipulations 1) A deceleration lane be considered for the business in order to prevent accidents 2) The entrance to the operation be upgraded and repaired by the proper agency. The motion passed 8-0. i Page 11 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 125. Mr. Gero explained that the next item for discussion concerned the Commission rules and the lead time that was presently allowed for legal advertise- ment of public hearings. He further explained that when a heavy case load occurred, it was i..k difficult to completely review each case and verify that the file was in order and still have enough time to place the advertisement for the hearing in the newspaper He requested that the Commission amend the rules to require a lead time of 10 working days as opposed to the 5 days at present He added that this additional time would enable the Department to have the Commission packets ready for review one week before the hearings. 126. Mr Kell asked if it would be possible to publish the ads in the Apache Sentinal by allowing this additional lead time. 127 Mr Gero explained that since the Sentinal was only a weekly publication that additional time of one week would also be required. He added that the City was obligated to provide the best service possible and the Mesa Tribune helped provide that service with their daily publication schedule. 128 Kell/Strickler M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that it approve the Planning Director's decision to extend the lead time for advertised public hearings to ten (10) days " By a show of hands, the motion passed 8-0. 129 Mr Gero informed the Commission members that at the last meeting of the City Council, the Council issued a directive to the Planning and Zoning Commission to hold a public hearing to obtain public opinion on the proposal to change the names of Superstition Blvd and Lost Dutchman Blvd 130 Mr Hudson reminded the Commission that people had been through the street name change in the City before and would not react favorably to another change without good cause 131. Mr. Gero added that the Council also wished the Commission to consider adopting a guide for the naming of future street alignments throughout the City 132. Chairman asked if the previously named Street Name Commit- tee could be called back together to complete this task for the Council 133 Mr Gero replied that he would ask the Associate Planner to work with the previous Committee on the new directive 134. Chairman asked if there was any other business or questions There being none, he stated that he would entertain a motion to adjourn. 135 Hudson/Baker M/S to adjourn the meeting 136. Chairman there being no objections, he adjourned the meeting at 10:40 P.M. Page 12 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 Respectfully submitted, Joseph Gero Executive Secretary Approv d• , e George aljo / Chairman L. (11P.CHE de/ U( j`. 6 , , O 'qPizowxVity o @ pache 09unction January 13, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER-4— FROM: -d" JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING CHUCK NEWCOMER, ACTING EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Jc TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: MINUTES FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING Attached you will find copies of the "Minutes" from the Board of Adjustment meeting of December 1, 1980. Please have the original "Minutes" entered into the official Minutes Book. Any questions on these "Minutes" should be directed to the Acting Executive Secretary. CRN/kmc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA DECEMBER 1, 1980 7:00 P M - In Attendance Absent Guests omiN Joe Jessamine, Chairman William Nunn Esther F Balla Don Nesser, Vice Chairman (illness) Marjorie I. Gould William Furness Howard Gould William Vaughn Oscar Geiger Harvey Morrison Vernon and Orpha Nelson Chuck Newcomer, Acting Thomas Damiano, Councilman Executive Secretary Allen and Ellen Price Kathy Connelly, Secretary Robert and Lona Doak Hazel M. Breneman Mary Heck Evelyn Hoffarth Mary Benson Lyle and Violet Webster Marvin Gripp John W Rasmussen Marian Dugger Zella R. Warner Mary C Gruper Goldie O'Hare Betty and Carl Clay 1. Chairman opened the meeting at 7 05 P M and requested the Executive Secretary call the roll. 2. Mr. Newcomer called the roll and determined five (5) members present as indicated above 3 Chairman announced that a quorum was present and that the meeting would proceed with the first item being the consideration of the "Minutes" from the meeting of November 17, 1980. 4 Mr Vaughn requested that the "Minutes" be amended to reflect ,.� that it was Mr. Nesser and not himself that had made the request to postpone the approval of the "Minutes" until the end of the meeting in order to allow time for review Mr Furness has agreed. 5 Vaughn/Nesser M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of T19e City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the "Minutes" of the meeting of November 17, 1980 be approved with a correction to Item #4, changing the name from Mr. Vaughn to Mr. Nesser; and in Item #5, changing the name from Mr. Nesser to Mr Furness" The motion passed 5-0. 6 Chairman announced that the section for public hearings was now open and that the first item would be case BA-17-80. He asked Mr. Newcomer to brief the case. 7 Mr Newcomer explained that BA-17-80 was a continuation of the variance application submitted by Rock Shadows Travel Trailer Park for a reduction in the side space setback requirements for the entire park He reminded the members that the case had been con- tinued to this meeting to obtain an opinion from Page 2 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 the Fire Chief on the possible safety hazards involved. He then read the memo from the Fire Chief and the Zoning Administrator into the record p f- 8. Chairman requested that the applicant present his case 9 Mr Geiger stated that he did not have much to add since the basics of the case had been presented at the pre- vious meeting He added that he did not see any safety factors involved. He asked Mr Newcomer if the Board was aware that the Fire Chief had not seen any problem with the requested variance 10 Mr Newcomer replied that the Zoning Administrator had called attention to the fact that the Uniform Building Code required that the structures be at least three feet (3') from the lot line 11. Chairman asked if this should be so for all spaces 12 Mr Geiger replied that the variance was for all the spaces within the park. 13 Mr Nesser asked whether or not the park people would still want carports if they knew that there was a fire hazard involved 14 Mr Geiger replied that the residents wished to have the car- ports to protect their cars from the sun 15 Mr Nesser referring to the drawing, asked if the space from lot line to structure would be 18" on one side for the tip-out side, and 18' on the other side, not including the patio and proposed carport 16. Mr. Geiger explained that the patio was 7'6" and the carport .••► would be 10'6", making the space between the lot line and structure to be 18", plus another 18" from the lot line and the next structure 17 Mr Nesser asked if the proposed carport would be free standing or a continuation of the patio cover 18 Mr Geiger replied that it could be either. 19 Mr Nesser asked if it was possible to make the tip-outs, trailer, patio cover and carport cover all contin- uous and still comply with the 3' requirement on each side 20 Mr Geiger replied that it would be nicer looking and easier to maintain, but that it could not be done on all of the lots 21 Mr Nesser asked if all other alternatives had been exhausted He added that presently some of the spaces could conform with the requirements, but yet the variance had been for all of the spaces 22 Mr Geiger replied that that was what was being requested since some spaces would conform, but others would have to be cut down 23 Mr Vaughn asked if some of the trailers had storage sheds. Page 3 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 24. Mr. Geiger replied: "Yes" 25 Mr Vaughn stated that, in other words, the carports would not be open at each end 26 Mr Geiger replied that some were, in cases where the storage sheds were set back. 27. Mr Vaughn added that, according to the diagram, some of the sheds overlapped, and were actually not open at each end. 28 Mr Geiger replied that, in a sense, the areas were not open. 29. Chairman asked if it was possible to make adjustments on the carport and patio so that they would not exceed the 3' requirement. 30. Mr. Vaughn asked if the patio slabs were already poured 31 Mr Geiger replied that the patio sites were already set 32. Chairman thanked Mr. Geiger and called for other comments. 33 Mr Gould explained that in his case he would be able to conform to the 3' requirement, but that he under- stood the others in the park wanting the same thing He added that he wanted the carport to protect the vinyl roof on his car and keep the car out of the sun. 34 Mrs Balla explained that she had one of the larger spaces Il with 7' between her shed and the next lot, but that she wanted to protect her car from the sun She added that the carports would improve the looks of the park 35. Chairman asked how she would feel if the carport were to be 18" from her own property line 36. Mrs. Balla explained that she had a larger lot, but if it were smaller then she would only be concerned if there were gas lines involved 37. Mr. Vaughn asked how she would feel about sending a fireman into an area that was only 3' between the structures 38 Mrs Balla replied that the area would be open 39. Mr. Vaughn replied that when the cars were there, the area would not be open. 40 Chairman called for others to speak for or against. There being none, he asked Mr. Newcomer for a recommen- dation on the case. 41 Mr Newcomer replied that his recommendation would be the same as that of the Building Official, that being that the park would have to comply with the 1979 Uni- form Building Code as adopted by the City He added that by granting the variance to Rock Shadows, the other parks in the area could apply on the same basis 42. Chairman asked if it was possible to cut back on the size of the patio in order to place the carport within the 3' requirement. Page 4 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 43. Mr. Newcomer replied that even if the carport could be con- structed to meet the one-hour fire rating, that there was no way to place everything in the space provided, including the tip-outs, without violating the Uniform Building Code. i•► 44 Chairman asked if it was possible to move the trailer to con- form with the Code and meet the requirements. He explained that the variance, if given to Rock Shadows, could be given to all trailer parks 45. Mr. Geiger explained that Trailer Village and Good Life in Mesa had the 18" requirements 46 Chairman reminded Mr. Geiger that that was another county and another city with their own set of regulations He added that Rock Shadows had to comply with the laws of Apache Junction. 47 Mr Geiger added that the Mesa Fire Department had no problems with enforcing the fire code with the lesser setbacks 48. Mr. Vaughn asked if the public hearing could be closed for five minutes so that the Board members could discuss the case 49. Chairman closed the public hearing for five minutes. reopened the hearing at 7 40 P M and called for a motion on the case. ( 50 Mr Furness asked for a clarification of what was being requested lby Rock Shadows and what presently existed 51 Mr Newcomer replied that Rock Shadows was requesting a reduction in the side yard setbacks to allow the separation between the structures to be 3' total instead of the 3' for each lot as required by the City Building Code 52. Mr. Vaughn asked if it would be possible to pull the trailers into a one-piece unit considering the size of the mirrors on the trailers 53. Mr. Geiger agreed that it would be difficult 54 Mr. Nesser added that there were alternatives 55. Chairman called for a motion. 56. Mr. Nesser Motion: "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjsutment of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, hereby granting a variance to the requirements of Section 2001 (e) (3) of the City Zoning Ordinance to permit the reduction of the minimum side setbacks for any travel trailer in the Rock Shadows Travel Trailer Resort to be 18" from the end of the carport to the lot line However, the distance from the main body of the adjacent trailer must be at least 3' from the end of the carport". He explained that he had no objection to the 18" from the carport roof to the next lot line, but did want to maintain a distance of 3' from the lot line to the body of the next trailer Page 5 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 57 Mr Vaughn asked if the motion was intended to deny the variance 58. Mr Nesser replied that it was for denial of the 18" from the trailer to the side lot lines, but not for the 18" from the carport to the side lot line. i.► 59. Mr Morrison stated that it could be possible to move the trailers up on the pads to meet the requirements. 60. Mr. Vaughn added that he would not agree with an 18" setback in any way 61. Mr. Nesser withdrew the motion 62 Furness/Nesser M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the Lily of Apache Junction, Arizona, hereby denying the request for a variance to the travel trailer space setback requirements of Section 2001 (e) (3) of the City Zoning Ordinance as submitted by Mr Arthur K Dwyer, Director of Rock Shadows Travel Trailer Resort The reason for this denial being that it does not fit the City Building Code 63. Chairman called for a vote on the motion. 64 Mr Newcomer called the roll for a vote on the motion The motion passed 5-0 65. Mr. Geiger asked it it meant that the variance was denied 66 Chairman replied "Yes" 67 Mr. Geiger asked what the alternatives were. 68 Mr Newcomer explained that he would go over the alternatives if Mr. Geiger could come into the Planning Office any morning. 69 Chairman announced that the next item was case BA-18-80 and Adak asked the Executive Secretary to brief the members. 70 Mr Newcomer reminded the Chairman that the public hearing on this case had never been officially opened 71. Chairman announced that the public hearing on case BA-18-80 was opened and requested that the applicant present his or her case. 72. Mrs Wynn explained that she was requesting a variance to have a mobile home on the property to be used as a storage area until such time that permanent facilities could be built. She added that at the time the restaurant was built, no space had been alloted for storage of canned goods or materials, not office space for doing the book work She explained that she had been hauling the goods from her home to the restaur- ant. 73 Chairman stated that he was aware that three people had owned the property previously and that there had been prob- lems with the management and ownership He asked if these problems had been cleared up and if they (the Wynn's) were now the sole owners s � 1 Page 6 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 74. Mrs Wynn explained that the corporation had dissolved and that the problems had been resolved 75 Mr. Nesser asked if the trailer was intended to be temporary /, 76 Mrs Wynn stated that it would be and that they also had the intentions of building a walk-in freezer for the storage of meats She added that presently, the Mining Camp Restaurant was allowing them to use their freezers. 77. Mr Nesser pointed out that, according to the Fire Chief, there might be a problem getting a fire truck in to fight a fire with the trailer so close to the building. He asked how far it was from the mobile home to the rear fence 78 Mrs Wynn replied that it was approximately two trailer spaces. 79 Mr Newcomer added that it was approximately 23'. 80 Mr. Nesser asked if that was enough access for trucks 81 Mrs Wynn pointed out that the beer and delivery trucks used the space and did not seem to have trouble with it. She added that the area might be a designated alley. 82 Mr. Newcomer pointed out that this was not indicated on the plat map ( 83. Mr Vaughn asked if utilities could be hooked up irC 84 Mr. Newcomer stated that both power and water was hooked up 85. Chairman called for other questions or comments 86 Mr. Rasmussen announced that he was the attorney representing Mr Hvidsten, who owned Lots 11 through 17 of the Parkway Plaza As an adjacent property owner, Mr. Vdsten objected to the placement of the mobile home rk since it gave an unprofessional appearance to the area that the community should want to avoid He pointed out that the ownership of the property was now the subject of Pinal County Case #23239 before the Superior Court since the ownership had previously been deeded back to Mr. HvYdsten.He added that the owner of record was Universal Equities and not the Wynn's. He added that the storage problem was something that the Wynn's were aware of since they had a part in the original plans and had designed the restaurant with the others. He questioned whether or not the Board could hear a case which was the subject of a Superior Court suit involving the legal ownership of the property He was in agreement with the Zoning Administrator and Fire Chief that it was improper to place the mobile home behind the building 87. Mr Nesser asked if there was any idea as to how long the case could be in litigation. 88. Mr. Rasmussen stated that he was only guessing, but that it would probably be late Spring or Summer before a decision was reached Page 7 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 89. Mr. Nesser asked if Mr Hvidsten had any objection to the building of a permanent storage room. 90. Mr. Rasmussen stated that if the Wynn's wanted to improve the property, that it was fine with them 91 Chairman asked what the purpose of the law suit was 92. Mr. Rasmussen explained that Mr Hvidsten had sold the lots to a corporation formed by the Sodemeyers, Stones and Wynns. After construction, they ran into some financial problems and it became necessary to deed the land back to Mr Vdsten. He added that they were about 18 months behind in the payments. The Wynn's were now disputing the transaction, arguing that they had been forced into it 93 Mr Vaughn asked who was the owner of record 94 Mr Newcomer explained that he had assumed the Wynns were, but would have to check with Pinal County on ownership. 95. Mr. Rasmussen pointed out that Hvidsten paid the real property taxes, but that the Wynns paid taxes on the personal property. 96. Chairman asked Mrs Wynn if she had anything to say. 97 Mr Nesser asked Mrs. Wynn if she could state, under oath, that she was the legal owner. ( 98 Mrs Wynn replied "No" Il 99. Mr. Nesser asked if they still had intentions of improving the property even if the ownership was under question. 100. Mrs. Wynn replied: "Yes". 101 Mr Newcomer suggested that the Board delay the decision until the ownership was verified and he was able to obtain an opinion from the City Attorney 102 Nesser/Jessamine M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of t1T—e City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the public hearing on case BA-18-80 be continued until the meeting of January 5, 1980 to allow investigation of the ownership question raised on the property" 103 Mr. Vaughn asked why the case should be continued since there were already so many irregularities in it. 104 Mr Nesser maintained that the Board might be able to deny the trailer, but could not act on the application if the ownership was under dispute 105 Mr Vaughn asked that if the City disallowed the trailer, could the City have it removed from the property. 106 Mr. Newcomer explained that a Cease and Desist order had already been issued on the use, pending the variance decision. 107. Chairman asked if the legal owner could remove it themselves. 108 Mr. Vaughn agreed with Mr. Nesser and asked if the Board could drop the case and refuse to hear it since the owner was not known Amik oak Page 8 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 109 Chairman pointed out that the Wynns had acted as the owners in applying for a variance, but that the attorney was now claiming another ownership. 110 Mr Newcomer added that the Board could make a motion to Ask postpone the case 111 Mr Damiano as a point of information, added that there was already one motion on the floor 112. Chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion passed 3-1-1 with Mr Nesser voting "no" and Mr. Vaughn voting "present" 113. Mr. Vaughn called for a five-minute recess 114 Chairman there being no objection, called a short recess. He re-opened the meeting at 8 30 P M and announced that there was a slight change in the agenda since he had been informed that Mrs. Warner was concerned about her husband being left at home since he was ill He asked the Executive Secretary to brief the Board on case BA-21-80 115. Mr Newcomer explained that Mrs. Price was applying for a variance to the front yard setback requirements of the CR-3 zone in order to add on to the existing dwelling She was requesting that the front yard be reduced to 15'. 116 Chairman called on the applicant to present the case. 117 Mrs Warner explained that they wished to enclose the front patio which measured 7'x15' The front wall would extend slightly more than the 7' with the roof overhang extending approximately 7'6". otiak 118 Chairman asked why this was being requested, 119 Mrs Warner explained that her husband was ill and that she would soon need a wheelchair to move around herself This area was needed to make it easier to care for her husband 120. Mr. Nesser added that he had spoken with the applicant today and that her reasons had been satisfactory to him, 121 Chairman asked if there were any comments for or against. 122 Mrs. Warner added that Mr. Peterson and Mr. Whiteaker had told her that they approved of her request 123 Chairman called for the recommendation from the staff. 124 Mr Newcomer read the memo from the Zoning Administrator stating_ that he had no objection and added that he was in agreement 125 Mr Nesser pointed out that the Board had heard cases with this kind of problem before, and that Mrs. Warner was only the victim of the CR-3 zoning and having a small lot. 126 Nesser/Furness M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, hereby granting 0044, Page 9 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1981 a variance to Section 1106 of the City Zoning Ordinance and permitting the front yard setbacks to be reduced to approximately 15' as shown on the diagram submitted with the application The prop- erty is located at 269 S. Ocotillo Drive, Apache Junction, Arizona, Lot 7 Hughes Place Subdivision The reasons for this being that due to the odd shape of the lots in this subdivision, it is virtually impossible to have adequate housing space in accor- dance with the CR-3 zoning classification The 15' setback is in compliance with the TH classification, similar to the lot layouts in this subdivision The motion passed 5-0. 127 Chairman announced that the next item on the agenda was case BA-19-80 and asked the Executive Secretary to brief the Board members on the case. 128 Mr Newcomer described the location of the property in question and explained that the applicant (Mrs Price) wished to be permitted to place a second mobile home or travel trailer on the lot for a limited period of time so that the applicant's handicapped mother could live in the trailer and be cared for 129 Chairman called on the applicant to present his case 130. Mr. Price explained that the second unit was necessary so that his wife's handicapped mother could be close-by and properly cared for He added that the unit would be strictly for her and would not be available for rent or lease to anyone else 131 Mr. Vaughn asked if the unit would meet the setbacks of the General Rural zone as an accessory building 132 Mr. Newcomer replied that it could be done omik 133 Chariman asked what period of time was allowed for the use 134 Mr Newcomer replied that the Zoning Ordinance allowed for up to a nine (9) month period. 135. Mr Vaughn asked if, after the nine month period, did the appli- cant have to come before the Board again. _. - 136 Mr Newcomer explained that they would have to come before the Board but it would not be a public hearing nor would they have to pay another fee 137 Mr Vaughn asked if there was any medical proof of the illness 138. Mr. Newcomer replied that the Board could request proof of the actual medical hardship 139 Chairman asked if there were any additional comments 140. Furness/Vaughn M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of ITT City of Apache Junction, Arizona, hereby granting a temporary and revocable permit to place a second mobile home or travel trailer unit on the applicant's property located at 1328 N Gold Drive, Apache Junction, Arizona This permit shall be issued for a period Aft. p Page 10 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 of not more than nine (9) months, commencing on December 2, 1980. At the end of this nine (9) month period, the applicant must again appear before the Board to request issuance of a new permit As a further condition of this permit 1. Only the applicant's mother may reside in the mobile home or travel trailer If the structure is vacated by this person, the structure shall not be occupied by any other person or persons 2. All applicable regulations of public agencies having jurisdiction shall be complied with. 3. All other requirements of Article 8 (GR Zoning District) of the City Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with 4. The second unit shall be installed as per the plat plan submitted with the application " The motion passed 5-0 141 Chairman called upon the Executive Secretary to brief the members on the next case, BA-20-80. 142 Mr Newcomer explained that Mrs. Hoffarth wished to have a tem- porary permit to place a second mobile home on their property in order to house people who would care for the ill Mr. Hoffarth while Mrs Hoffarth was at work 143. Chairman called on the applicant to present her case 144 Mrs Hoffarth explained that her husband had had six by-pass operations and needed supervision and care while she was at work She added that they wished to place the second mobile home on the property for the people that would be responsible for caring for her husband. 145. Mr. Nesser asked if it was possible to place the two mobile homes 25' apart instead of 20' 146 Mrs. Hoffarth replied that it would not be a problem 147. Mr. Newcomer explained that as a detached accessory building, the 20' was the required separation 148 Chairman called for other comments or questions. 149 Mrs Nelson stated that she had no objection to the application 150 Mrs. Clay informed the Board that she had a power of attorney from the owner of the Mountain View Mobile Ranch, and that the owner objected to the the proposal. 151. Mr. Newcomer added that he had received a letter from a Mr Cavendar in which was indicated that he approved of the proposal 152. Mrs Doak added that she lived across the way and that she was in favor of the second mobile home on the property. 153 Mrs Hecht explained that she was not in opposition to the use, but added that she had a lot of sick friends that could make use of the same situation. She pointed out that if one could do then so could others. Asibk Am. Page 11 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 154. Mr Newcomer pointed out that medical information on the con- dition of Mr Hoffarth was available for review. 155. Chairman asked what the staff recommendation was 156 Mr Newcomer read the memo from the Zoning Administrator into ommak the record and added that he was in agreement 157 Nesser/Furness M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment of fie City of Apache Junction, Arizona, hereby granting a temporary and revocable permit to place two mobile homes on the applicant's property located at 2076 W. Roundup, Apache Junction, Arizona This permit shall be subject to the following conditions. 1. That it is issued to alleviate a temporary hardship 2 That all applicable regulations of agencies having jurisdiction be complied with. 3 Only those assigned to the care of Mr. Leo Hoffarth shall reside in the second mobile home 4 All other requirements of Article 8 (GR Zoning district) of the Zoning Ordinance must be com- plied with This permit shall be issued for a period of not more than nine (9) months commencing December 2, 1980. At the end of this period, the applicant must appear before the Board to request the granting of a new permit if the applicant desires to continued using the second mobile home as a dwelling " 158 Mr Newcomer asked if the second mobile would be used for the people caring for Mr Hoffarth 159. Mrs Hoffarth replied that the trailer to the rear of the property would have the caretakers. 160. Chairman called for a vote on the motion The motion passed 5-0 161 Chairman asked the Executive Secretary to brief the members on the next item, the follow up to BA-9-80 162 Mr Newcomer explained that the case had come before the Board at the May 19, 1980 meeting and involved the request of the then property owner to obtain a variance to place a mobile home on the property and reduce the lot size from 7,000 to 6,000 square feet He added that the property had since been sold and that the new owner was having difficulty with meeting the requirements as set down by the Board 163 Chairman asked Mr Gripp to explain the situation 164 Mr Gripp explained that he wanted to change the usable area of the property and move the mobile home According to the present requirements it was not possible to get a truck into the rear of the property He also wanted to install awnings and a patio on the mobile He pointed out that with the rear awning being 11' from the rear lot line, it would be possible to get a vehicle into the area /m. ^.. Page 12 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of December 1, 1980 He added that the shed could be removed and showed a diagram of his proposal to the Board members 165. Mr. Newcomer explained that there would be problems in meeting the CR-3 yard requirements as previously set forth by the Board oak 166 Mr Vaughn asked if the Board could deal with anything other than the storage shed at this time 167. Mr Newcomer explained that there would have to be a public hearing before a decision could be made on the awnings 168. Chairman asked if that was necessary even though the case had been heard before 169 Mr. Newcomer explained that on the previous plat the 25' setback requirement was met. He added that the Zoning Administrator could give a 15' setback allowance to the front, but could not do it for the rear 170 Mr Nesser told Mr. Gripp that his problem was understood and that the Board was familiar with the odd-shaped lots in that area of the City 171 Chairman pointed out that since the Board had not received any request in writing, that they were unable to act 172. Mr Nesser asked if Mr. Gripp could request mobile home setbacks. 173 Mr. Gripp pointed out that the setbacks throughout the neigh- bor hood were not consistent 174 Chairman agreed with Mr. Gripp but added that the Board needed a written application before they could decide He called for additional comments or questions. There being none, he asked if there were any objections to adjourning the meeting No objections were raised and the meeting was adjourned 41.4 at925PM Resp tfully sub itted, Cles Newc er Acting Executive Secretary Aw� ed: ; `Gttit /- ,/,,C,t/ Joe Jessamine, 'man By. Don Nesser, Vice Chairman rO -1 Pizow1/4 y o @ pac e 09unction December, 1980 COMMUNITY SERVICE ACTIVITIES A. MIXED VOLLEYBALL LEAGUE Started December 8, 1980 with apporximately 75 participants . This league will run through February with the second half beginning the 14th of January. B. GOLDEN AGE SOFTBALL An organizational meeting was held, and six teams have shown interest . League to begin January 6 , 1981 , with all games being played at Oasis Park in Maricopa County . This is the only senior citizen softball league in the Valley. Could turn into something big . C . YOUTH JOB REFERRAL SERVICE This service is continuing to grow, with approximately 20 youth applications in. The only referrals we have made have been for individuals needing yardwork done. That ' s a start . D. SENIOR SOUNDS NEWSLETTER This monthly information flyer has been very successful . December issue has just been published Five hundred copies will be distributed throughout the community . E. CRIME PREVENTION "` The Community Service Department in conjunction with the Police Department has been averaging two programs a month. We have two more scheduled for January . F. LOST DUTCHMAN DAYS MENS BASKETBALL TOURNY Five teams have already entered this First Annual Tourna- ment which will be held on January 24th and 25th, 1981 . Expecting teams from all over the state. G TRANSPORTATION This service has been recently established with the co- operation of Pinal/Gila Senior Citizens Council . Every Thursday transportation is provided for our seniors to areas in town where they can shop, and make visits to the doctor. As interest grows , so will the days on which this service is provided. 3 150 NORTH OCOTILLO • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-6154 Community Service December, 1980 page 2 PROJECTS A. BALLFIELD and TENNIS COURTS The contractor has finally got down to business . An estimate for percentage of completion is around the 40% range. Project completion date is February 28, 1981 . B. VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK The Veterans Memorial Park Committee have received over $1000 in donations to construct a gazebo in the park to be located in the southwest corner of our City complex . INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT The Department has spent quite a bit of time formulating a joint use agreement between the City and School for use of recreation facilities and equipment . Being a new city, this is a very important step in establishing a recreation program. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION The December meeting was held recently and the Commission discussed fund raising ideas for a swimming pool drive . They were also briefly informed of the need to establish a City wide recreation plan and the various alternatives to look into to form this plan. At the next meeting, a priority list of recreational facilities will be established. (1-;:yikcHE--,G qP/ZONP `Oity oe. &4pache 09unction JANUARY 8, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER --''--, FROM: JOE GERO, PLANNING DIRECTOR rOCHUCK NEWCOMER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER l.SUBJECT: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT This memorandum is to inform you of recent Board of Adjustments actions and upcoming cases. At the January 5, 1981, meeting, the following public hearings were held and actions taken. BA-18-80 (Wynn, Los Vaqueros Restaurant) The Board of Adjustment refused to hear the case. The applicant was seeking a temporary use permit to use a mobile home as an office and storage area behind Los Vaqueros Restaurant on Apache Trail . The Board's decision was based on the applicant's inability to prove ownership of the Is lib. property in question. BA-22-80 (Ehler) The Board of Adjustment granted the applicant a temporary nine (9) month permit to use a travel trailer as a dwelling unit for a security guard on his property located at the intersection of South Coconino Drive and West 22nd Avenue. The property is in a CB-2 (General Business) zoning district. I iliU J it ports 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 Board of Adjustme. Activity Report January 8, 1981 Page two On February 2, 1981 , at 7:00 P.M. at the City Hall Complex, the Board will hold one public hearing: BA-1-81 (Martin) The applicant is requesting a variance to minimum lot area and lot width requirements of the TH (Trailer Homesite) zoning district regulations. The applicant desires to split a parcel into two (2) lots and use both lots as building sites. The property is located on West 16th Avenue, near the intersection of S. Warner Drive Files on any of these cases may be examined at the Planning Department. k,. Y ' I BUILDING DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY . CALENDAR YEAR: 1980 MONTH OF CLASSIFICATION DECEMIBER YEAR TO DATE Number of Building Permits Issued 59 748 Total of Permit Fees Assessed $ 1,770,00 $ 34,178.47 Total of Plan Reviews Assessed 597.96 16,467.26 Total Pre-inspection Fees Assessed 105.00 Total Incoming 2,367 96 50,750.73 Cost of Proposed Work 395,983.39 13,922,347.29 Number of Inspections made in connection with building permits 193 1,744 «1 Cw) co C.-- PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS ISSUED F I S CAL YEAR : 1 9 8 0 — 1 9 8 1 CATEGORY JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 1 NOVEMBER DECEMBER YEAR TO DATE PERMITS ISSUED 52 48 56 100 81 59 396 INCOME $ 5 , 002. 25 $ 7, 702. 07 $ 7 , 140 . 34 $ 8 , 077 . 70 $ 2 , 809 . 90 $ 2 , 367 . 96 $ 33 , 100 . 22 CONST. VALUE 951 , 140 . 92 2872 , 157 . 79 1334,804. 57 1568, 866 . 12 522 , 363 .901 395 , 983 . 39 7 , 645 ,316 . 69 NUMBER INSPEC. 117 163 181 187 206 193 1 ,047 LF. sw 1/2/81 ) ) ) a. BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED ) F I S CAL YEAR 1 9 8 0 - 1 9 8 1 SINGLE- ILY MULTI-FAMILY , FAM VALUE OF PERIOD MOBILE HOME DWELLING UNITS COMMERCIAL ADDITIONS OTHER CONSTRUCTION JULY 15 17 -- 2 4 14 $ 951,140 92 AUGUST 11 15 4 2 1 15 2,872,157.79 SEPTEMBER 11 13 2 6 5 20 1,334,804.57 FIRST QUARTER 37 45 6 10 10 49 5,158,103 28 OCTOBER 25 23 4 4 3 44 1,568,866.12 ) NOVEMBER 19 2 4 2 4 53 522,363.90 DECEMBER 16 6 -- 2 5 30 395,983 39 SECOND QUARTER 60 31 8 8 12 127 2,487,213 41 YEAR TO DATE 97 76 14 18 22 176 7,646,079 53 1/2/81 ) ) BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED CALENDAR YEAR . 19 8 0) SINGLE-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY VALUE OF PERIOD MOBILE HOME DWELLING UNITS COMMERCIAL ADDITIONS OTHER CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 13 13 -- 6 6 18 $ 644.657.16 FEBRUARY 31 13 12 4 4 14 1,137,223.49 MARCH 25 5 -- 8 5 20 1,462,092 48 APRIL 25 9 -- 1 3 16 716,930 32 MAY 10 10 -- 2 4 18 494,526 57 JUNE 10 30 42 -- 9 11 1,821,835 36 JULY 15 17 -- 2 4 14 951,140.92 AUGUST 11 15 4 2 1 15 2,872,157.79 SEPTEMBER 11 13 2 6 5 20 1,334,804.57 OCTOBER 25 23 4 4 3 44 1,568,866.12 NOVEMBER 19 2 4 2 4 53 522,363.90 DECEMBER 16 6 -- 2 5 30 395,983.39 CALENDAR YEAR 1980 211 156 68 39 53 273 $ 13,922,582 07 1/2/81 BUILDING DEPART ENT ACTIVITY � '`� CALENDAR YEAR• 1980 MONTH OF CLASSIFICATION DECEMBER YEAR TO DATE Number of Building Permits Issued 59 748 Total of Permit Fees Assessed $ 1,770.00 $ 34,178.47 Total of Plan Reviews Assessed 597.96 16,467.26 Total Pre-inspection Fees Assessed - -- 105.00 Total Incoming 2,367.96 50,750.73 Cost of Proposed Work 395,983.39 13,922,347.29 Number of Inspections made in connection with building permits 193 1,744 ) ) PERMITS AND INSPFCTIONS ISSUED F I S CAL YEAR : 1 9 8 0 — 1 9 8 1 CATEGORY JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER YEAR TO DATE PERMITS ' ISSUED 52 48 56 100 81 59 396 INCOME $ 5 , 002. 25 $ 7 , 702. 07 $ 7 , 140 . 34 $ 8 , 077 . 70 $ 2 , 809 . 901 $ 2 , 367 . 96 $ 33 , 100 . 22 CONST. VALUE 951, 140 92 2872 ,157 . 79 1334,804. 57 1568, 866 . 12 522 , 363 . 901 395 , 983 . 39 7 , 645 ,316 . 69 NUMBER INSPEC. 117 163 181 187 206 I 193 1 ,047 LF• sw 1/2/81 . ) ) Y'. t !,' L I BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FISCAL YEAR 1 9 8 0 - 1 9 8 1 SINGLE-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY VALUE OF PERIOD MOBILE HOME DWELLING UNITS C(IIIERCIAL ADDITIONS OTHER CONSTRU 1'iON JULY 15 17 -- 2 4 14 $ 951,140 92 AUGUST 11 15 4 2 1 15 2,872,157.79 SEPTEMBER 11 13 2 6 5 20 1,334,804.57 FIRST QUARTER 37 45 6 10 10 49 5,158,103 28 OCTOBER 25 23 4 4 3 44 1,568,866.12 NOVEMBER 19 2 4 2 4 53 522,363.90 DECEMBER 16 6 -- 2 5 30 395,983 39 SECOND QUARTER 60 31 8 8 12 127 2,487,213 41 YEAR TO DATE 97 76 14 18 22 176 7,646,079 53 1/2/81 BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED CALENDAR YEAR : 1980 SINGLE-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY VALUE OF PERIOD MOBILE HOME DWELLING UNITS COMMERCIAL ADDITIONS OTHER CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 13 13 -- 6 6 18 $ 644,657.16 FEBRUARY 31 13 12 4 4 14 1,137,223 49 MARCH 25 5 -- 8 5 20 1,462,092 48 APRIL 25 9 -- 1 3 16 716,930 32 MAY 10 10 -- 2 4 18 494,526 57 JUNE 10 30 42 -- 9 11 1,821,835 36 JULY 15 17 -- 2 4 14 951,140 92 AUGUST 11 15 4 2 1 15 2,872,157 79 SEPTEMBER 11 13 2 6 5 20 1,334,804 57 OCTOBER 25 23 4 4 3 44 1,568,866 12 NOVEMBER 19 2 4 2 4 53 522,363.90 DECEMBER 16 6 -- 2 5 30 395,983.39 CALENDAR YEAR 1980 211 156 68 39 53 273 $ 13,922,582.07 1/2/81 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY : YES NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN SHANKS_ COUNCILMAN E I DSON COUNCILMANGEss COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN I UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: ITEM NO. 11 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT P . M. from the desk of CITY CLERK TO Mayor Seeman: Mr. Robert Dugger has requested that the attached letter be read at call to the Public at the regular council meeting of January 21 , 1981 . jdt S xp et _0`'' c; 1 `c \Vcil j\p54 0? \I V4), Pinal County Libertarian Committee 1484 West Apache Trail Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 (602) 982-6812 January 12, 1981 City Council City of Apache Junction Apache Junction, Arizona 85220 Madame Mayor and Councilmembers: You lave_ asked to decide on changing the names of Superstition Drive and Lost Dutchman Boulevard to University and Brown, respectively. I wish to enter an argument against such changes. It has been said that this change is necessary to bring the streets into conformity with the existing street names in Mesa. All over the country there seems to be a trend towards conform- ity, organization, and uniformity. Everyone wants to be the same as everyone else. No one wants to be different. , This is a minor issue to be sure, but a declaration of individ- uality is sorely needed. Apache Junction is a unique community with a unique history. Part of that history is the Lost Dutchman' s Mine and the Superstition Mountains. They deserve to be honored by using them as significant place names or street names in the Junction. One of our neighbors to the west, Tempe, has two major streets that change names as they cross the border into Scottsdale. This seems to cause no problem. Apache Trail, our main street, becomes Main in Mesa, then Apache Boulevard in Tempe without causing a great confusion. In addition, the streets west of Meridian derive their numbering from Mesa. Changing Superstition to University would result in a location on one side of Meridian having a address on East University while the other side would be West University. That might well cause more confusion than the existing situation. Our pride in our community should impel us to retain street names indicative of our history. Robert M. pptger Chairman