Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-03 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING APRIL 3, 2012 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on April 3, 2012, at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Insalaco called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Councilmember Smithson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Wilson led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Insalaco Vice Mayor Dietz Councilmember Barker Councilmember Serdy Councilmember Smithson Councilmember Wilson Staff Present: Others Present: (There is one vacancy on the council.) City Manager George Hoffman Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Development Services Director Brad Steinke Captain Arnold Freeman Communications Supervisor Jerry Ward Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 1 OF 35 ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Dietz MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED; AND WITH GREAT HONOR, I ASK THAT RESOLUTION NO. 12-10, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, HONORING THE VETERANS AND THE ACTIVE DUTY SERVICES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY CREATING A DISPLAY OF FLAGS TO BE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF APACHE TRAIL AND NORTH APACHE TRAIL, BE APPROVED. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. (During the vote Councilmember Smithson commented he had asked for a very minor correction on the minutes earlier.) The motion carried. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Insalaco read a proclamation designating April 11-17 as National Public Safety Telecommunication Week and presented it to Communications Supervisor Jerry Ward.Captain Arnold Freeman commented on the number of calls processed by communications personnel during a recent plane crash. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CURRENT EVENTS Councilmember Wilson commented Leslie Bennett put together a crew of 8 people that went out into the open space east of the rodeo grounds two Saturdays and gathered an estimated 5 tons of trash and over 60 tires.He thanked parks and recreation, code enforcement, and court personnel for helping out. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager George Hoffman commented on the upcoming spaghetti dinner event for the Boys and Girls Club. PUBLIC HEARINGS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 2 OF 35 ORDINANCE NO. 1380, AMENDING THE CITY CODE, TRAFFIC SECTIONS 12-3-8 HANDICAPPED PARKING AND 12-5-7 SCHEDULE OF SANCTIONS )City Attorney Joel Stern briefed the council on the item. Vice Mayor Dietz commented prior to this being changed if someone had a placard hanging on their mirror and it happened to have fallen, they could have received a citation for it and the judge would have to charge a $300 fine. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.It was a mandatory $300 fine. Vice Mayor Dietz stated that $300 fine was regardless of if they had it legally or whatever. This gives the judge discretion in reducing that fine under certain circumstances. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct. Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Barker commented there is $50 on page two of four and on page three of four where the column says initial sanction when paid within 7 calendar days, it still says $300.It is a little misleading if someone is told that they owed the $50.She asked if they could put $50 or $300 as ordered. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the ordinance needs to be read as a whole.Hopefully when someone is trying to figure out if they have to pay the $300 or they are trying to get out of the $300 they will have looked in subsection A. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 3 OF 35 Councilmember Barker commented he is saying she is being picky. City Attorney Joel Stern stated in this case if they go to trial the judge would have this ordinance in front of him.The judge would then say if they want to go to trial that would be fine but he would only give them a $50 fine.The judge will need to keep track of people who keep coming back. Councilmember Barker commented these are the people who drop their placards. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.In his prior experience in another city in another state, people would keep coming back and back and back.They would say they did not do it and they would see these people 3 or 4 times and they would get their case dismissed or vastly reduced.He hoped that would not happen here.These are not criminal cases so he would probably not see filings.It is the citation that is written by the police department that gets filed directly with the court.His office never gets involved because they are civil violations. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Smithson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1380 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Smithson MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1380, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 4 OF 35 Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1381, AMENDING AND READOPTING SECTIONS 1-15-19-C, 1- 16-19-D AND 1-16-19-E ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STORAGE SHEDS OF THE ZONING CODE REGARDING HEIGHT, SIZE AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS )Development Services Director Brad Steinke briefed the council on the item. Councilmember Smithson asked him to define compatibility. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he could not.This is where this whole problem started from.To try to create a standard for compatibility is almost impossible.They are trying to create standards that get them there without the need for staff to be the judge of artwork and design.Compatibility would mean that if the house was designed with stucco, the accessory building should maybe be designed at least partially with stucco.If it is designed with brick then maybe the accessory building should be brick.It is a fluid and open interpretation that has been troublesome. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the zoning administrator would have the ability to put everything together based on the facts and decide what is compatible.If the individual did not like the requirement, it could be appealed to the board of adjustment.The board of adjustment would be the fact finder and the one to rule on it if it was taken that far.There is an appellate and a review of that. Councilmember Smithson commented it is not appealable from them. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 5 OF 35 City Attorney Joel Stern stated they can go to court. Councilmember Smithson stated it is not appealable to the city council or any other municipal body. City Attorney Joel Stern stated it is not.The zoning administrator's orders are appealable to the board of adjustment. Councilmember Barker commented if there is no definition for compatibility there would be no definition for consistency either.That is the phrase that he uses in the ordinance. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it would be a working interpretation that over time gets defined through application.What triggered this whole thing was that staff interpreted a Quonset hut to be compatible with a home in the R1-43 district based on the language in the code which said that simply spraying a metal building with textured paint would by definition be compatible. That was the message they had heard from a previous council and they interpreted it that way.Clearly, members from that neighborhood thought it was a misguided interpretation.That is part of what we want to change here so that it does not happen again.It is very difficult to legislate and we will never get it exactly right.It is why the safety valve that Joel talked about is there.He continued with his briefing. Councilmember Smithson asked if the metal building can be higher than the main building. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it cannot. Councilmember Smithson commented it says it exempts it.He asked if that exempts it from number two or number one. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 6 OF 35 Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it exempts it from the design standards, not the height and size standards.He continued with his briefing. Councilmember Smithson asked if the decision of the planning and zoning commission on a special use permit is appealable to the city council. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct.He continued with his briefing. Councilmember Barker commented the corrugated on the slide prior, the wider corrugated, and the decorative to the far right look alike. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated they are very close.That is exactly the problem and the question he is posing to them.It is not by definition corrugated siding.It is a board on batten -type of design for siding. Councilmember Barker commented corrugated is corrugated for a structural purpose. Development Services Director Brad Steinke state not necessarily. Councilmember Barker commented he has said the decorative would be fine.She asked if they would still be fine if their dwelling was stucco. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it would. Councilmember Barker commented they do not have to stucco these. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct.This type of material can qualify as compatible material. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 7 OF 35 Councilmember Barker commented this type of material could be used for accessory building no matter what the residence is made out of and it would be acceptable. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct. Councilmember Barker commented they will not have to have a wood building if they have a wood house or a stucco building if they have a stucco house. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct.They are trying to distance themselves from making that decision. Councilmember Barker commented that cleared one thing up. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated this is the gray area and they are going to enter into that.There are buildings that look very close to corrugated but are not by definition corrugated.He continued with his briefing. Councilmember Smithson commented these buildings also appear to have color that is part of the material rather than painted. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated they are all painted.He continued with his briefing on partial walls and open air walls. Councilmember Smithson commented that the corrugated walls that are legal here do not have to be colored. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct. Councilmember Serdy commented the paint jobs would not be acceptable. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 8 OF 35 Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated the green building probably is not defined as earth tone.Up north it would be but not so much down here. They do have a color palette in the design guidelines if that becomes an issue.He continued with his briefing. Councilmember Smithson asked what it would take for this to apply only to the square mile. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated they might be able to target it to this one square mile.In the past where there has been an area that they want to have specific standards that are different from the zoning code, either adding standards or taking away standards, the city has done it with a planned development.Tonight would be a zoning text amendment; in the past it has been a zoning map amendment.They had taken the property and declared it to be a planned development, added the conditions they wanted and then they have to comply with those conditions.That is a six month process. Vice Mayor Dietz asked if they could make this change for R1-43 period without going through and doing a zoning change and doing everything because it is already an R1-43.They are taking the R1-43/MH and R1- 43/PD out. City Attorney Joel Stern stated if they wanted to do that and keep it to a smaller area than normal he would suggest they follow the development services director's recommended planned development zoning. They would need to notify the property owners and it would be a map amendment versus a text amendment.This is similar to when they did the downtown planned development that applied a group of rules to just the downtown area.It is to a specific geographical area.If they do that they would need a direction to staff to send it back through planning and zoning, there would be the notification process of everyone within the zone and within 300 feet of the zone, it would then go through the council with public hearings and an eventual vote.It would be a full blown map amendment.He would recommend that on something like this as it is a use.Otherwise it would look like they are trying to avoid the zoning rules of Arizona. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 9 OF 35 Vice Mayor Dietz commented it is R1-43 now and we are not changing that.We are just taking the MH and PD off of this ordinance.He asked if that could be done without doing a map amendment. City Attorney Joel Stern stated for consistency's stake and consistency in this matter means it is similar to other ways that you have done other accessory building requirements in other zones.The other zones have them embedded in their actual zoning classifications.He thinks they would want to have something very close to that if not a planned development.A planned development would do it also.Just to put it under the general provisions like this is, correctly under Article 6, an argument might be made that they are trying to get around zoning rights.He would not recommend doing that tonight. Councilmember Smithson commented other than a few isolated parcels that are in residential areas, the only other area covered is what is now state land or federal land.When that land comes in the requirements on it would require basically a major plan where we could impose regulations on it if we wanted to or ease regulations on it.He asked if that is correct. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that state and federal land are pre -zoned as R1-43/PD so any development that occurs on that must go through planned development. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the position of the State Land Department may be that they have the zoning but it does not really apply to this.That is an extreme that could happen.He wanted to make sure they are aware of that. Councilmember Smithson stated they could always say they are not going to sell it unless the city put something else on it that is consistent with the plan they would have for it. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they can always sell the land and then the developer can REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 10 OF 35 come to us and say they want to put in 3,000 houses and commercial.The city could then say it was not zoned correctly. The developer could say they do not have to follow that and the city says they have to.At that point the lawsuits start.They do not ever want to be in that position with State Land.We have not been at this point.It is a possibility and it is his job to point that out. Vice Mayor Dietz asked if the property would be out of State Land's hands if it were sold. City Attorney Joel Stern stated State Land sells land however they want to sell it and hopefully the zoning is already there or they try to get the city to zone it the way they would like it for their market. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he does not understand how State Land could interfere if they had already sold the property under the R1-43 zoning as it is right now.If a developer comes in and wants a zoning change to do what they want State Land could not step back in. City Attorney Joel Stern stated once it is sold he is correct. Vice Mayor Dietz commented it is out of their hands. City Attorney Joel Stern stated if the city had come in and rezoned it already it could be problematic.He is sorry he brought it up as it will probably never happen but one never knows.He wanted them to be aware of it. Councilmember Smithson commented another issue that has come up several times tonight and in the petitions is the concern that this is the camel's nose under the tent and if this is adopted it will spread to other areas.He asked him for a response to that issue. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he has been hearing those same things. Staff would not have put this on the planning and zoning REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 11 OF 35 commission's desk at this point in time when they are reviewing the entire zoning code.This is truly a grass roots effort. This neighborhood group has continued to say they only want it to apply to that one square mile.They have no designs on changing the character of the city.He has heard from some of the residents that their goal is to try to maintain the quality and integrity of the district.It is why they are here in the city and why they are in that district.They do not want it changed but strengthened.This is their ordinance that has been modified coming forward.He has not heard from any planning and zoning commissioner or from the council that this is the camel's nose under the tent and that this is what they want to see the whole city turn into.It has never been a blip on the radar screen. Vice Mayor Dietz commented it seems that a number of people think that the city is going to change all the general rules and the rules in the county islands; that it will all be changed to the same zoning.He believes it was misinformation. Development Services Director Brad Steinke continued with his briefing. Councilmember Barker commented she had sent him multiple questions and she thanked him for answering them again.She had asked him how many animals a person could have and he had told her two pigs, two head of cattle and two whatever per acre.She asked if that goes for horses, too. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated horses are unlimited.They have to have a minimum of 1.25 acres gross. Councilmember Barker asked what the average lot size is there. Development Services Director Brad Steinke asked if she meant the one mile square area. Councilmember Barker stated that is correct. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 12 OF 35 Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated if they had GIS he would have it immediately. Councilmember Barker commented that is one she did not ask him when he was at a point where he might have been able to get it. Councilmember Smithson asked what the minimum lot size requirement is in the ordinance. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated the ordinance does not change the requirement for minimum lot size in R1-43.It is 1.25 acres gross. Councilmember Barker commented the idea that the accessory building can be no larger than the footprint of main dwelling or the height of the main dwelling would probably exclude such things as barns. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it would if it was a 10' high house. Councilmember Barker asked how high normal barns are.She does not know these answers. She will get very upset if they laugh at her.She is asking for herself here.She does not know these answers.She is not looking to show off for anybody.She literally wants the answers.She again asked how high a barn is. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated all of the barns currently in the R1-43 should be less than 25' in size. Councilmember Barker asked if that is the norm if there is a norm. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he comes from Wisconsin.Barns are like 40' high up there. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 13 OF 35 Councilmember Barker commented Councilmember Wilson has a barn. Councilmember Wilson stated it depends on the design of the barn.If it has a center section that is open it can exceed.If they are going to have a squeeze of hay delivered, the minimum height for that to be delivered is 14' to 17' according to three different hay providers.Fourteen feet could be a problem, especially if they have wood pallets underneath the hay. Councilmember Barker commented 25' sounds like a doable thing. Councilmember Wilson stated that is correct. Councilmember Barker commented the idea is to build a big house.She asked if covered arenas are low, high or in between. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he is not the person to answer that.Every arena he has seen down here in the valley appears to be less than 25' in height unless it is a decorative roof. Councilmember Barker commented what they are going for is a pitched roof somewhere. They would want a pitched roof on the top to give them the height.He had already answered the question that she had regarding if the building is stucco does the accessory building have to be stucco and no it does not.It could be decorative metal.They can use decorative metal no matter what the house is like.She is having a problem with the vagueness of the words compatibility and consistency and the vagueness of the difference between corrugated and decorative metal. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated if he were to have created a zoning district from scratch without input from others he probably would not try to make that distinction.They know the difference between the corrugated siding and the other forms of siding. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 14 OF 35 Councilmember Barker commented because they say so. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct.If the siding is not corrugated it will not advertise itself as corrugated. Councilmember Barker commented if they say it is corrugated we call it corrugated. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated it is a building term.Whether or not the distinction in the way it looks is enough for her could be a possibility. Councilmember Barker commented she has worried over this for weeks now as many of them have.According to Mr. Cross who did a lot of statistical stuff, and she thanked him for that, and presuming that he is correct, our first petition has approximately 21% of the area. It was more to the southeast corner of that.The second petition which they received yesterday has a few more, having about 29% of the people represented in the area.Out of the 313 residences that Mr. Cross feels are there, it seems like we have 130 some people who have signed these petitions.The idea of putting a planned development over this entire area is probably not going to come as a very happy thought to at least half of the people in the area as they have said they do not like this idea.This has become such a conundrum.It seems to her this is a neighborhood issue that should have been taken care of in the neighborhood.Now it has opened a huge can of worms that is not about just Quonset huts but about metal buildings and what kind of sides they have on them.This has expanded and grown like a disease.The council could say no more Quonset huts in R1-43 and tackle the metal buildings some other time.It will make a lot of people unhappy but it can be done.The council could also say they are not going to do anything and let them handle it themselves.It is their property and they can do with it what they need to do with it.Or the council could put it on a ballot.The whole city could vote on it.She does not think they would like that but it is something that could be done. She does not have the answer to this problem.She had a lot of questions and thanked staff for spending many hours with her REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 15 OF 35 this past week - legal, development services, Rudy, Kathy, George and everybody for trying to help her out on this.She is willing to listen to what anyone has to say.She hopes a light bulb will come on and say it is a great solution and most people will probably be happy with this.She does not believe they can make everybody happy with this, but perhaps one of her brilliant colleagues up here or one of our brilliant residents out there will have the wonderful idea that will do it. Councilmember Wilson thanked Brad for answering several of the questions he had.He wanted to bring out that even if this passed someone could have ten 10X12 sheds of corrugated metal on their property and they would be legal. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated the little ones would be legal. Councilmember Wilson commented he had a conversation with an attorney about outlawing the Quonset huts.The attorney believed it could be classified as a taking underneath Proposition 207 that was passed by voters a few years ago.If we used a three -sided metal building that would be okay for horses and hay storage.A neighbor could not have a garage using the same type of metal because it is totally enclosed.He repeatedly said he thought it would be a taking. He asked if city staff felt the same way. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated anyone can sue anybody for anything anytime. City Attorney Joel Stern stated Proposition 207 is the diminution in value proposition that came forth 3 or 4 years ago.There has not been a lot of case law on interpreting it.It basically says if the government passes a rule or regulation or ordinance that somehow reduces the fair market value of my property, it decreases in value because of that rule, regulation or ordinance, then he would have a claim against the state.There is a lot of proof that has to be made in that.For example, George has a piece of property in this area and they pass the ordinance saying no Quonset huts.George wants to have a Quonset hut.Mr. Steinke will not approve it because of the rule being passed.George REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 16 OF 35 would have to come up with an expert witness stating he lost value because he cannot have a Quonset hut on the property.The value of a Quonset hut would probably be the storage.They are very good for storage.Some people even like the way they look. If they paint it camouflage colors and it blends in, there should be no problem as it cannot be seen.They can be camouflaged pretty well.The real legal issue is if it diminished the value of his rights.They would have to come up with the proof.It is not automatic. Councilmember Barker asked what about the zoning that was standing at the time Proposition 207 was passed. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the statute directly says any rule, regulation or zoning that was passed after the date of passage.The first statute was passed in 1998 and it got amended in 2010.There is some case law on it but there has not been a lot of interpretation of it. Councilmember Barker commented it is kind of like compatibility and consistency. City Attorney Joel Stern stated it is kind of like that but also the economy took a dive on the market values.Part of the problem is there has not been a lot of development.There has been one case in Flagstaff and one in Sahuarita.Anybody could sue anybody for anything anytime whether it is a valid claim is another issue.Another issue is there is a dispute on how to file the claim and whether it conflicts with other claims or statutes.It gets very complicated.It could be a long road before there is any recovery.It could be a two-year process if it goes to the court of appeals. Councilmember Wilson commented he was asked if the homeowners there could form a homeowners association.He asked if that would be possible. Councilmember Barker commented she did not think that would be possible there. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 17 OF 35 City Attorney Joel Stern commented he believes the question was can an established subdivision that does not currently have a homeowners association or CC&Rs establish a homeowners association or CC&Rs that would apply to just a limited number of lots.The legal answer is probably.There is no statute on it but there is case law.In order to do that they would need 100% of the owners of the parcel within the area they are trying to impose it on. They would have to agree.In addition to the owners, it would have to be any lenders if the houses are not owned outright, such as the banks and possibly beneficiaries.The case law is blurry on that.Two or three streets could do it to impose deed restrictions and they would not have any dues.They would basically be saying no Quonset huts.Deed restrictions are enforceable but they would probably have to be enforced by the individuals within the certain area.If there is no homeowners association to cover the cost, it would be split.They had a situation a while back where there was a subdivision with deed restrictions but they did not have a homeowners association and the question was how weeds in the front yard are dealt with. There was no homeowners association that could fine them and impose penalties.It would be a court action by a group of homeowners to enforce it.It is a little more complicated.To get a Quonset hut off a property after someone just put it up they would have to take it to Pinal County Superior Court to enforce it. Councilmember Wilson commented he received several telephone calls and letters concerning having tall buildings within 10' of their property lines.It would affect their views, one of the reasons they purchased the property and live in the area.In his research to see if any other city has a similar ban on metal -type buildings of which he found none, he ran across one for Scottsdale which he suggested they look at.It is for a gradual increasing height for buildings.Basically the height is limited to lower level at the setback and as it goes further into the property it would go up to the maximum of twenty-five feet. Councilmember Serdy commented they approved something similar at Community Christian Church. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 18 OF 35 Councilmember Barker stated that involved the view shed. Councilmember Wilson asked if they could do something like that to relieve the concerns of some of the neighbors and the aspect of having a tall building right next to their property. City Attorney Joel Stern stated part of that is a policy question and part of that is legal.He stated the legal part is under A.R.S. § 9-462.01(A) municipalities may regulate the location, height, bulk, number of stories and size of buildings and structures and may establish and maintain building setback lines.This means the council can do this.He believes it is called a stepback requirement, meaning the closer you get to the middle of your property, there could be a gradual increase in height.That is so it does not offend the adjoining property owners.They could not have a 20' wall at the property line.The 20' height would be closer to the center of the property.He believes Scottsdale and Paradise Valley have similar ordinances.They apply to the mountain areas more than to the downtown areas. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he would answer the zoning question.It has been done.It has been done in large cities where they want to have the wedding cake effect.They could do that but he does not recommend doing that on the floor tonight. City Attorney Joel Stern commented the policy question was if it would alleviate some of the concerns of the public. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated right now it can be 10' away.If they say they can have a larger building that is 20' away and would it make it difference, it would some.From a practical standpoint, if someone is staring at a 20' metal building, whether it is 10' or 20' away one is still staring at it. Councilmember Wilson commented they could be staring at a 25' building which is a residential home as well. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 19 OF 35 Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated the residential home generally has a little more character than an accessory building.It is a policy matter that would be deferred to the council but it certainly could be done.If that is what the council wants staff will come back with something. Councilmember Barker commented as the public comes forward to speak, she encouraged them to ask questions so that the council can have staff answer those questions.She asked if that would be permissible. City Attorney Joel Stern stated typically, and if they want the evening to go a little faster, they could have the person get their five minutes and someone will take down the questions and the answers could be given afterwards.If they are interacting in the five minutes with questions for the council or staff, the question is does the time clock end.In the supreme court one gets 20 minutes for their case.If they get interrupted by a justice and have to spend the rest of the time explaining their position, the chief justice then says the time is up even though the other ten points have not been discussed.He does not know how that will work with the time. Councilmember Barker commented he is saying people can ask questions and that staff can address those questions at the end of the public hearing. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they could also do it her way, which is to do it during the hearing. Councilmember Barker commented she just wants staff to be able to answer those questions tonight rather than saying staff heard the questions and they will get back with them.People are here to find out what is going to go on. City Attorney Joel Stern asked if it would satisfy her if a staff member takes down the questions and then staff answers them after the hearing. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 20 OF 35 Councilmember Barker stated it would.She wants people to be able to ask questions and get answers. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they can do that rather than the interactive part.It is up to her. Councilmember Barker stated she would rather have them ask questions and get the answers after the public hearing was closed. Councilmember Serdy commented the corrugation is what gives the metal its strength.He is not sure if the decorative is floppy.He asked if the gauge would matter on this.There are some pretty big buildings and they have to be corrugated so that it is structurally sound. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated he is mixing structural with siding.The galvanized, prefabricated corrugated can serve as a wall itself without anything else.That is what pole barns are.The decorative siding is applied to a wall. City Attorney Joel Stern requested a five minute break. Mayor Insalaco called for a five minute break. Mayor Insalaco reconvened the meeting.He advised Vice Mayor Dietz had to leave because of a medical emergency at home.He then opened the public hearing. Mr. Darryl Cross, 1018 N. Acacia, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He showed some pictures on the overhead projector while he spoke.He commented he and his neighbor submitted letters to be put in the packet and they are not in the packet and he asked why. Mayor Insalaco and Councilmember Barker commented that they have them. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 21 OF 35 Mr. Darryl Cross stated he did not find it in the agenda part. Mayor Insalaco commented the council has them. Mr. Darryl Cross stated he wanted it part of the record.The first petition does not have any signatures from west of Cortez.The new petition has a fair representation of signatures from west of Cortez.The petition he helped pass around has signatures from residents that signed the first one that were eager to sign the second one when they found out that it would be an outright ban on all metal buildings. Mayor Insalaco commented that is not true. Mr. Darryl Cross stated originally that is what a lot of people thought.That is why they were eager to sign the second petition. .City Attorney Joel Stern stated he is not sure they want to interact with him but that is their decision. Mayor Insalaco commented they do not want any false statements or rumors going out without saying anything.It is not an all and out ban on metal buildings. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he knows that but it could be brought up later if he wants to do that while he is speaking. Mayor Insalaco apologized and asked Mr. Darryl Cross to continue. Mr. Darryl Cross stated the reason why people want metal buildings in the first place is for their stuff.Stuff that they want to put away such as boats, RVs and travel trailers.The metal building is cost effective and fills those needs.It puts things out of sight and out of REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 22 OF 35 mind.He showed some examples of metal buildings and commented adding a few architectural changes to a metal building can make them look nice.Some have 40 year paint warranties.He also showed pictures of stucco buildings.He requested this stop with a ban on Quonset huts only or they have a discussion with the residents and come up with good, viable solutions.A lot of the residents he talked to strongly want nice metal buildings where they can store their stuff. Ms. Connie Wegeng, 1431 N. Cortez, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated when she signed the petition she was shown cute little buildings and she wants her name taken off that petition.She gave a history of the area regarding zoning and accessory buildings.She commented all but one council member live in subdivisions where accessory buildings are not allowed.They do not want a homeowners association.They want good zoning.The city has spent $250,000 to create a good image and without a good image and zoning in their neighborhood they will not get people to move to the area.More than half the homes in Section 15 have been built since 2000.They do not want commercial -looking buildings in the area. Ms. Cathy Diroff, 860 N. Wickiup, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated they moved here for the rural lifestyle, previously owning a park model for 12 years before purchasing their current residence two -and -a -half months ago.They have attended planning and zoning meetings on this issue to speak out against the Quonset huts.She is in support of the metal buildings; not all corrugated buildings are the same.They have owned several high end metal buildings throughout the years.She commented on several enhancements that can make the buildings attractive. The new changes will severely limit the accessory building they want to build.It is not just an issue for horse owners.It is a property rights issue.She and her husband collected signatures in the past several weeks opposing the ban on metal buildings over 10X12.They went to as many non -horse properties as horse properties.With Darryl Cross they collected 122 signatures; deleting the one woman's name they have 121 signatures in R1-43 zoning.They also collected 73 signatures of people living outside but close to the R1-43 area.These people feel if these restrictions are passed in R1-43 they will REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 23 OF 35 soon affect them.This issue started with some residents upset about a bright, shiny Quonset hut in their R1-43 neighborhood. She agrees with that and wonders how it got through planning and zoning.But to say they represent most of the R1-43 residents in banning metal buildings was an overstatement.As Brad Steinke cannot define consistency or compatibility she thinks it is time to go back to the drawing board.Her husband asked her to say that if you cannot define it, you cannot make it law. Ms. Lori Bullock, 1675 W. Acacia, Apache Junction, had filled out a form but had already left. Ms. Valerie Beemer, 1841 E. Tepee, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She is the president of Superstition Mountain Horsemen's Association. There is a question on whether metal buildings or Quonset huts have an effect on property values.She discussed it with several realtors and appraisers.She has been a realtor for almost 10 years.They do not affect the property values.Never once has a buyer told her he wished a building was not metal. It is really just for the eye.There is a difference of opinion out where we live.She is not looking for a bunch of restrictions where she lives.They and the opposition agree with some things and she believes they are very close.They agree that they do not like Quonset huts, supersized commercial buildings and homeowners associations.It would be a disservice of the city council to disregard the wishes of the people who live this area and who signed the petitions so that their opinion could be duly heard.Their petition is 122 names, the opposition's is 106.They represent 70 homes, the opposition 50.She does not think the smaller homes have been taken into consideration.People come out here because they want to have their big toys like buses.They could not cover the bus with these restrictions.The current proposal is unclear and should not be passed.She agreed with Councilmember Barker to pass the ban on Quonset huts and go back to the drawing board on the rest.The proposed ordinance should benefit the majority, not the minority. Ms. Diana LaClaire, 2521 E. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated they purchased their home in 1998 with the intent to build a REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 24 OF 35 shop that her husband had always wanted.It is a 25' metal corrugated building but it was offset so that it is no higher than their home and it is in desert tones.What she has heard tonight is very disconcerting as it is so vague.One can put up a 3 -story 25' building but if a fourth wall is added it is not okay.One can have metal that looks like corrugated metal but if it is corrugated metal it is not okay.One can litter the property with multiple buildings as long as they are the size of one's home.One can have a two story home that obstructs someone's view but if it has character it is okay.She and her husband oppose this overly restrictive ordinance.One square mile should not be singled out.She would like it left the way it is.They should be able to work things out without restricting property rights. Mr. David Bowling, 1310 N. Starr, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated he appreciated all the comments brought out tonight.There does not seem to be any disagreement that no one wants Quonset huts in this area.The person who puts a Quonset hut on his property could say that his property values have been raised by it being on his property, but the surrounding neighbors could also say their property values were lowered by having that Quonset hut there.He recommended that since they all agree that they do not want Quonset huts in this area that is reserved for stick built homes by the zoning that they should vote tonight to ban Quonset huts and then go back and clarify the rest of the ordinance to have agreement on what else can be constructed there.He can view the Quonset hut from his property and he does not want to say there are legal grounds he is willing to pursue if this is not taken care of because it has not come to that yet.He has obtained legal advice in that regard and obtained legal precedent from neighboring communities. Mr. Jeff Watson, 2140 N. Warner, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He wanted to clarify things for Councilmember Barker.Prefabricated barn sides are baked enamel on the back of a hardwood board.They can either be structurally set in by themselves or they can be bolted onto it.The barn structure has its own support posts set through the barn whereas corrugated metal does not.Walls can be taken out and put back in and they have 20 years to 40 years of life on them.A covered riding arena has to be tall. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 25 OF 35 He is 6' tall and rides a 17 hand horse.He is 8'8" off the ground.It would have to have a minimum roof structure of at least 10'.It would have to be 12' to get a water truck underneath it.It can be a pretty tall roof.The roof structures are designed for strength.If it is a 300X150 arena it will be 25' to 30' in the air to get the support needed.If they are looking at covering a bus with an air conditioner on it, those are 13'6".They would need a cover taller than that to back it into to get it out of view. Mr. Al Buckmeier, 1187 N. Starr, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He does not think anyone in here wants a homeowners association, and maybe only a couple want Quonset huts.They do not want a Quonset hut replaced with a 14' or 16' steel building that has a 3-12 pitch on it.The steel buildings are detrimental to property values. He owns 19 pieces of property and he knows what hurts the sale of properties.He is a horseman and does not look at this as a horse issue.They have tried to exclude the horse structures. Horse people do not build 14' to 16' side wall steel commercial buildings that they want to stop.City staff stated they could not regulate it between horse people and someone wanting to put up an egg building.He had a steel building franchise for 15 years and has some insight into them.He suggested setting a side wall standard for horse structures and they can have whatever they want on it.He knows people with 8' side wall structures for horse buildings with 3-12 pitch that are plenty high.B&B and Superstition Feed do not have the equipment to deliver a squeeze of hay.Some outside outfits can.It would just be a roof cover as they do not worry about losing a little bit of hay here and there.A squeeze load can still fit in a 10X12 building stacked 6 high and there is still room by the door.He commented on the kind of structures that could be built out there but, if they were, people might then move to Gold Canyon.He suggested setting a standard for the horse people.He does not think the size of the house for the accessory building will work out.They might want to go as high as 4,000 sq.ft. Ms. Thea Richardson-Proesch, who lives on Shiprock, addressed the council.She does not want Quonset huts and has no problem with metal buildings.She was one of the original grass roots people on this and it was just REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 26 OF 35 about Quonset huts to begin with.They need to get together and talk instead of having accusations and work things out. Mr. Jim Foster, 1841 E. Tepee, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He believes 94% of the people here do not want a Quonset hut by them.He disagreed that a squeeze of hay could be put in a 10X12 shed. They have maintenance issues in the community with painting on stick and mortar houses and buildings.These structures have a 20 to 40 year life span on their paint.There are no roofing issues. Mayor Insalaco closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Barker commented it appears the general consensus is to go back and talk this over and that no one wants Quonset huts.They need to get staff and these folks together to figure out how best to serve that zoning area.She appreciated the education on the barns.Her only frame of reference came from when she was a little girl in her grandfather's barn which looked so high to her.She knows nothing about a squeeze except it is something you do to your husband.She thanked them for some really good comments that clarified their position.She appreciated it very much. Councilmember Smithson commented he appreciated all the testimony and it appears the two sides are not that far apart.He agrees with Robin that they should get the two sides together.He does not know if they could pass an ordinance tonight to exclude Quonset huts and come back for the rest.He believes if they got all these people together they would get something that would be a lot simpler and would satisfy just about everyone.He does not believe there is much disagreement between everyone.He asked if the ordinance is constructed where they could prohibit Quonset huts and continue the rest of it. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he would not recommend that.It was written for a different purpose.They would have to throw in some new REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 27 OF 35 recitals.There would have to be some legal support for excluding one type of building.He is not sure the testimony really addressed that tonight.There are people that do not want them, but there has to be a health/safety/welfare justification.He recommends rewriting it if that is the only reason they want to pass something.He would also recommend some kind of neighborhood meeting with staff. Councilmember Serdy asked if there would be grandfathering of the Quonset hut that is there. He commented if they do not get some relief tonight people might go out and slap Quonset huts up saying they got in under the limit.He thinks they might want to put a moratorium or freeze on them right now so that no more go in during the meantime. City Attorney Joel Stern stated a moratorium is not on the agenda.Even if it was passed tonight there is no emergency clause. Councilmember Barker commented they would still have 30 days. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct and it is also subject to referendum. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated the reason why staff approved a Quonset hut that started this whole thing rolling is because they judged a previous council's message to us that Quonset huts were, by definition, compatible with a main structure as long as you covered them with textured paint.They were following the bouncing ball.If this council tells them that is not the interpretation they should be making with the existing ordinance then they will not approve any more Quonset huts.He does think they need to clarify this but do it the right way, not on the floor.There were a number of other things that popped up. They would be happy to meet with a select number of people that would like to sit on a 10 or less committee, it cannot be a 50 person thing or it will go crazy, but like they did with the horse boarding.This is the way to get at this. City Attorney Joel Stern commented he is saying that administratively if someone comes to REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 28 OF 35 the front counter and says they want a Quonset hut and hands them a plan, he, as the development services director would not approve it or his senior planner would not approve it. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct. City Attorney Joel Stern commented that as this is the zoning administrator position that could be appealed to the board of adjustment. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is how it would work.The council would never get involved in it from that standpoint. Councilmember Barker asked if there were any questions in there that he felt needed to be answered.It seemed to her that most of it was statements. Development Services Director Brad Steinke stated that is correct.There is nothing in there that he would have objected to or been concerned with. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he only heard two questions from all these people and they were from Darryl Cross.One was why his statements were not in the packet; the council answered that they were.The other was a throw out question as to why people wanted metal buildings and he answered that himself. Mayor Insalaco thanked everyone for being civil.It was refreshing to see that they could get things done without bickering.He asked if there was any way possible the Quonset hut ordinance could be done by the next meeting. City Attorney Joel Stern stated there is a publishing requirement.Legally they do not have the time for it.The city clerk would have to post it and you do not have the time. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 29 OF 35 Mayor Insalaco asked if they could do it on the first meeting in May. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that would be the soonest they could do it. City Attorney Joel Stern commented this is a direction to staff to bring back an ordinance that essentially says no Quonset huts in the R1-43 zone. Mayor Insalaco commented that is correct. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that means the entire R1-43 zone, not just this square mile of R1-43. Councilmember Smithson stated it would also help with a definition for consistent and compatible. Councilmember Barker commented and hopefully to commercial buildings.That is another one that came up and people were using it differently. It was used in one huge, gargantuan form and it was also used in small form.Somehow there has to be a definition there that helps people understand this site is okay and this site is not okay.She asked if they want our planning staff to come back with an ordinance dealing only with Quonset huts if they are not going to approve of any more Quonset huts at this point. Mayor Insalaco commented Joel said if someone comes to Brad and then they want to bring it to the appeals, it is out of our hands then. City Attorney Joel Stern stated from a legal standpoint, he would rather it be fought out at the zoning administrator level than an attack on the city council or city for an ordinance that prohibits Quonset huts. Councilmember Barker asked him to clarify that. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 30 OF 35 City Attorney Joel Stern stated he would prefer that they do not pass an ordinance and leave it for the administrative staff to handle those requests. Councilmember Barker commented until such time as they iron out this entire problem. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.They need to iron out all these types of issues and that means meeting with a select group of residents that want to come forward and speak.Hopefully there is not a lot of them but we will make the time to do that. Mayor Insalaco commented he is saying they should not do the vote on just the Quonset huts. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he would not recommend it. Mayor Insalaco commented he wished he had not said that. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he asked. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion with no more comments and called for a motion. stated he would not recommend it. wished he had not said that. stated he asked. There was general discussion between Councilmember Barker and City Clerk Kathleen Connelly on the language of the motion. Councilmemer Barker MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO A DATE UNCERTAIN AT THIS POINT, AND THAT IN THE MEANTIME STAFF MEET WITH A GROUP OF RESIDENTS FROM THE R1-43 AREA TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT ORDINANCE THAT WILL HOPEFULLY HELP TO SETTLE THIS PROBLEM AS IT DEALS WITH METAL STRUCTURES, CORRUGATED STEEL STRUCTURES, QUONSET HUTS, ETC. Councilmember Smithson SECONDED THE MOTION. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 31 OF 35 VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1382, REPEALING TOWING SERVICES ORDINANCE NO. 885 IN ITS ENTIRETY )City Attorney Joel Stern briefed the council on the item. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated there is something missing from this ordinance.She had pointed it out in the draft.In the title and in the body there should be a provision for repealing conflicting provisions and it was not included.It should say repealing conflicting provisions, providing for severability and declaring an emergency.The matching text should be in the body of the ordinance as well. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he will go with the city clerk on this but they have had a difference of opinion on this in the past.He will talk to her about it.They will be happy to put those changes in.They would have to state in the motion that those things be added as stated by the city clerk. Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and reopened the item to council discussion.There being no further discussion, he called for a motion. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1382 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Wilson SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 32 OF 35 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only with the emergency clause. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1382, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:THAT WORDS TO THE EFFECT OF REPEALING CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY BE ADDED TO BOTH THE TITLE AND BODY OF THE ORDINANCE. Councilmember Wilson SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS None. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF None. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES, TIMES, LOCATIONS, AND PURPOSES Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:45 P.M. AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. BE HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 16, 2012, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, RESPECTIVELY; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:45 BE HELD ON TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 2012 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilmember Smithson SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 33 OF 35 The motion carried. CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Ms. Tess Nesser, 1511 S. Cactus, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding the second annual spaghetti dinner to benefit the boys and girls club and that on Saturday, April 21, will be the Fifteenth Annual Boys and Girls Club Yesteryear Event at Dolce Vita. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Insalaco adjourned the meeting at 9:03 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1. Acceptance of Agenda. 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 20 2012. 3. Resolution No. 12-10:A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, Honoring Veterans and the Active Duty Services of the United States of America By Creating a Display of Flags to be Located at the Northwest Corner of Apache Trail and North Apache Trail. ACCEPTED THIS 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2012, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2012. OHN S. INSALACO Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 34 OF 35 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, held on the 3rd day of April, 2012.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 10th day of April, 2012. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2012 PAGE 35 OF 35