Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 02.18 City Council Regular Agenda (---- p,:okcs,,R-1, E, ✓ x G lb v 'r6ft z I '� ,' yr_=lam qR/ZOO* c6ity o f pace &9unction CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA FEBRUARY 18, 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, FEBRUARY 4, 1981 AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS CALL TO THE PUBLIC CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PUBLIC HEARINGS None. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS (3) PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 87, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 13-2 OF ORDINANCE NO. 38 -- OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS (FIRST READING) (4) EXECUTIVE SESSION, MARCH 4, 1981 (5) INFORMATION AND REPORTS REQUESTS OF COUNCIL (6) ADJOURNMENT 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES 6/Citil) I►. ITEM # l MEETING OF 1- ti'C1 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: l D YFS NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN BURGESS 1///:/ COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON 1 k./COUNCILMAN HILL dow COUNCILMAN SHANKS VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: \)1\ ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES a ITEM # MEETING OF 7 /1 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY : YES N0 ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN HILL _ COUNCILMAN DAMIANO 1 COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO .7/ MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: \/\ oein • . . _ . • 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, C j/(7 I was at the airport forum and heard a comment by Mr. Manny Pesco. He explained that he is president of the Arizona Pilots Association, but is also a businessman and he would not put a business in Apache Junction because it took him too much time to get here (from Phoenix) . He mentioned over one billion dollars was generated in the Phoenix area as a direct result from general aviation. Had Apache Junction an airport facility some percentage of that billion dollars would have come in this City. He also mentioned over 1400 members of the Pilots Association will be flying in to Falcon Field for breakfast and a meeting. That's 1400 people that are going to be spending money in Falcon Field and Mesa. This money could be spent as well in Apache Junction, if it had an airport facility. Mr. Pesco related Apache Junction cannot stand still - it must move forward. He extended the cooperation of the Arizona Pilots Association, who include manufacturers, businessmen, and all types of people, that are willing to donate their time and cooperation to help Apache Junction develop an airport that Apache Junction can live with and benefit by. The Airport Commission will be contacting industry and businessmen to inquire of their interest in locating in or by Apache Junction. They will also be asking if an Apache Junction facility would have any influence on their decision. As soon as that information is available, it will be made public. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING February 4, 1981 The regular meetina of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on February 4, 1981, at the Apache Junction Council Chambers ii pursuant to notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Seeman called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m INVOCATION Councilman Eidson led the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and public participated in the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present Councilman Jerry Buroess, Councilman Thomas Damiano, Councilman Jimmy Eidson, Councilman Norman Hill, Councilman Marie Shanks, Vice Mayor John Granillo, and Mayor Virginia Seeman. ( Staff Present: City Manaoer Ray Lee L City Clerk/Director of Administrative Services Marlis Davis Director of Planning Joe Gero Director of Public Works Richard Broman City Attorney Michael Curtis Others with Council Business Mr Clayton Halbert, 1337 S Delaware Mr Roy Hudson, 2084 W. 9th Avenue Mrs. Dorothy Halbert, 1337 S. Delaware ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA,THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED Councilman Hill seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 21, 1981 Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JANUARY 21 , 1981 BE, AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS CORRECTED Councilman Eidson seconded the motion VOTE Unanimous The motion carried AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Seeman stated there would be a public forum on the proposed Apache Junction Airport Wednesday, February 11, 1981,at 7:00 p.m. at the Superstition Mountain Elementary School Auditorium. She stated the purpose of the meetina was to inform the community on the concept and findings of the Commission in reference to the airport site, selection, and master plan study The public's input was solicited and it was stated their input will be considered in the planning process. Mayor Seeman read a letter from the Arizona Emergency Medical Systems agency to the Council regarding emergency services in the Apache Junction area. She stated the organization has indicated their interest in suoportina these efforts and their desire to offer the City $1000 for the purchase of whatever medical supplies might be needed Mayor Seeman read a letter from Senator Barry Goldwater wherein he stated he was impressed with the municipal Policy Statement comina from the League of Arizona Cities and Towns and that he was having it put in the Conoressional Record. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mayor Seeman opened the meetina to the public and called upon Mr. Clayton Halbert Clayton Halbert, 1337 S Delaware, submitted a petition to the Council which read as follows• "We, the residents of S. Delaware Dr , realize the fence in front of our homes needs to be either repaired or rebuilt and maintained In light of the letter delivered to us,would you please reconsider and not uproot all our plantings at this time. We understand it is in the riaht-of-way, but also that at this time the City has no intentions of putting a tube in the ditch and filling it over now. If possible, we would like for you to Give us a reasonable estimated time when this would be done And since it is in the interest of the City as well as residents of this street to keep our City and our homes as attractive as possible, will you please take under advisement and consider the possibility of our keeping the plantings at least two or three years in order to give the City, the residents of our street and perhaps residents of the Mobile Home Park, an opportunity to consider what would be the most attractive and best suited for all concerned. We the residents of Delaware Drive are in agreement with the above " Mr Halbert stated 42 people signed the petition which is approximately 90 percent of those who reside on the street and about twenty of the residents were present at the meeting. Mr Roy Hudson, 2084 West 9th Avenue, Apache Villa, stated that although he did not sign the petition he was concerned about the same problem He stated the problem originated prior to incorporation and requested that the City take time to look at the situation or appoint a committee to study it and come back with a better recommendation Councilman Damiano stated he is in aareement with the residents that some- thing should be left there; whether it be trees or whatever He read a letter from Mr Broman which indicated the Building Inspector has been directed to remove the fence but also indicated that landscaping will be allowed to remain as lona as traffic hazards are not encountered. Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated when questioned that the fence is in such disrepair that it is constantly fallina down In addition siaht distance is completelt obliterated from exiting on the intersecting street so he believes a fence should not remain in that area He stated if a fence was to be put up in order to screen some other areas it should be done on the private property adjacent to the rights-of-way REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1981 PAGE TWO Mr Halbert again approached the Council and addressed the item Mrs. Dorothy Halbert, 1337 S Delaware asked if there was any way a fence could be put up on the other side of the ditch. Mayor Seeman requested that this item be referred to staff She requested that staff return with some type of recommendation on the situation She directed the City Manager to present the Council with some studies on the situation alona oar with the cost of fencing. She stated the Property owners would be advised of anv decision arrived at by Council Mayor Seeman stated the Mr Robert Duaaer had requested an opportunity to speak. The mayor stated she had asked the Attorney to address Mr. Duaaer in reference to the nature of the matter he wished to address She felt it should not be a portion of the City Council's business City Attorney Michael Curtis stated his understanding was that the Mayor had received a request of Council to respond to an alleoed attack by a member of the Council on an individual He stated it is up to the Council to determine how they wish to handle this request to speak that is directed not to any item on the agenda but solely as a request to respond to an alleged attack. He advised that should the Council determine that this is not an appropriate item for discussion at the Council meetina since there are letters, media, and other forums, the matter could be redressed if the person who feels there was an attack wants to redress it. He advised that if the Council wished to rule that the topic was not in order, they had the prerogative to do so. His ooinion was that it was not a matter of aeneral business, nor in his ooinion was it appropriate that the City Council meetings be used as forums to either launch or defend attacks upon individuals; he felt enaaaina in personalities was out of order Mayor Seeman informed Mr Duaaer that if he felt someone made a personal attack on him she would suggest Mr. Dugger contact that person individually and explain the situation to him CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Mayor Seeman called upon Ray Lee for the City Manaaer's Report City Manager Ray Lee stated there were three items to report on: (1) In order to comply with the Governor's energy conservation program, and with Councilman Hill's assistance, a test was run recently with an energy coil to see if the City might be able to save some aasoline He said he received a memo from the Department of Public Safety stating tests were run on two departmental vehicles which indicated mileage was increased considerably with the installation of energy coils The performance was as good if not better than without the coil and the mileage increase was about 70 percent for the 1975 Ford and about 60 percent for the 1979 Pontiac He stated the City would continue with the test unless instructed not to and would also consider installing the Energy Coil in all City vehicles which would amount to a considerable savings by the end of the year (2) City Manager Ray Lee read a letter from the Attorney's staff con- gratulating the Apache Junction Police Department for their handlina of a recent murder. City Attorney Michael Curtis pointed out that the Police Department has not only willingly, but frequently, asked to be brought up-to-date on the latest in legal procedures and the newest rulings of various courts and various iuris- dictions to increase their level of efficiency He stated the legal staff is very gratified to be working with the department under Chief McDaniel that does not resent, but rather eagerly seeks out and asks for assistance from the legal staff (3) City Manager Ray Lee called upon the Building Official to give a brief report. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1981 PAGE THREE Building Official Leo Frazier gave a brief report on the street signs stating most were installed in the first quadrant of the City. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEWBUSINESS US INE SS PROPOSED ORDINANCE 85, STREET NAME MAP (FIRST READING WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE) ) Mayor Seeman stated this item is a first reading with the emergency clause She called upon Planning Director Joe Gero to brief the Council and public. City Planner Joe Gero stated the Pinal County Board of Supervisors has adopted the name change for Meridian so that it is now North and South Meridian Drive respectively; also the letters from the ASAP Committee and from the City of Mesa statino they have no objection to the change of the name have been received. He stated the deadline for the installation of the street signs is February 28, 1981 and without the emergency clause the ordinance would not take effect for 30 days after approval thereby necessitating the emergency clause in order to give instruction to the staff on w�' '>--- - particular names that will be utilized and to order the rest of the sions Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 85, BE READ BY TITLE ONLY, WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED Councilman Burgess seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried. OIN Mayor Seeman called upon the City Clerk to read Ordinance No 85 by title only with the emergency clause. City Clerk Marlis Davis read as follows. "ORDINANCE NO. 85, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 83, AMENDING CHAPTER 12 ARTICLE 13-2, APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 13-2-5 PERTAINING TO THE NAMING OF STREETS AND ALIGNMENTS OF STREETS WITHIN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, INCLUDING ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR NAMING CITY STREETS, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURE FOR ASSIGNING ADDRESSES TO PARCELS WITHIN THE CITY; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY." Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 85, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO 83, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 13-2, APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 13-2-5 PERTAINING TO THE NAMING OF ALIGNMENTS FOR STREETS WITHIN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION INCLUDING ESTABLISHING A STREET NAMING PROCESS, ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR ASSIGNING ADDRESSES TO PARCELS WITHIN THE CITY, REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY BE, AND HEREBY IS, APPROVED Councilman Hill seconded the motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1981 PAGE FOUR VOTE• Unanimous The motion carried APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION OFFICIALS Mayor Seeman gave background on the requirements for appointment of election officials for the Primary Election Ask to be held on March 24, 1981, and the General Election of May 19, 1981 Councilman Damiano MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS BE APPOINTED AS THE ELECTION BOARD FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING THE PRIMARY ELECTION ON MARCH 24, 1981 AND IF NECESSARY THE GENERAL ELECTION ON MAY 19, 1981, RUTH LONG AS INSPECTOR; PATRICIA OLTMAN AND LOUISE HONOR AS JUDGES, BERTHA ROGERS AND JANE VIELEHR AS CLERKS FOR THE PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22A/MARICOPA VOTING PRECINCT APACHE, AND THAT RUTH PRIORESCHI AS INSPECTOR, SHIRLEY ERICKSON AND RENETTA DEJOHN AS JUDGES, DOROTHY YAEKLE AND MARGARET CARLIN AS CLERKS, FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22B FOR SAID ELECTION, BE AND HEREBY ARE APPROVED BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT BARBARA KINGSLEY BE APPOINTED AS ALTERNATE FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22A/MARICOPA VOTING PRECINCT APACHE; AND HAZEL SANDERS BE APPOINTED ALTERNATE FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22B Councilman Hill seconded the motion. VOTE Unanimous The motion carried EXECUTIVE SESSION, FEBRUARY 18, 1981 Vice Mayor Granillo MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PERSONNEL AND LEGAL ADVICE BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 18, 1981, AT 6 00 P M IN THE CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilman Hill seconded the motion VOTE: Unanimous The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS There were no information and reports REQUESTS OF COUNCIL Councilman Eidson stated that when the City was first incorporated the leaal requirements made it necessary to pass several ordinances that have placed a burden in some areas upon some of the citizens He said the Council has been working with staff in an attempt to alleviate some of these burdens Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER TO REVIEW ORDINANCE NO 38, MORE SPECIFICALLY SECTION 13-2-3-C AND RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL AN APPROPRIATE AMENDMENT GIVING OFF-SITE RELIEF TO THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT NOW FALL UNDER A CERTAIN CATEGORY. Councilman Damiano seconded the motion VOTE. Unanimous The motion carried REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1981 PAGE FIVE Councilman Damiano inofrmed the public of the letter written to the proprietors of the skating rink recently cited for violation of the Building Codes and referred to the article in the Apache Sentinel concerning the closing of the Rink He asked the Attorney to address the City's responsibility and liability as it pertains to this type of occurrence City Attorney Michael Curtis stated that when a City knowingly countenances the violation of a Code enacted for the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens, oak and where subsequently an injury or accident resulting in damage to an individual or group of individuals health, safety, and welfare, the City would have a vicarious liability from knowingly endangering the public health, safety, and welfare He stated this issue has evolved in other Cities and there is a great deal of difference between a 'knowing' and an 'unknowing' permission of the violation of a Code or Ordinance which affects the personal health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry He stated if the City did not know of the violation and an accident occurs the City is fortunate because there is no liability; but where the City does know and has direct knowledge that a structure does not meet the standards of the Ordinance and there is subsequently an operation of the establishment and subsequent to that there is an injury the City would be subject to liability. He further stated in the opinion of legal counsel there would be danger that insurance coverage might not apply because many times there are pro- visions in the insurance coverage stating that where one knowingly disregards an ordinance or a law insurance contracts do not always apply He stated the City's insurance contract has not been examined to determine whether or not the City would be insured in the event of a lawsuit resulting in this type of circum- stance He stated the Attorney's office will be reviewing the contracts although they feel that the City has no alternative but to enforce an ordinance when the ordinance affects the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry Councilman Eidson referred to the questions he has asked concerning whether or not the City is going to remain incorporated and stated the only thing he can say is that it is not known for sure what is going to happen Councilman Eidson addressed the possibilities of what will happen to property values in the City if it should disincorporate Mayor Seeman stated she had been asked that each member of the Council spend an evening at City Hall to be available to the public. She asked that any Councilmembers willing to participate in such an endeavor contact Sharon Seder who will put together a schedule and provide it to the newspaper ADJOURNMENT Mayor Seeman adjourned the meeting at 8 15 p m APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1981, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA ..ti,- ... VIRGINIA SEEMAN ATTEST Mayor MARLIS J. DAVIS City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1981 PAGE SIX NOTES ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET ITEM # 2' MEETING OF ? i ' 20 MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: _yFS NO ABSTA I N COUNCILMAN .E IDSON_COUNCILMAN SHANKS_ /i/,/ COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN BURGESS 0014 COUNCILMAN DAMIANO VICE-MAYOR GRAN ILLO MAYOR SEEMAN � 7 UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: • ITEM NO, 2 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND MEMEBERS OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 4, 1981 BE, AND HEREBY ARE, ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED , Be it resolved by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, /.- Arizona, the following persons be pp appointed o the Public Safety Personnel ( a a .-A_. Retirement Board:�-'t---'" A".---mac ‘-"1�'6-6/4 O aII"— )said term to end KXXXXXO March 4, 1983 and said term to empire March 4, 1985 and said term to expire March 4, 1983 and (Pan) said term to expire March 4, 1985 i e a v6ed. /641 ' 7"---""r (-- g.P.C, HE✓o n O qR/ZONP IV ity o, ' &pache 09unction February 18, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Councilman Hill THRU: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Fence along Delaware Street In reference to your request at the last council meeting, it is estimated 1980 LF of chain link-slatted fence along the west side of Delaware from 10th to 16th Avenues would cost approximately $6,200.00 installed. In viewing purposes for which improvement districts may be used, fencing is not included. With few exceptions, historically fen- cing is installed by the owner on private property. Such should be the case, if and when a new fence would be built on Delaware Street. It is suggested, if the property owners in Apache Villa desire to construct a screening fence on private ptoperty, that they could pool their resources to construct the fence, combining their efforts with the residents of Apache Sierra (17 lots) to further reduce costs. $6200 1980 LF fence Apache Villa (29) =+$214/lot $6200 1980 LF fence Apache Villa and Apache Sierra (46)=+ 135/lot It is possible that in the future Paradise Valley Trailer Park, North of 12th Avenue on the west side of Delaware, may install a chain link-slatted fence. If this was done, the fence south of 12th Avenue would be reduced to approximately 1300 feet and installed for approximately $4071. As less residences would be affected in Apache Villa, the cost could amount to: 4071 Apache Villa (20) _ + 204 4071 Apache Villa and Apache Sierra (37) = + 110 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 i-A„C„H F G F , 'r a2n - ,r kY�.14 a .```. qR/ZONP `Oily o Apache 09unction February 18, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Councilman Hill THRU: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Fence along Delaware Street In reference to your request at the last council meeting, it is estimated 1980 LF of chain link-slatted fence along the west side of Delaware from 10th to 16th Avenues would cost approximately $6,200.00 installed. In viewing purposes for which improvement districts may be used, fencing is not included. With few exceptions, historically fen- cing is installed by the owner on private property. Such should be the case, if and when a new fence would be built on Delaware Street. It is suggested, if the property owners in Apache Villa desire to construct a screening fence on private ptoperty, that they could pool their resources to construct the fence, combining their efforts with the residents of Apache Sierra (17 lots) to further reduce costs. $6200 1980 LF fence Apache Villa (29) =+$214/lot $6200 1980 LF fence Apache Villa and Apache Sierra (46)=+ 135/lot It is possible that in the future Paradise Valley Trailer Park, North of 12th Avenue on the west side of Delaware, may install a chain link-slatted fence. If this was done, the fence south of 12th Avenue would be reduced to approximately 1300 feet and installed for approximately $4071. As less residences would be affected in Apache Villa, the cost could amount to: 4071 Apache Villa (20) _ + 204 4071 Apache Villa and Apache Sierra (37) - + 110 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 RECENTLY, INFORMATION WHICH WAS NOT CORRECT WAS BEING DISPATCHED AT A LOCAL RESTAURANT BY A CITIZEN OF THIS COMMUNITY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD THE PARTICULAR STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE , THAT THE CITY HAS A 6 MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET - NOT TRUE FACT: THE BUDGET AS PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER IS $3,023,527,00 WHICH INCLUDES A $500,000 CONTINGENCY TO ACCEPT GRANT MONIES (YOU MAY WISH TO HOLD YOUR BUDGET UP) THAT THE CITY PURCHASED 5 NEW BUICKS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FACT: THE CITY AT THE PRESENT TIME HAS ONE 1980 BUICK LASABRE WHICH WAS PURCHASED FROM THE LOWEST BIDDER AND PAID FOR BY A HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS NO OTHER NEW AUTOMOBILES OF ANY MAKE AND HAS NO INTENTION OF PURCHASING ANY , (LIST OF ALL CITY VEHICLES ARE ON FILE WITH THE CLERK' S OFFICE) ROY HUDSON ANNEXED GOLD DUST T1OBILE HOME PARK FACT : NOVEMBER 1979 MR, HOLBERT PETITIONED PRESENT CITY COUNCIL MAY 7, 1980, PRESENT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DUNE 7, 1980, ANNEXATION WAS EFFECTIVE ROY HUDSON WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST NOR AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL, THAT THE CITY OWES $500,000 TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR BUILDINGS WE ARE IN FACT : PURCHASE PRICE OF CITY HALL MODULAR BUILDINGS IS APPROXIMATELY $158,000 AND HAS BEEN PAID IN FULL RECENTLY, INFORMATION WHICH WAS NOT CORRECT WAS BEING DISPATCHED AT A LOCAL RESTAURANT BY A CITIZEN OF THIS COMMUNITY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD THE PARTICULAR STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE , THAT THE CITY HAS A 6 MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET - NOT TRUE FACT: THE BUDGET AS PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER IS $3,023,527,00 WHICH INCLUDES A $500,000 CONTINGENCY TO ACCEPT GRANT MONIES (You MAY WISH TO HOLD YOUR BUDGET UP) THAT THE CITY PURCHASED 5 NEW BUICKS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FACT: THE CITY AT THE PRESENT TIME HAS ONE 1980 BUICK LASABRE WHICH WAS PURCHASED FROM THE LOWEST BIDDER AND PAID FOR BY A HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS NO OTHER NEW AUTOMOBILES OF ANY MAKE AND HAS NO INTENTION OF PURCHASING ANY , (LIST OF ALL CITY VEHICLES ARE ON FILE WITH THE CLERK' S OFFICE) ROY HUDSON ANNEXED GOLD DUST P'OBILE HOME PARK FACT : NOVEMBER 1979 MR, HOLBERT PETITIONED PRESENT CITY COUNCIL MAY 7, 1980, PRESENT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DUNE 7, 1980, ANNEXATION WAS EFFECTIVE ROY HUDSON WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST NOR AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL , THAT THE CITY OWES $500,000 TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR BUILDINGS WE ARE IN FACT: PURCHASE PRICE OF CITY HALL MODULAR BUILDINGS IS APPROXIMATELY $158,000 AND HAS BEEN PAID IN FULL PUBLIC MEETING - AIRPORT COMMISSION February 11, 1981 COMMENTS FROM PERSONS RESIDING OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS: PROS (2) Site "C". Airport is an absolute necessity. East Valley needs additional airport facilities. Study is going along good. (2) Definitely should have it. Does not have to be profit making, loss would be offset by additional payroll and industrial tax base. It will help the City to grow. A.J. is largest community in Arizona without an airport. Need to plan for an airport now. Well done. CONS Why can't this be a private enterprise for people who own planes. Apache Junction does not need an airport to maintain a western community, nor we we have an obligation to furnish a few pilots with a means to their hobbies. I would like to see a council initiative referendum vote. PERSONS RESIDING INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS: PROS The sooner the better. Hurry up and get it built. An airport provides a good tax base, employment and business. CONS Should be paid for by aircraft users, not private proierty owners. Not able to support it, lets not do it. Cannot afford, nice and quiet here, keep it that way. Cannot support, have 34 years flying business, might vote for it it very small, 3500' runway, etc. Site C most logical.I would like to have my plane here. (5) Lets build roads, signs, communications, a city first, who wants industry. (1) Put on ballot for vote by people. Good for future, for sure. It's nice and peaceful, lets keep it that way. (1) The cost is too much for the benefit of a few. I would like to keep A.J. a retirement area. Don't need it. Biggest rip off since the Tea Pot Dome. Don't want industry in A.J. - will use up our water supply and cause pollution. Not the time - about 1990. Should be located further East, more to the south. icip.cHs ✓G "IR/ZOIAP` c6 t y o c pache 09zinctzon May 16, 1980 COST OF CITY HALL MODULARS: Price I.D. $15,575.70 C0995911460 (Planning) 12,033.00 M1-226-1260 (Public Works) 38,806.76 Unit #1 45,177.20 Unit #2 46,866.25 Unit #3 / ti Oa° gk 150 NORTH OCOTILLO • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE (602)982-6154 J APA.J 1 CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION FLEET X/REF APA J59-2 NORTH-WEST INS %US CE N FRAL PtJL I C.Y #►ALA 7 34.% (+=I N TERN CHANGE) CC tVERA►:•ES= LI 1000 UM-30 iCMAC:V CM#50 CLIO° CL#250 A. NONOWNED & HIRED AUTO LI B. DRIVE OTHER CAR --NO COVERAGE-- 1 . 79 C.HEV CAPRICE #1N69/.5/Ci.26677 LI UM C:M CL CITY MANAGER 2. 7c) C:HEV IMPALA #1N69/.' C128113 LI UM CM CL POLICE CHIEF 3. 75 CHEV CHEVELLE #1D29U5Z441493 LI UM POLICE ADMINISTRATION 4. 77 FORD LTD #7.J63H151267 LI UM CM CL UNDERCOVER CAR 5. 74 MFRI" Mi:NTEt t:t 44744C5 _i971 I._ I UM PATROL_ CAR 6. 75 FukIl 4 DOOR # _5:'C 1 `56c) LI UM PATROL CAR 7. 74 CHEV CHEVELLE #1C2%4H4Z4.3';9003 LI UM POLICE ADM1NISTRATION 8. 74 MERC. MONTEGCO #4H04A5s2ScS LI UM ADMINISTRATION USE c . 7`, FORD 4 rtuOk *5, I5 C 14401/. LI. UM PA FROL_ CAR 10. 74 MERC MON T EGO #4Z44C551970 LI UM PATROL C.AR 1 i . 7r9 CHEV 1/2T PU *C. D 14QA 1 9 1153 LI UM CM C:L# STR MAIN1 12. 75 CHEV 1/2T PU #CC245F3 9041i► LI UM PUBLIC WORKS 13. '71 CHEV /4T' PU #Ct:L247Z1574_32 1._I UM i'i t_L_# * 14, 7/. FORD L I I t #i..J/_-•=±l 447/--.4 �f LI UM ADMINISTRATION ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF / —�I MOTION BY: V S SECONDED BY: .9 YFS Nn ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN HILL '/ COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN SHANKS L//:// COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION ARIZONA, THAT THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS BE APPOINTED AS THE ELECTION BOARD FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING THE PRIMARY ELECTION ON MARCH 24, 1981; AND IF NECESSARY THE GENERAL ELECTION ON MAY 19, 1981; LOUISE R, HONOR AS INSPECTOR; PATRICIA M, OLTMAN AND BERTHA G , ROGERS AS JUDGES; JANE K, VIELEHR AND BARBARA J . KINGSLEY AS CLERKS FOR THE PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22A/MARICOPA VOTING PRECINCT APACHE : AND THAT SHIRLEY ERICKSON AS INSPECTOR; RENETTA F, DEJOHN AND DOROTHY YAEKLE AS JUDGES : AND MARGARET D . CARLIN AND HAZEL D. SANDERS AS CLERKS, FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22B FOR SAID ELECTION, BE AND HEREBY ARE APPROVED, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT ROSALINE DEBNAM BE APPOINTED ALTERNATE FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22A/MARICOPA VOTING PRECINCT APACHE; AND BETTY J . KTT7MAN BE APPOINTED ALTERNATE FOR PINAL COUNTY VOTING PRECINCT 22B, PQACHF✓G O Rya- ` +` 2 M ,l,r`''Y!i- , + - �` O U .,,, ,.t},, y Z : �gR/ZONP amity o, C4pache 09unction ,.. February 12, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: City Manager aFROM: Director of Public Works i SUBJECT: Ordinance 38 - Options Ordinance 38 previously postponed offsite construction for individual single family construction only. Considering other construction, some organizations will not account for a large percentage of construction, however, commercial development will. Serious consideration has been given to the impact commercial development has on the community. New businesses will generate more traffic on our already crowded, inadequate roads and will put an additional burden on the taxpayers of this community in the form of street maintenance, traffic/pedestrian inconvenience, and admin- istrative overhead, if postponements are granted. Paving, curb, and sidewalk costs for a typical 100 foot, half-street oak section is estimated at less than 10 percent of a $100,000 project. Businessmen surely understand the benefits derived from offsite improvements, especially in the areas of property valuation and public safety. Small businessmen can create substantial traffic, safety, maintenance and administrative burdens on the taxpayers of this community. Also, due to the type of business and its location, special consideration may be given to environmental decisions and impact on existing develop- ment. This might result in inconsistant decisions that could subject the city to unnecessary legal actions, which again will put a burden on the community taxpayer. Approve, for ALgnnda 7 Date 4-<..... .. 4 �=- fi'rrs ('�_ '` J Item # n fi!1rt _/ �) 4li- gaccrt;,j r Ir �.1 r Ll "�.� e--t nl 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL Page 2 People call the city regularly to request paved roads and sidewalks, as the rural setting of the community changes to a more urban setting. The development of the last 10 years is only a fraction of the future development. To date, Ordinance 38 has been implemented with consistency to all .4061K applicants and has been a step forward toward providing long over- due improvements to the community and relief to the taxpayer. This department, in cooperation with other departments, has considered several options that included: establishing a minimum valuation, vehicle trip rates, maximum traffic volumes, development density, existing road conditions, review by committee, bonding, and construc- tion sequencing. Any or all of the above will be difficult to consis- tently enforce and will necessitate an additional burden on staff and the applicant, to prepare, receive, review, process, schedule, recommend, monitor and act on such postponement requests; due to the fact that each development, location and applicant will most likely have some individual uniqueness. Therefore, it is recommended that Ordinance 38, more particularly section 13-2-3-c be considered for amendment as attached. Should the council prefer to pursue another avenue of recourse, please advise. ORDINANCE NO. 51 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 13-2, APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, AND ORDINANCE 38 OF THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, BY MODIFYING SECTION 13-2-3-C, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, PROVIDING OR S PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES '"-'."" BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTIO ON ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS' SECTION I IN GENERAL SECTION 13-2-3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS 9/1'14114-71 ' C. Postponing Required Improvements. 1. The Director of Public Works may postpone the installation of the required offsite improvements for individual single family construction, prior to issuance of a building permit, provided that the applicant enters into an agreement to participate in an improvement district for the purpose of future street improvements 2. For application other than for individual single family construction, the installation of the required off- site improvements may be postponed by the Director of Public Works provided the applicant enters into an agreement to participate in an improvement district +► - �-- for the purpose of future street improvements Should the Director of Public Works deny a request for postponement of off-site improvements, the applicant may appeal the denial as follows• La Applicant shall submit a written letter to the Depart- Depart- ment of Public Works, asking that the City Council review the decision b The Director of Public Works may refer the matter to the Development Coordination Committee for review and recommendation c The Director of Public Works and Development Co- ordination Committee shall submit recommendations to the City Council for action SECTION II PENALTIES Any person found guilty of violating any provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not to exceed $300. or imprisonment, for a period of not to exceed three months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be a separate offense punishable as hereinbefore described SECTION III REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Any 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 IV 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 Common Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, this day of 1981 Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. City Attorney ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES A?Affik A")))1/4) V 7F (17 ITEM # MEETING OF 2- - MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: YFS NO ABSTAIN . COUNCILMAN SHANKS__ COUNCILMAN EIDQN COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN HILL r COUNCILMAN :AMIANO VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO ✓ MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED 1 r f TOTAL: ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES f 6 1 ` � ITEM # MEETING OF (1 ' I �' MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: J YFS NO ARSTAIcl COUNCILMAN DAMJ ANO COUNCILMAN DURESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON L t/ COUNCILMAN HILL .� COUNCILMAN SHANKS f VICE_—MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVO ' OPPOS ABSTAINED TOTAL: Yff• J ITEM NO , 3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Step 1 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZ.ONA, THAT THE READING OF ORDINANCE NO, 87 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY, WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED, (NOTE: This motion must have a unanimous vote to carry; if the vote is not unanimous, the clerk must read the ordinance in full . ) Step 2 CALL UPON THE CITY CLERK TO READ ORDINANCE NO, 87 BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, PE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR Step 3 AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 87, AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 13-2, APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, AND ORDINANCE 38 OF THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE, BY MODIFYING SECTION 13-2-3-C, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY BE, AND HEREBY IS, DECLARED, FOR APPROVAL (WITH EMERGENCY CLAUSE) ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES ITEM # MEETING OF '(� MOTION BY: : SECONDED BY: N f YFS NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN EIDSON COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN SHANKS VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN I UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: 7\\\ ITU NO , 4 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR. AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE 'UNCTION, ARIZONA, THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PERSONNEL AND LEGAL ADVICE BE HELD ON MARCH 4, 1981, AT 6 : 00 P. M. IN THE CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOF , 1PQACHF✓o o`` ;. 2 U r! gPizoNP (Oily o' C pache 09unction February 10, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: City Clerk FROM: Director of Public Works .4 SUBJECT: Minutes of Airport Meeting Attached is the original copy of the Minutes of the Airport Meeting of February 2, 1981. Please insert these into the Minutes book for the Commission. RWB/an attach. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 MINUTES OF MEETING AIRPORT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2, 1981 Meeting was called to order by Chairman, Dr D H Robinson, at 5 25 p m PRESENT Dr D. H. Robinson, Chairman Mr. John Forsberg, Vice Chairman Mr. John Drummond, Secretary Dr J H. Downs Mr. William Wright Mr. Richard Oltman Mr Richard Broman, Public Works Director Mr. Richard Bryant, City Engineer Mrs. Althea Nunn, Recording Secretary GUESTS Mr. Jim Harris, Consultant (Buell, Winter, Mousel and Associates) Ms. Priscilla Gardner, Invocation was given by Dr Downs. Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr John Forsberg. 1. Chairman asked if all members had read minutes of the last meeting. Mr Forsberg made a motion, seconded by Mr Drummond, to accept the minutes as presented Voted unanimously to accept minutes 2 Acceptance of Agenda Motion/seconded Mr Oltman, Mr Drummond. Voted unanimouslyagenda to accept p g as presented 3. Call to public given by Chairman, there was no one present that cared to address the Commission 4. Chairman welcomed Ms Gardner, asked if there was anything she would like to say. Ms Gardner responded "I am happy to be here, and would like to help in any way I can I'll be available " Chairman asked if she would be available for the meetings next week, Ms Gardner responded in the affirmative Chairman stated the Commission was glad to have her. ^ 5 Public Works Report given by Mr Broman He referred to various correspondence re• aviation gas availability R R Evans responded, came to the office and stated they will not be able to provide us with fuel, their allotments are such that they are already committed, he did give me the name of another contact, Chevron manufacturer. One of those letters is included in the packet Today I have continued along that line and wrote some additional letters to gas manufacturers In checking with the Department of energy, aviation gas is uncontrolled. I did talk with another in- dependent dealer, that was the first positive re- sponse I got that fuel could possibly be provided [_ The Council has not said definitely that we will have an airport, so there is a lot of unknown factors when talking with these people. I have tried to contact Tom VanSickle to talk with him about the Industrial Development of the air- port, he is out of town and is to return my call (Question from Chairman - who is Mr. VanSickle9) _ -2- He is the developer of the Scottsdale Airport - the Industrial portion. I wanted to see if he would be interested in pursuing that same type of thing for us here in the Apache Junction area. We don't want to get locked into any one thing, but I think it advisable to talk to some of these people, to see what they think is important in this area, what they would expect from the City, as far as what they would do, what the City would do. I think it is a good idea to get this input "up front" rather than wait until the last minute One of the things I am especially concerned with today, is that, being on the 5 year plan we have asked for a modification of that five year plan, and after this study is complete, the next segment is the land acquisition and possibly the engineering for the first stage of the development With the land development itself, we are going to have to come up with a good number of dollars, I don't think it is any too early to try to find out where that money is going to come from, whether its don- ations, whether we are going to have to go on a bond, or whether there are grants available Mr Wright indicated that he would get with me and we would pursue that. I don't know how active I can be on some of these things in the future, we have a Commission of several people here, and we have designated and delegated certain things for them to do Even though I would like to do everything in concert with every- body, I don't think I can. I think one of the reasons for the Commission is that the workload can be distributed throughout. Each one can carry his share of the work, and then bring back that information to the Commission, and the Commission can take appropriate action on it There may be times when I can't get actively involved and the Commissioners may have to take on that obligation of going out, making the telephone calls, writing the letters, compiling the report, coming up with a recommendation to the Commission. I would hope that with everybody's time getting tighter and tighter, possibly some of the advisory members could be used in that capacity to assist the Comm- es ission in preparing the information and getting it so that you can peruse it There were various comments made in reference to the type of gas operation that you might want to consider, but I think that is getting into too much detail for what we need right now, so I won't go into that. We made 300 extra brochures, I would recommend that we spread these out in Alpha Beta, Bayless, and some of the banks, some of the areas that there are a lot of people walking in and out of - in fact, would it be worthwhile for someone to stand and pass them out for an hour or so on the street? (Mr Forsberg will take and distribute) Agenda packets were ready Friday, we were holding them until we got the working paper Everyone was called, but everybody didn't pick up their packet, we were hoping that everyone would, so that they could review the working paper over the week-end, and respond at this meeting I don't know if there are suggestions on what you would like staff to do to get the agenda to everybody, I would appreciate your comments on that. -3- The other thing is that if a person cannot come, or is going to be late, he should call in and notify the staff. That might save the other Commissioners from waiting to see if there is a quorum For a majority of the people to miss out on the present- ations, I think they are losing a lot of valuable information to make decisions on in the future One last item is that you can submit that response to the review of the working paper and we will compile all those and send to the consultant so he can consider any changes and recommendations Further discussion was held about picking up packets, it was decided that staff will continue to call and remind members that their packets are ready 6. Chairman thanked Mr. Braman for doing all this work, writing all the letters, etc. Asked if we are "jumping the gun" as far as gas goes? 7 P W Director responded that he did not think so, to go thru a site selection, master plan study, buy the land, even build the facilities and then to find out there is no gas available, is an effort in futility I think we should check this right up in front. Even if we can't get a committment, we should get an indication Let's not wait until the llth hour 8 Chairman How do we get to maybe have one of the members do this? 9 P W Director We went over the duties of the Commission members at the last meeting. I think it is just a matter of maybe if someone isn't doing something, they can help one of the other commission members at this r time. LSome of these things should be coming from the Chair, and you should be giving the direction to the Commissioners as to what to do, then that information should be funneled back thru me I think we have to turn this thing around a little bit, in that I would like to get away from the recommending and directing type of thing, and leave that up to the Commission, that is your responsib- ility I should act as Counsellor, checking with you. 10 Mr Forsberg Maybe I could make a suggestion here. Maybe if on Monday you two could get together ahead of our meeting, an hour or so, and go over things, would that be beneficial? 11 P W Director I think that might be a good approach, we could sit down and go over the agenda, and decide who might be asked to do certain things. 12 Chairman Suggested that would be good, do it the Monday before the meeting, in other words, the last Monday of the month 13. Mr. 0ltman said he had a suggestion for an interested party to serve on the Advisory Committee to the Airport Commissioners, that being Monte Edwards, Kings Ranch -4- 14 Dr Downs He is an ATP (American Transport Pilot). I believe he works out of Los Angeles, not Phoenix. I don't know if he could attend the meetings, but if he has the time to do this, he would be a good person to have on the Advisory Committee. Discussion was held and it was decided to send Mr Edwards a letter of invitation to serve in this capacity 15. Chairman asked if there is any old business to be taken care of. There was none 16. Chairman we will now act on the new business. I think the only new business we should consider tonight is the public meeting, that is what we are all here for Jim (Jim Harris, Consultant) would you like to report on what you have planned? 17 Mr Jim Harris Thank you for inviting me out tonight to review Consultant the third working paper, which, as we talked about last time, is concerned with the site Has everyone had a chance to review it? We have a week until the next scheduled meeting We will have another review of this particular working paper next Monday. (Discussion was held re• flying over the sites and setting another meeting for next Monday at 5 p m (February 9th).) This working paper is not lengthy, but is taking from a stage of anaylsis of the site of the L airport to a potential of eight sites, and gone thru a matrix formation on engineering and environmental factors to do a preliminary site screening. Under the engineering factors, there are several things taken into account, they are self explanatory Each of these things are looked at in a general sense. That is true of envir- onmental factors. We took a rating, on page 8, and they range from 0 being unacceptable to 10 being best There is little narrative behind each one We then went thru a description of / 1 each site. Page 13 goes thru the matrix evaluation You can see how each site relates. If you feel we have misjudged one of these sites, make note of it, let us know The total of the engineering factors finds site F had the most points, site C and H tied for second, and then site B Again, we did use all eight sites Environmentally, Site F was the highest, site H the second highest, site C the third, site B the fourth, etc. Conclusion we will look at the four candidate sites, and further development of those site analysis We will continue on with reviewing those sites, development costs, noise contours, and then to FAA for their evaluation After public input, that, plus your input will be used in generating the final site selection. I can't emphasize any more than Rich did that the Commission must get out and push for the Airport especially for the public meeting We will present -5- some slides, present the information, and all the 1 data up to date leading up to the 4 candidate sites, and will let the public respond. We will keep it concise and to the point 18 P W. Director In response to the working paper, there are a few comments I had that have been forwarded to Jim in letter form. (Discussed contents of letter ) 19. Chairman Thank you for the presentation, Jim. OIN We will plan to see you again next Monday 20. Discussion re• flying over the sites Members will plan this among themselves. 21 Chairman Any requests of the Commission? If none, we will close the meeting. 22. Adjourned Motion/seconded Mr Drummond, Mr Forsberg to adjourn meeting at 6.22 p.m. Unanimously approved. Respectfully submitted, D,„,,,,,,,,„,„Q 2._ n Drummond, Secretary Approved, G�e � (✓ un C2LC.° Dr. . H- obinson, Chairman MINUTES OF MEETING AIRPORT COMMISSION JANUARY 5,1981 Meeting was called to order by Chairman, Dr D H Robinson, at 5 00 p m PRESENT Dr D H Robinson, Chairman aim likk Mr. John Forsberg, Vice Chairman Mr John Drummond, Secretary Dr J H Downs Mr William Wright Mr. Richard Oltman Mr Richard Broman, Public Works Director Mrs Althea Nunn, Recording Secretary Invocation was given by Mr. William Wright. Pledge of allegiance was led by Mr John Drummond 1. Acceptance of Agenda Motion made by Mr. Wright to accept agenda as presented, seconded by Mr Drummond Commission voted unanim- ously to accept agenda as presented 2. Minutes of the Meeting Mr. Wright made a motion to accept the minutes of December 1, 1980, as presented Motion was seconded by Mr. Drummond. Commission voted unanimously to accept minutes as presented 3. Chairman Asked Mr. Broman if he had anything he would like to report to the Comm- ission. Mr Broman advised Commission that the City had extended an invitation to the State Transportation Board to hold their March 18th meeting in the City Complex He also reminded Commission to check with Superstition Mountain Elementary School to reserve the date of the public meeting. 4 Chairman Thanked John Forsberg for representing the Commission at the City Council meeting of December 17th re: change in membership Discussion was then held about withdrawing the Commission's request from the agenda Motion was made by Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr Forsberg to withdraw the request to change the number of Commission member- ship from the City council agenda of January 7, 1981 Motion passed unanimously by the Commission 5. Discussion held re inviting other persons to assist the Commission in an Advisory Capacity. Mr Broman stated the Commission could involve other persons through this method. The following names were agreed upon by the Commission as persons they would like invited to attend the Commission meetings in an Advisory capacity: Mr James Craig, Mr Tom Kollenborn, Mr George Johnston, Mr Jack Womack, Ms Priscilla Gardner. Letters will be sent thru the Public Works Director inviting these persons to serve in the Advisory capacity 6 Chairman turned the meeting over to Mr Harris, of the consulting firm of Buell, Winter, -2- Mousel and Associates for a report. Mr. Harris stated the consulting firms of Buell Winter, Piousel and Associates and Coffman Associates, have eliminated certain sites from serious consideration for an airport due to problems, specifically: e ;a: A & D - Conflict wiht Williams Air Force Base A E - no Access to the airport, and high / , tension lines. G - Air space problems and line problems. This leaves B, C, F, and H A final evaluation is being worked on. A matrix will be furnished and will be presented to the Commission at the next meeting of February 2, 1981, along with a preliminary site anaylysis Mr Harris suggests the Commission then fly over to observe the sites, and the consultants will then return to a special meeting on February 9th to review and receive comments from the Commission on the sites. He suggested the public meeting (for public informational purposes only) be held February 12, 1981. Mr. Harris commented the State is supportive of an airport in Apache Junction, as there is an airport availability problem in the State. Many aviation groups are looking for airport accommodations. 7 Commission reviewed duties of members, in accord- ance with the organizational chart of the LAirport Commission. 8 Mr Drummond suggested each member of the Commission contact the Transportation Board. The Chairman requested that all letters be reviewed by the Public Works Director and Chairman before being mailed 9. Mr. Broman stated the Advisory members will be invirS to the Public meeting to be held February 12, 1981. 10. Meeting adjourned Motion was made by Mr Forsberg, seconded by Mr Wright, to adjourn the meeting at 6:27 p.m. . Respectfully Suted Jo�rty Drummond, Sec APPRO E Dr. . H Robinson, Chmn 0ACHF '44RizoN1)% cOity o f C4pache 2unction February 3, 1981 .•. MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER FROM: j09¢1 JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING 1CHUCK NEWCOMER, ACTING EXECUTIVE SECRETARY C° TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: "MINUTES" FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached are copies of the approved "Minutes" from the meeting of the Board of Adjustment of January 5, 1981. If you have any questions on these "Minutes" please direct them to the Ink Acting Executive Secretary. Please enter the original "Minutes" into the official MINUTES BOOK. CRN/kmc 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 (--- p1/4?AC,i-is✓ Fr S. 4,9/zONP Vitt' o, ' C pache &unction February 3, 1981 Amok MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER - FROM: j;.5S31 JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING } CHUCK NEWCOMER, ACTING EXECUTIVE SECRETARY CP TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: "MINUTES" FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached are copies of the approved "Minutes" from the meeting of the Board of Adjustment of January 5, 1981. If you have any questions on these "Minutes" please direct them to the Acting Executive Secretary. Please enter the original "Minutes" into the official MINUTES BOOK. 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 JANUARY 5, 1981 7 00 P M In Attendance Absent Guests Don Nesser, Vice Chairman Joe Jessamine Larry Ehler Pete Nunn (business) Mrs. Ehler Bill Furness Jimmy Wynn Harvey Morrison Mrs Wynn Bill Vaughn Jackie C. LeCount Jackie LeCount, Secretary Richard W. LeCount Chuck Newcomer, Acting Executive Secretary 1. Vice Chairman chaired the meeting in the absence of Mr Jessamine opened the meeting at 7.00 P.M. and asked the Executive Secretary to 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 next item was the'Minutes'dated December 1, 1980 He then asked if there was any discussion 4 Mr Vaughn made a suggestion that they defer the'Minutes" until after agenda item #4 and discuss the "Minutes" then, because there were some changes on it 5. Chairman stated if there were no objections, they could hold the discussion on the "Minutes" until after the public hearings There were no objections • 6 Chairman announced that the next item on the agenda was the continuation of BA-18-80, application of Jimmy Wynn 7 Mr. Newcomer said that the Wynn's should arrive very shortly 8 Chairman suggested they y go on to the next case and come back to BA-22-80 when Mr. Wygn arrives asked the Executive Secretary to brief the members on case BA-22-80 (Ehler) 9. Mr Newcomer stated that Mr Ehler has applied for a permit to allow a travel trailer to be used as a dwelling unit for a security guard on his property located on S. Coconino Drive and W 22nd Avenue, which is right off Idaho Road, just a little bit north of Southern He added that the whole area is zoned CB-2 all around it His lot is approximately 160' X 60' and in CB-2 regulations there are no provisions for using anything but a conventionally- built structure as a dwelling unit Page 2 - Board of Adjustment minutes of January 5, 1981 10. Chairman asked the applicant to step forward and remain at the podium so that the members may ask him any questions 11. Mr. Ehler stated his name and address and said that he bought the property to use as a travel �•; .s., trailer and used travel trailer sales lot Eventually, he stated, he was going to build a building for light manufacturing of wrought iron railings and structures and a leasing situation He said he did not know that at the time he bought the property that he couldn't use the travel trailer for an office or couldn't have a security guard. He further stated that he has his septic tank and water in. He explained that only one employee would live in the trailer and that it was a 40' double tip-out He asked if the trailer that he had on display could be hooked up to show that the plumbing worked. In the future, he stated, a building would be erected for the manufacturing part He explained he was told that if he built a building, he could put an apartment in it, and let the people live in it or put up a ..» .Fs .., »:.. pre-fab. "I have the trailer, "he stated," but it is against your code to have someone live in it". 12. Chairman asked if after he built the permanent build- ing, was he still going to retain the trailer for an office. 13. Mr Ehler said he would then move the office into the permanent building 14 Chairman asked the members if they had any questions 15. Mr Vaughn questioned Mr. Ehler on his statement of hooking up more trailers beside the one in question 16 Mr Ehler explained that there would be nobody living • in them but if he had wanted to sell a trailer he may want to show them that the water system was in working order - �^�-°� --- 17. Mr Vaughn asked how many other trailers he was talking about. 18 Mr Ehler said that it depended There are so many people going for these longer trailers, the 40' tip-outs, that there are a lot of smaller travel trailers that can be bouoht That is what I was going to go into I would probably have a display, but it is only the one trailer that I want for a security guard. 19. Mr Nunn stated that they should only be concerned with the one that is going to be used for the security guard? 20 Mr Ehler replied "Thats right". The others would be trailers I would buy and have for sale. 21 Mr. Furness asked if the sanitary facilities were already in Page 3 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of January 5, 1981 22 Mr Ehler replied "Yes" 23. Mr Vaughn questioned whether there was a kitchen in the travel trailer he has now and a complete bath ~•--- = as PIN24. Mr Ehler replied. "Yes There is a full bedroom. The front room will be the office and the back will be the bedroom for the security guard" 25 Mr Morrison asked if the trailer he was Going to have there was also going to be used as a demonstrator. 26 Mr Ehler answered "If I could leave it there, it would stay We have a 17' X 38' awning for it, and I would keep it as an office and see how soon I could build that building" S 27. Mr Morrison stated that he could show that trailer if someone was interested 28 Mr Ehler answered that if someone was interested, he would sell it for the right price 29 Mr Vaughn asked Mr Newcomer if Mr Ehler sold the trailer that he now had and replaced it with another, if he would have to keep comma back to the Board evertyime he sold one of them. 30. Mr Newcomer answered that if he sold that live-in trailer, he would have to come back before the Board L to replace that trailer but as far as other travel trailer sales on the lot were concerned, CB-2 does allow for that 31 Chairman stated that it would fall on the Board of Health as to how many trailers he might hook up to a single septic tank 32 Mr Newcomer said the one's for display couldn't be hooked up to sanitary facilities 33. Mr. Ehler stated that if someone was really interested, he could move it and hook it up and demonstrate • it. 34 Mr Furness asked if Mr Ehler had to come back every nine months and if this was going to be a temporary permit. 35. Mr. Newcomer said it was the only provision in the Zoning Ordinance If the Board wanted him to set it up on a nine month basis, that would be their decision 36 Chairman called for additional comments. 37 Furness/Nunn M/S "Be IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment ( the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, Hereby granting a temporary and revocable permit for a period not to exceed nine (9) months, to Mr and Mrs Lawrence E Ehler, to use a travel trailer as a dwelling for a security guard on their property located at Lots 326 and 327, Superstition Villa Subdivision, in Apache Junction, Arizona Page 4 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of January 5, 1981 The granting of this permit is subject to the following conditions. 1 Setbacks shown on the drawing submitted with the application shall be the minimum setbacks for the temporary dwellis 2. All other applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with 3 All applicable provisions of the City Building Code shall be complied with 4 All applicable regulations of other agencies having jurisdiction shall be complied with " • 38 Mr Newcomer stated that in the motion there was no provision for a procedure for renewing the permit 39. Mr Vaughn said that what is usually done if there are no complaints is that the Board automatically goes ahead with the permit The City notifies you of the renewal date 40. Mr. Furness asked: "How long is temporary?" 41 Mr Newcomer answered "Up to the nine (9) months " 42 Mr Furness asked why would we have to extend the permit even before he had the first one 43. Mr Vaughn asked "What would the procedure in nine (9) months be?" 44. Chairman stated that they had said "all applicable provisions in the City Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with". He added that one of the paragraphs of concern in the Zoning Ordinance did specifically specify a maximum of nine (9) months 45 Mr Vaughn stated that he thouaht the question was as to how he was to apply again. He added "It's not an automatic thing. In nine (9) months his permit will run out unless we specify that he can renew the permit aaain " 46 Mr Newcomer replied that it would otherwise require a whole new variance application, hearing notification and so forth, which is one way it could be handled 47 Mr Nunn suggested they leave it as it is, and see how it goes for the first nine (9) months and have him re-apply again in nine (9) months at which time they would reconsider it again 48 Mr Furness addressed the Chairman and said that the motion read "this permit shall be issued for a period of not more than nine (9) months", and mentioning December 2, 1980 49 Chairman said "No, this is January 5th". 50. Mr Furness answered, "well, whatever the applicable date would be " 51 Furness/Nunn motion was amended to include Pane 5 - Board of Adjustment Meeting of January 5, 1981 "At the end of this period, the applicant must appear before the Board to request a arantino of a new permit if the applicant desires to continue usino the second mobile home as a dwelling " 52 Chairman stated that it was not a second mobile home He then asked if that had answered the question. 53. Mr. Vauahn said that it still did not tell him how this gentlemen has to come back in nine (9) months and apply for a permit He added I don't think it is fair to have him no throuah the whole procedure again He has already gotten the signatures and everythino " 54 Mr Furness said it doesn't say he has to come in and ask for a whole new variance 55 Mr Vaughn answered "he does, unless we specify otherwise." 56. Mr. Furness stated that what they were doing was readino the motion. 57 Mr Newcomer said he would just have to appear before the Board and put it on the agenda and discuss it By doing that, it would prevent him from havino to no through the complicated variance procedure 58 Furness/Nunn M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of adjustment 7—the City of Apache Junction, Arizona Hereby grantinn a temporary and revocable permit for a period not to exceed nine (9) months, to Mr and Mrs. Lawrence E Ehler to use a travel trailer as a dwelling for a security guard on their property located at Lots 326 and 327, Superstition Villa subdivision, in Ppach Junction, Arizona At the end of this neriod, the applicant must appear before the Board to reouest a granting of a new permit if the applicant desire to continue using the mobile home as a dwellino The arantino of this permit is subject to the following conditions 1 Setbacks shown on the drawing submitted with the application shall be the minimum setbacks for a temporary dwelling. 2 All other applicable provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with 3 All applicable provisions of the City Buildina Code shall be complied with 4. All applicable regulations of other agencies having jurisdiction shall be complied with." The motion passed 5-0 59. Chairman announced that the next item would be the public hearing on the continuation of BA-18-80 (Wynn). asked the Executive Secretary if the legal opinion concerning this case was forwarded to the applicant 60. Mr. Newcomer replied "No, the opinion was not forwarded to the applicant I had discussed it with him and gave them a letter concernino the matter." Page 6 - Board of Adjustment Meeting of January 5, 1981 61 Chairman asked the applicant to step forward. 62 Mr Wynn stated his name and address 63. Chairman asked the Executive Secretary to explain what had gone on before and what is goina on now 64 Mr Newcomer stated that at the time of the last hearing there was the question brought up concerning" legal ownership of the property, and the propriety of the Board hearing a case which was brought before the Board by the applicant who apparently was not the property owner. He added: "shortly after the last hearing, I contacted the City attorney and got a written opinion from the attorney concerning this, and I will now summarize the opinion Basically, I asked the City attorney what were the proper procedures that the Board of Adjustment should follow when it shows on the Pinal County records a different property owner than the applicant for the variance The answer, in summarizing this opinion, was taken from Section 2501 of the City Zoning Ordinance which provides that "application for any permissable variance of regulations provided herein shall be made by the owner or his �; •_; •r representative to the Board of Adjustment in the form of a written application for a permit " "The City attorney suggests that Mr and Mrs. Wynn be given the opportunity to document any kind of ownership that they have in the oiece of property in question and if it is determined the Wynn's are not the owners or agents of the owners, the Board should, on the basis of Section 2501, refuse to hear the case for lack of jurisdiction " He added that he did check with the Pinal County Recorder's office and there is a Universal Equity's Corporation shown as the buyer from a David C Hvidsten /^ 65. Chairman asked Mr Wynn if he understood the problem in this case 66. Mr Wynn answered• "Yes sir" 67 Chairman asked Mr Wynn if he could give any other further explanation He also asked Mr. Wynn if he had any document- ation of ownership 68 Mr Wynn replied "This thing is going to be proven out in about two to four weeks as to who owns that property " He said there was a lot of hassle involved in the case "David Hvidsten's case is like a sieve. It wouldn't hold water, but there are legal ways of getting it carried out He hoped to have this done within the next three days " Page 7 - Board of Adjustment Meeting of January 5, 1981 Mr Wynn said that Mr Hvidsten came about getting the property back in his name under false pretenses He was dealino with a person who was neither a president or on the Board of the Corporation He explained that Mr. Hvidsten was a one-sixth owner at that time "The case was brought to court and we won the first round of it, but it is still not completely settled yet " He added that Mr Hvidsten was a man of enough means to hire a lawyer to come and sit at one of these meetings and pay him Mr Wynn said he could not afford to do that. 69 Chairman opened the meeting to any questions from the Board He also asked if there was anyone else in the room who wished to speak 70 Mr Vaughn asked if it was correct that the City attorney said that the Board should dive Mr and Mrs Wynn a chance to prove ownership 71 Mr Newcomer answered "By this hearing, otherwise we will be running into troubles with the public hearino laws, which would require another continuation That would mean we would have to qo back and notify all the property owners again " 72 Mr Vaughn asked what would happen if the Board postponed it one more time 73. Mr. Newcomer said it would have to be treated as a new application and notices would have to be posted again All certified letters would have to go out to the property owners again 74 Mr Furness asked Mr Newcomer if they had any choice one way or the other concerning this case He said if ownership has not been proven to our satisfaction, one way or the other and until the court settles on it, could we act on it? 75 Mr Newcomer asnwered "No". 76 Mr. Nunn asked Mr Newcomer if this matter could be set up to a vote so that if he does prove ownership, :.. ww., it could come back to the Board without Mr. Wynn having to pay any more fees again 77. Mr Newcomer explained that the problem would be that the City would have to incur an expense of over $100 00 to re-post the hearing which was the purpose of the application fee to begin with 78 Chairman stated that �f the Board had known full, in the beginning, the question of ownership, the Board would have automatically refused to hear the case. i He asked Mr Newcomer if Mr Wynn could withdraw his original application until the matter of ownership was settled Page 8 - Board of Adjustment Meeting of January 5, 1981 79. Mr. Newcomer answered that another problem they would run into would be that if this were to take six (6) to eight (8) months, there is still the mobile home placed illeaally on the property as long as the Board holds something in suspense and continuance There can be nothing done even if it took two (2) to three (3) years. The Board never made any action twomN do something with the case. 80. Mr. Furness pointed out that regardless of what decisions the Board wanted to make on this case, they have no right to make any decisions or even to hear the case 81 Chairman replied. "That is why I brought up that question Mr Newcomer explained it to me very well " "We have a situation where the Building Dept. has put a cease and desist order on it However, that is being held up until we reach a decision He explained that the Board had several options They could try to hold this in abeyance until the one question was resolved If they refused the application, then they would be subjecting the applicant to the whole reprocess 82 Mr Furness stated that it may be true, but they are supposed to know who owns the property before they come in here He said the Board should have been given direct Linformation 83 Mr Morrison said that they would have to wait on what the court said and they could hardly ask the Wynn's to pay again if the Board couldn't do anything about it. 84. Mr. Newcomer said that the advise of the attorney was not to wait to decide what the court does, but was/iL just to give the Wynn's a chance to show if tM have a document at this time to show they are the property owners 85 Mr Vaughn stated that they could sit and haggle this case all night long but his opinion was that if in thirty days Mr Wynn wins this case, he did not think the Wynn's have to pay $65 00 and oo through this whole thing again 86. Mr Newcomer asked if he may interject again that the legal problems involved in this case is that the Board cannot do anything with this application one way or the other. It is not legally entitled to act upon an application which is incomplete or inacurrate, By holding it up, it would be acting as if it was a proper application, which it isn't 87 Mr Vaughn asked. "If Mr. Wynn were to prove ownership tonight we could have heard the case, Is that correct?" page 9 - Board of Adjustment Minutes of January 5, 1981 88 Mr Newcomer replied "Yes then the Board could have acted on it. There would have been an application in-hand to proceed on. As it is, there is no application in-hand that the Board can act on." 89. Mr Vaughn asked if they could hold the application since they held it from October 17, 1980 90 Furness/Nunn M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment Br the City of Apache Junction, Arizona• Hereby refusina to hear the case of BA-18-80, an application for a temporary use permit sub- mitted by Mr Jimmy E. Wynn and Mrs Glenda M Wynn for Lots 21, 22, and 23 Parkway Plaza, according to Book 13 of Maps, Page 15, records of Pinal County, Arizona, located in Apache Junction, Arizona. The Board bases its decision on the provisions of Section 2501 of the City Zoning Ordinance which state that, "Application for any permissible variance of regulations, as provided herein, shall be made by the owner or his representative to the Board of Adjustment, in the form of a written application for a permit " The motion passed 5-0. 91 Chairman asked if there was any other business besides the "Minutes". 92 Mr Vaughn said that while he was in the office, he mentioned to Jackie that there were quite a few changes He added that it had to do with clarification He did not abstain from voting He voted present and added that you cannot abstain on the Board of Adjustment 93 Mr Newcomer stated that line number 112 should be amended to read that Mr Vaughn voted "present " ^ 94 Chairman said he did not know where the 3-1-1 vote came from because he did not vote against that 95 Mr. Vaughn replied that it was Mr Furness who voted "no" on that and not Mr. Nesser 96. Vaughn/Furness "BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment, City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the "Minutes" of December 1, 1980, be accepted as amended Motion passed 4-0 with Mr Nunn voting "present" 97 Chairman asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting 98. Furness/Vaughn M/S to adjourn the meeting The motion passed 5-0. yunc lO - Board of Adjustment Minutes or January 5, 1981 gg Chairman Adjourned the meeting at 7 45 P M Respectfully submitted, Charles Acting Executive Secretary Approved' "flifrwan / | � / / ' N / � � � � � � � � � � | � ! | � � � � � / � / / r„NcHF,„„„, ✓ Ui Fs .Z K'*=- /3.-:-;:' 4P/ZOO' COity o &4rache &9unctian February 11, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER FROM: .J--'v)-JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR YOUR INFORMATION Attached you will find copies of the approved "Minutes" from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of January 13, 1981. Please have the original "Minutes" entered into the official MINUTES BOOK. — If you have any questions regarding these "Minutes" , please direct them to the Director of Planning. JWG/kmc 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 JANUARY 13, 1981 7:00 P.M. In Attendance Absent George Baljo, Chairman Roy Hudson (illness) Ilene Taylor, Vice Chairman Richard Oltman (business) Ron Kell John Hutchens (business) Henry Steelsmith Sim Strickler Mildred Baker Joe Gero, Executive Secretary Kathy Connelly, Secretary Guests Senator Stan Turley Mayor Virginia Seeman Councilman Shanks Councilman Damiano County Supervisor, Jimmy Karam Larry Stewart, Consolidated Water Lloyd Wetten, Desert Sage Water Harold Christ, Mesa Del Oro Linda Stowell, Arizona Republic Chuck Newcomer, Associate Planner Keith H. Stachar Nancy Braudrick Erich Kuntze Connie Schmitt Richard Broman R E Behnke Chris Ochs Robert L Hare, Arizona Water Christopher Ochs. Jr. Don Nesser William Vaughn L Donald M. Gilbert Jim W Hardin V B Irvine Wendell Clarke Darrell Truitt David F. Alexander Butch and Cindy Smyers Keith and Barbara Bullock Robert Shanks Clifford Kolasinski Chuck and Cher Jastyemski Sarah and Henry Noetzel Barbara J. Grgurich Lloyd Hughes Clay Worst Eunice Hughes Dick Bryant Betty and Dave Workman Phillip Rundstrom Ron Nybo Dwight and Norma Ellinger Larry and Sharon Laswell David Fjeldahl Robert Lahr Bob Lake 1 Chairman opened the meeting at 7.06 P.M. and requested the Executive Secretary call the roll 2 Mr Gero called the roll and determined the members present as indicated above. 3. Chairman announced that a quorum was present and that the first matter of consideration would be the "Minutes" from the meeting of December 9, 1981 4 Steelsmith/Strickler M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning tiimission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the "Minutes" of the meeting of December 9, 1980, be approved as written " The motion passed 6-0 5 Chairman announced that the next item was the rezoning application as submitted by David Workman He requested that Mr Gero brief the members Page 2 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of December 9, 1980 6. Mr Gero explained that case PZ-23-80 was the application of David and Stephen Workman to rezone their parcel of land from General Rural (GR) to Multiple Residence (CR-5) The land was located on Winchester Road, just north of Southern Avenue. He pointed out the location of the property and explained that the surrounding area to the west was zoned GR and to the east was zoned CR-5. He pointed out that the Commission members had before them a letter from the Palm Springs Water Co pointing out that they were not obligated to nor capable of providing sufficient fire flow to such a project. He added that the property to the east of Winchester was already zoned CR-5 for a depth of 5 lots He asked the Commission to consider the question of where to make a distinction between multiple and single family residence zones and added that if such a rezoning was permitted for the westerly side of Winchester then how could another such application be denied He added that the only hydrants were 3 on Royal Palm Blvd & that a mobile home had been destroyed by fire the year before because there had not been enough water available to fight the fire 7 Chairman called on the applicant to present his case. 8 Mr Workman explained that he was interested in developing a mod- erate density of apartments on the property and that L they would be constructed as totally individual units, connected only by carports and patios He further explained that he had been looking for land for such a project for some time and that there had been none available that was zoned for apartments. The other lots that had been available would have had to been purchased on a piecemeal basis He added that he understood the water problem but had the understanding that a public hearing was going to be held the following week on a proposed rate increa" by Palm Springs Water Co that would permit service tu be improved. 9 Ilene Taylor asked how many units were planned and how it would be developed since there were 2 property owners involved. 10 Mr Workman explained that the land would be developed 1; acre at a time over a period of four years and that the units would be 8 one-bedroom units and 8 two-bedroom units. These would all be one-story units 11 Chairman asked Mr Workman if he had considered a Planned Development application. 12 Mr Workman stated that the Planned Development process had been explained to him, but since his application was al- ready in process, he did not want to spend the addi- tional money and time to make the changes. He added that he preferred to be aware of the feelings of the Commission before he spent the additional money that was required to complete the application for a Planned Development 13 Chairman asked if it would be necessary to file another appli- cation if Mr. Workman decided to go to a Planned Development Page 3 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 14 Mr Gero explained that since Mr. Workman would be going from a broad classification to a stricter clas- sification, there would be no need for another application. However, there would have to be a motion to continue the public hearing to allow for the revisions to be made 15 Mr Workman explained that he was willing to take a reduction in density since he had no desire to build apart- ments up to the allowable density in the first place 16 Chairman asked if these would be rental units 17. Mr Workman explained that he was setting up the project for his son as an investment and that the units would be built along the lines of a condominium so that they could be sold as such at a later date if so desired 18 Chairman asked if he would accept a Planned Development 19 Mr Workman explained that he would have no objection to a reduction in density. 20. Mr Steelsmith stated that he was concerned about the water. 21 Mr Gero called their attention to the letter from Palm Springs Water Co He added that he understood that their proposed rate hike would serve to improve the existing service and not to increase it. 22. Mr. Steelsmith stated that they should consider the water problem and the possible costs involved even before making a motion on a Planned Development 23 Mr Gero suggested that the Commission consider the situation carefully because there were added costs in a Plan- ned Development 24 Mr Kell pointed out that the water company was concerned with the 500 to 1500 apartments that might be in the area in the future, but that they should only be concerned with the 64 that were now proposed 25 Mr. Gero pointed out that they had to consider the potential involved of the lots already zoned CR-5 He reminded them that transition was also an issue here and sug- gested that they hear from the audience. 26. Mr Kell suggested that the water company might make improve- ments over the years that could handle the growth 27 Mr Gero explained that the rate increase was not assured. 28. Chairman pointed out that with a Planned Development they would be aware of the number of units involved 29 Mr Stewart explained that he was the manager of Palm Springs Water Co. and that they were now facing a crisis since the existing system had not been upgraded over the past 30 years He pointed out that they were not required to meet any fire flow requirement under their certification He added that the requested increase would not add to the existing system, but would serve to improve it Page 4 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 30 Chairman asked if there was anyone present who would like to speak for or against the application 31 Mr Lloyd Hughes stated that he represented other land owners in the area and that he wanted to know if construction in the area was at a standstill so that he could tell them. 32 Mr. Nybo explained that he owned the triplexes in the area and that he was concerned that an additional 600 available units would saturate the area and if the Workman application was approved, it would set a precedent for other such cases 33 Mr Laswell explained that he owned the property adjacent to the parcel and that the apartments would be in his driveway. He added that he was the owner of the trailer that had been destroyed the year before and that the entire thing had burnt in 7 minutes because there was not enough water available 34 Mr Kuntze explained that he lived adjacent to the parcel and that he would like the application denied for the following reasons• 1) the City should develop the existing CR-5 zoned ,.., areas before rezoning others 2) no actual need for apartments had been shown. 3) other lots already zoned CR-5 were available 4) the additional taxes did not make a valid reason 5) the City should discourage the crossing of Winchester to avoid a "domino effect". L 6) the increased traffic would hamper the safety and security of the residents already there 7) to deny the request would not impose a hardship since the land could be developed other ways 8) the plans for the units did not provide areas for parking, storage or recreation 35 Mr Ellinger explained that he had moved to the area because he like the openess and that there were already enough . apartments on the west side of Winchester 36. Chairman called on the applicant for his comments 37 Mr Workman repeated that he was agreeable to anything and that he was willing to work on the project 38 Chairman replied that one of the best fire retardants was air space and that separate units were helpful in this area He pointed out that the density of the septic tanks were also a question to be answered 39. Mr Workman explained that he would be the first one to hear the complaints about the septic system 40 Chairman explained that a future problem could be the amount of waste in the soil because of high density. 41 Mr Workman said that the Planned Development was acceptable, but that he first preferred to see some assurances from the Commission before he proceeded 42 Mr Gero explained that they could not make an official comment on that until the plans were seen Page 5 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 43 Chairman suggested that they take a straw vote on the issue. 44 Mr Kell suggested that they ask the realtors in the audience if there actually was a need for apartments 45. Mr Workman explained that by going to apartments and condominiums, the travel-trailer residents would be increasing the tax base for the City and be even better accepted by the community as tax-paying residents 46 Mr Strickler asked what percent of the residents in the area disapproved of the rezoning since there seemed to be so many against it. 47 Mr. Gero reminded the Commission that only 51% of the owners and property area had to agree to the rezoning 48 Mrs Taylor asked if the apartments would be for senior citizens 49. Mr. Workman said that they had not fully developed any ideas 50 Councilman Shanks asked what the rights of the people in opposition to the rezoning were. 51 Mr Gero pointed out that if 20% of the property owners objected, the Council would have to have a unanimous vote to approve the application. 52 Mr Workman asked if the 20% would include the existing CR-5 zones 53. Mr. Gero stated that he would reserve the right to consult with the City Attorney on Section 2807 of the Zoning Ordinance before he could answer the question 54. Chairman called for a straw vote on the changing of the appli- cation to a Planned Development The vote was tied 3-3. Amok 55 Chairman called for any rebuttal. 56. Mr. Nybo stated that he was confused since the applicant had said that he wanted both apartments and condominiums He added that Mr Workman could also change his mind and sell the property to a large developer. 57 Mr Hughes explained that the applicant had purchased the extra 21/2 acres to meet the signature requirements because he wanted the project for himself 58. Mrs. Laswell explained that she was at home every day and that she was concerned over the safety and traffic problem that would be created, especially for the children 59. Mr. Kuntze stated that even with the Planned Development he was opposed to the rezoning because of the density He did not like the piecemeal idea of developing the property He added that if the other property owned by Workman was excluded, then the percentage of the people opposed to the idea would be higher 60. Mr Gero pointed out that there would have to be a formal motion to continue the hearing if the Commission so desired. Page 6 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 61 Steelsmith/Taylor M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning tThhiission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the public hearing on case PZ-23-80 be continued until the meeting of February 10, 1981, at 7 00 P M at this same location." The motion passed 6-0 62. Chairman announced that the next agenda item was case PZ-22-80 63 Mr Gero explained that the sub-committee members had not had time to meet on the various definitions and that the item would have to be continued until a later meeting 64 Steelsmith/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that case PZ-22-80 be withdrawn to allow the staff to prepare a recommendation to return at a later date " The motion passed 6-0 65. Chairman announced that Commission member Ron Kell would be presiding as Chairman for the next portion of the meeting. 66. Mr. Kell explained why he had requested that Senator Turley speak before the Commission tonight and introduced the Senator to the audience. 67. Senator Turley gave the history of the Groundwater Legislation and the background of the State's water problems. After speaking on the legislation and proposed amendments to it, he answered questions from the audience 68 Mr Kell thanked the Senator for coming and for answering the questions that had previously gone unanswered 69 Chairman called a 5-minute recess at 9 45 P.M. and called the meeting back to order at 9.50 P M He announced that the next item on the agenda was r the hearing requested by the Mayor and Council to obtain public opinion on changing the street names of Superstition Blvd. and Lost Dutchman Blvd 70 Mr Gero stated that he had received a card in the mail from a Mr. and Mrs. Melder stating that they favored a street name of University Drive He pointed out that the City had no official position on the proposal at this point 71 Mr Kolasinski stated that he did not want any name changes because of the problems involved in changing the address with the banks, motor vehicle and so forth. He added that he had been through the same thing before and that it had taken months to have everything changed He pointed out that the names had already been changed 3 times. 72 Mrs Taylor asked what his neighbors thought of the changes. 73 Mr. Kolasinski replied that he didn't know because he hardly ever saw his neighbors because of the hours he worked 74 Mrs Taylor asked why the Street Name Committee had not considered this change Page 7 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 75. Mr. Gero explained that the Council had discovered the situ- ation with the names after the committee had completed their work 76. Councilman Damiano asked why other people living along these streets were not present 77 Mr. Gero pointed out that there had been press releases in the local papers announcing the meeting 78 Mr. Steelsmith stated that the names should be left as they were because of the local color they provided 79 Mr. Stachar pointed out that he owned property along Superstition Blvd and that he preferred that they stay the same 80 Mr Strickler agreed with Mr Stachar 81. Steelsmith/Baker M/S "BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning CCommission of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, that the names of Superstition Blvd and Lost Dutch- man Blvd remain the same " The motion passed 6-0 82. Mr Gero added that he had one more item to be considered that involved the name of Apache Trail He pointed out that there was a lot of confusion with the name because the Trail was in both Pinal and Maricopa Co He showed the Commission how the name changed from E Apache Trail in Maricopa Co. to West Apache Trail in Apache Junction and then again to East Apache Trail when it turned north The local Post Master had suggested that the northerly section of the Trail be changed to North Apache Trail so as to avoid confusion He pointed out that the Highway Department had no objection to this 83 Mr Strickler speaking as a former postal employee, agreed that the different designations made things confusing /^ 84 Mr Gero suggested that they make the motion a part of the previous motion • 85 Steelsmith/Baker agreed that the changing of the designation from E. Apache Trail to N Apache Trail for that segment running northerly could be a part of the previous motion -qua The motion passed 6-0 86 Mr Gero informed the Commission that the Population Analysis prepared by PRC Toups had been approved by the Four Corners Regional Commission He added that it appeared that the City had lost their challenge to the Census Bureau and that the population of the City would be shown as being less than 10,000 He reminded the Commission members of the meeting to be held on January 27th at 7 00 P M in the Council Chambers regarding the plans for the City Complex 87 Chairman stated that he felt that the growth rate as shown in the report was much too low. 88. Mr Gero explained that the consultant had taken a conser- vative approach because there was not enough factual information to the contrary. Page 8 - Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 13, 1981 He pointed out the information on the reverter clause in the packets and the opinion of the City Attorney regarding its application. 89 Mr. Kell announced that his rules committee had not had the opportunity to meet 90 Mr. Gero added that he would soon be working on a draft of the rules and procedures for the Commission. 91 Chairman asked if there was any other discussion There being none, he adjourned the meeting at 10 30 P M Respectfully submitted, Joseph J Gero Executive Secretary Approved rf 1 George Baljo, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission rp.cHF✓ ps " �L DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY O p '1RizoNP � �o y`Oil C uclie 02unction W E McDANIEL February 9, 1981 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Director of Public Safety (,c1m, Thru: City Manager , Subject: DepartmentalReport - January 1981 Attached you will find our departmental report for the month of January 1981. Larcenies have jumped considerably over last month and equal the total for April of last year, which was our high month last year. Burglaries are also up over last months total of 8. Most unfortunate of all is the Murder that occured this month. We went all of last year without a Homicide, only to be greated with this tragic event this first month of the year. We are pleased to report that the suspect was in custody within three days after the event took place and has been indicted by the Pinal County Grand Jury for Burglary, Strong Arm Robbery and First Degree Murder. We have received positive comments regarding this swift apprehension from the residents of Chaparral Mobile Home Park, — where the deceased resided. The month of January 1981 marked the beginning of the sale of Dog Licenses by the City and the Animal Control Division had scheduled two Rabies Clinics in January. However, due to the overwhelming acceptance, a third clinic was held on January 31st to accomodate all concerned. As a result, some 325 Dogs and 4 Cats were vaccinated against Rabies and 583 Dog Licenses were sold during January 1981. This brought $2345.00 in Revenue to the General Fund of the City from the sale of Dog Licenses. They will continue to be sold throughout the year, however dogs found without Dog Tags from the City after January 31, 1981 are subject to being picked up and the owner subject to a citation. What with three Rabies and Dog License Clinics during January, everyone had a chance to comply. 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 PQACHE✓ " " x O U : ,�`,�,j v.: .i;;, Z DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY gR,ZONP 2ty o CApuche 09unction WE McDANIEL 2 Awk The following is a breakdown of activity within Animal Control for January 1981: Complaints: 120 Impound Fees: $115.00 License Fees: $2345.00 Total Collected: $2460.00 (Deposited to General Fund) Impounded Adopted Reclaimed Dogs 87 28 11 Cats 32 11 0 Destroyed In Pound at End of Month Dogs 33 22 Cats 18 4 Escaped Dogs 0 Cats 0 + We ordered 1,000 Dog Tags and have sold over half of them during January. Animal Control Officer Black will have tags available throughout the year for those dogs found to not have a tag on them within the City limits. We received a special price for the Rabies Vaccination during the three clinics. The regular price of $12.50 was reduced to just $5.00. Coupled with the $5.00 fee for the Dog Tag, citizens were able to have their Dog vaccinated and tagged for $10.00. Some Dogs did not need a Rabies Vaccination as their three years were not up from a prior vaccination. Also, shots for Distemper and other diseases were available at the clinics. 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 PQACHE✓ U ` s ' �5.1 Z DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY gR,ZONP ity o7 &pache 09unction WE McDANIEL 2 The following is a breakdown of activity within Animal Control for January 1981: Complaints: 120 Impound Fees: $115.00 License Fees: $2345.00 Total Collected: $2460.00 (Deposited to General Fund) Impounded Adopted Reclaimed Dogs 87 28 11 Cats 32 11 0 Destroyed In Pound at End of Month Dogs 33 22 Cats 18 4 Escaped Dogs 0 Cats 0 We ordered 1,000 Dog Tags and have sold over half of them during January. Animal Control Officer Black will have tags available throughout the year for those dogs found to not have a tag on them within the City limits. We received a special price for the Rabies Vaccination during the three clinics. The regular price of $12.50 was reduced to just $5.00. Coupled with the $5.00 fee for the Dog Tag, citizens were able to have their Dog vaccinated and tagged for $10.00. Some Dogs did not need a Rabies Vaccination as their three years were not up from a prior vaccination. Also, shots for Distemper and other diseases were available at the clinics. 1001 NORTH IDAHO RD •POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220•TELEPHONE(602)982-8260 AYAVIIC JUaL11UN YULII.. VeXHAII'a.A1 Departmental Activity JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT. NOV. DEC. TOTAL ACCIDENTS * 961 10 * 961 Accident-No Injur S 1 962 Accident-Injury AL 1 963 Accident-Fatality 962 6 P Persons Injured P 9 or Killed S 1 S Speed Related AL 0 AL Alcohol Related 963 0 P 0 S 0 AL 0 TRAFFIC CITATIONS SPEED 58 ALCOHOL 10 OTHER 78 INDEX CRIMES MURDER 1 RAPE 0 ROBBERY 1 BURCLA&Y 18 AM ASSAULT 1 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 1 LARCENY 55 ARSON 0 C. R. T. HITS FELONY 5 aar c Hour A vmo 27 r i`v 1 'ii t k k: F I PQACHE✓G� � ti r O U ,, I $11 Z 'IP/ZONP (Oily 07, C pache o9unctian February 11, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: City Clerk THRU: City Manage FROM: Director of Public Works hi SUBJECT: Activity Report Attached is a copy of the "Activity Report" for the Operations Division of this Department for the Month of January 1981. Please include this on the next agenda, under "information and reports". RWB/an attach. iiitI,cl"C tfij 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 ACTIVITY REPORT OPERATIONS DIVISION JANUARY 1981 ROADS GRADED E. Junction from Idaho to Tomahawk W. 16th Avenue E. Southern E. 4th S. Ironwood E. 19th N. Idaho E. 20th E. Foothill E. 21st E. Tepee E. 22nd E. Broadway E. 23rd N. & S. Tomahawk E. Broadway N. & S. Wickiup W. Shiprock N. Vista W. Roundup N. Acacia N. Plaza S. Colt N. Gold S. Hilton N. Royal Palm .�. S. Maricopa N. & S. Tomahawk S. Phelps S. Cortez N. San Marcos S. Starr N. Valley N. Goldfield N. Ironwood E. 4th Avenue N. Delaware E. 10th W. Smoketree E. 12th W. Foothill E. 13th W. Windsong E. Southern S. Ironwood W. 16th Activity Report Pg. 2 ROADS IMPROVED Vaquero, Hilton and 20th Avenue widened, centered in right-of-way and graded. Greasewood between Valley and San Marcos cut through at request of churches. oak Winchester between Desert Avenue and Fred Ave. straightened and graded. VEHICLE MAINTENANCE Repair transmission linkage 30-106 New brake line 30-106 Install new tires 30-104 R.R. posthole auger for case Adjust Carbureator 30-106 Repair paint striper Repair P.T.O. 30-104 Rebuild starter 30-101 January, 1981 COMMUNITY SERVICE ACTIVITIES A. MIXED VOLLEYBALL LEAGUE ,�. Two new teams joined the second half of the league which began the 14th of January. This brings the total to eight teams . (Approximately 100 partici- pants . ) League will conclude in mid February B. GOLDEN AGE SOFTBALL This activity, which is offered for our community's seniors , has four teams participating. Games are played twice a week at Oasis Park. We have received excellent coverage from the news media. On opening day, Channel 3 and 10 both did a short story on this program during their evening news broadcast . C. YOUTH JOB REFERRAL SERVICE Both referrals and youth applicants have slowed down this past month. This might be due to the lack of publicity for this service. We ' ll work on it. D. SENIOR SOUNDS NEWSLETTER This monthly information newsletter has been success- full . January ' s issue is in the process of being published. We will distribute these throughout the community. E. CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM This service is provided to all organizations , clubs , mobile home parks , etc . of the community. During the month of January, the Community Service Department along with the Police Department , has held four of these programs . The Women' s Club , Mountain View Mobile Ranch, Golden Acres Mobile Park, and Sigma Beta Phi Sorority. F. LOST DUTCHMAN DAYS BASKETBALL TOURNEY The department offered this men' s basketball tourna- ment over Lost Dutchman Days Teams participating came from all over the state. Tournament was quite successful . Community Service Janaury, 1981 page 2 G. TRANSPORTATION Every Thursday transportation is provided for our seniors to areas in town where they can shop, and make visits to the doctor. This service is possible because of the cooperation of the Pinal/Gila Council for Senior Citizens . H. BICYCLE RODEO A bicycle rodeo was held on Saturday, January 31 , 1981 . The rodeo consist of an obstacle course which includes : balancing, maneuvering, and steering tests . The rodeo, for our youth, will be broken into age divi- sions, and awards will be given out for each age group. Bicycle owners may also register their bikes with the Police Department for identification pur- poses in case of loss . PROJECTS A. BALLFIELD & TENNIS COURTS A memo was received stating all poles for the lighting system will be delivered on 2-10-81 . I anticipate the poles and fixtures to be installed shortly after. An estimate for percentages of completion is around 60-65% range. Project completion date is 2-28-81 B. VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK Donations for the Veterans Memorial Park gazebo which will be located in the southwest corner of our City Complex have not come in as anticipated. The Veterans Committee have received approximately $1000 in donations (we need $10 ,000 . ) A fund raising dance (The Sweetheart Dance) is scheduled for February 14, 1981, at the American Legion Hall Community Service January, 1981 page 3 ACTION TAKEN 1 . Parks & Recreation Commission is working on different alternatives to raise money for a swimming pool . Suggestions include Aluminum can drive, raffles , athletic event fund raisers . 2 . ALTERNATIVE SITE FOR SWIMMING POOL A. Sent letter to Mr. Charles Guinn of Pinal County asking the possibilities of a joint-use agree- ment between the city and county, with the county park as a site for city recreational facilities (I have received no response) B. The Mayor and Mr . Bishop will meet on 2-3-81 to discuss future city/school recreation projects , including a swimming pool . C. Parks and Recreation Commission drew up a wish list for recreation facilities on city complex. Swimming Pool was top priority 3 . Contacted Dr. George Greey at ASU for student help on recreation projects and received a negative reaction. He feels if they offer help to our city, every city would ask for the same help and there isn' t enough qualified students to assist in these areas . 4 . Received information on all BLM land in the area avail- able for recreation and public purpose. Relayed infor- .•. mation to Joe Gero . Will stay close with the Planning Department. 5. A draft of an intergovernmental agreement was sent to Bill Wright covering AORCC project , summer recreation program, Superstition Mtn. Elementary ballfield. The school ' s attorney is now going over it . PQACHF✓ <,riN `° M' G4 — asiN 04..."*,,,,, ,.., o ,,,,A, _ ,.row z 'IP/ZOO' cOity ae' C4pache c2unction February 4, 1981 pan,bk MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER FROM: kf JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING J'" y� CHUCK NEWCOMER, ACTING EXECUTIVE SECRETARY G" TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - ACTIVITY REPORT This memorandum is to inform you of recent actions taken by the Board of Adjustment and of upcoming Board hearings. At the February 2, 1981 meeting of the Board, one public hearing was held on variance application BA-1-81, submitted by Melvin Martin for Gordon Erlandson. The applicant was requesting to split a lot below the mini- mum area and lot width requirements of the Trailer Homesite (TH) zoning district. The Board's decision was that such a split was beyond the Board's scope of powers as defined in the City Zoning Ordinance. .. The Board will be holding their next meeting on March 2, 1981 at 7:00 P.M. at the City Hall Complex. The Board will be hearing one case at this time, BA-2-81 (Duxbury). In this case, the applicant is seeking approval to use, as a building site, a parcel which was split below the minimum size required in the General Rural (GR) zoning district. Files on any of these cases can be examined at the Planning Department Office. If you have any questions on these matters, please contact the Acting Executive Secretary to the Board. CRN/kmc cc: file 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 rrb:ri'ACHE41,✓ . t mpg Y Z r 4 ,r. ` its o &419ache 09unction February 11, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THROUGH: RAY LEE, CITY MANAGER FROM: jcA U JOE GERO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: ACTIVITY REPORT - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION At its regular meeting of February 10, 1981, the Planning and Zoning Commission held the continuation of the public hearing on case PZ-23-80, application of David and Stephen Workman to rezone their parcel of land from General Rural (GR) to Multiple Residence (CR-5). At this hearing, the application was declared to be invalid by lack of the required amount of signatures and approved to be withdrawn without prejudice by the Commission members. In further actions, the Commission heard two rezoning requests from Maricopa County involving the extension and phase development of the Lost Dutchman Mobile Home and Travel Trailer Park, and the application by Mr. Harold Tryon to rezone his parcel from R1-8 to R-5 in order to permit two mobile homes to be placed on the property. In both of these cases, the Commission recommended approval with the suggestion that Maricopa County address the possible problem of future access in the case of Mr. Tryon. The agenda for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of March 10, 1981 was discussed and will include the following items: 1. A public hearing on Proposed Ordinance No. 86 - an amend- ment to Section 2503 of the City Zoning Ordinance. 2. Two public hearings on rezoning applications submitted by Bullock Builders (PZ-2-81) and Harvey Morrison (PZ-3-81) . Both of these applications are rezonings by Planned Development. 3. Two requests from Pinal County for review of rezonings to include an application submitted by Mr. Anderson for a large area to be rezoned to Trailer Homesite (TH) in Section 6, Township 1 South; a Pinal County Commission Initiative to rezone an area in Section 6 to Heavy Industrial (CI-2). 4. Discussion of Commission rules and procedures. 1001 NORTH IDAHO ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX K,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85220 • TELEPHONE(602)982-8002 February 11, 1981 Activity Report Planning and Zoning Commission Page 2 The Commission also approved a request for a Commission Initiative submitted by the Palm Springs Homeowners' Association to rezone units 2, 3, 4 and 7 in the Palm Springs Subdivision from CR-3 to CR-3 by Planned Development. The date for the public hearing on this case (PZ-4-81) was not set, but is projected for the regular meeting of the Commission to be held on April 14, 1981. If you have any comments on any of these matters, or wish additional information, please contact the Director of Planning. JWG/kmc cc: Zoning Administrator file ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES a ITEM # MEETING OF 17' 7 i MOTION BY: SECONDED BY : YFS NO ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN DAMIANO COUNCILMAN SHANKS COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN EIDSON RA VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: 0 - Aank 41W, ITEM NO, 6 PF IT RESOLVED PY THE mAYnr? AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARJZOMA, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT IC' 0'0 P,M, ROLL CALL VOTE SHEET NOTES P)I( ITEM # MEETING OF MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: I YES Nn ABSTAIN COUNCILMAN EIDSON_ !/ COUNCILMAN SHANKS_ COUNCILMAN HILL COUNCILMAN BURGESS COUNCILMAN DAMIANO / VICE-MAYOR GRANILLO MAYOR SEEMAN UNANIMOUS IN FAVOR OPPOSED ABSTAINED TOTAL: Nik ,/ CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: `� e44- .r<7 DATE: ADDRESS: AGENDA I TEM• a/2/4144,- CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION REQUEST TO SPEAK NAME: -J OE D1(tVA1K _ DATE: a- )9"' 8 J ADDRESS: ) Z'��-� s- Dojz,4lo 1'1tJ AGENDA ITEM: CHILL -7- �L� �f'lJl3 L7) N