Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-04 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 4, 2011 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on January 4, 2011, 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 Wilson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Barker led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Insalaco Vice Mayor Dietz Councilmember Barker Councilmember Coleman Councilmember Eck Councilmember Wilson Staff Present: Others Present: (Councilmember Serdy was absent.) City Manager George Hoffman Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Public Safety Director Jerald Monahan Public Works Director David Fern Programs Coordinator Heather Patel Library Manager Spencer Paden Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 1 OF 26 Assistant Planner Todd Kennedy Business Advocate Janine Solley ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Dietz MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED; AND THAT THE AWARD OF BID FOR PW 2010-16, CHIP SEAL EMULSIONS, BE AWARDED TO CACTUS TRANSPORT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $2.27 PER GALLON WITH THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT ENDING JUNE 30, 2011 WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR FIVE SUCCESSIVE PERIODS OF ONE YEAR FROM THE ORIGINAL SIGNING OF THE AGREEMENT; AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT; AND THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN CROSWELL V.CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,PINAL COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. CV200900441, IN THE AMOUNT OF $450,000, WITH THE CITY'S PORTION OF THIS SETTLEMENT BEING $1,000, WHICH REPRESENTS THE CITY'S DEDUCTIBLE PER ITS INSURANCE POLICY WITH ARIZONA MUNICIPAL RISK RETENTION POOL; SETTLEMENT IS IN EXCHANGE FOR A FULL RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AND OTHER POTENTIAL LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE CITY. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CURRENT EVENTS Councilmember Wilson announced he and Vice Mayor Dietz attended a police recognition ceremony for 2 individual citizens in the community who stepped forward and assisted the police in apprehending a dangerous felon.The individual who initiated the police response is only 11 years old.Because of the history of the felon and the dangerous situation, their names have been withheld.They wanted the community to know they have young people that are stepping forward and assisting the police. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 2 OF 26 Councilmember Eck commented he had to show off his new tie as he is a grandfather for the first time. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he, the mayor and Councilmembers Barker and Eck attended the D.A.R.E. graduation at Four Peaks on December 14.It was neat seeing the fifth graders be excited about this program.His nephew, Christian Miraz, graduated with the class. Vice Mayor Dietz commented on December 17 he was privileged to attend an Explorers meeting wherein Explorer Kevin Miller received a Certificate of Appreciation for spotting someone in need on the side of the road on a ride along.It was very special.He thanked the police department for their work with the explorer program and the council for keeping the program in the budget.The youth are the future of the community.The police department and the people assigned do a magnificent job. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager George Hoffman commented the movie "Bag It" will be premiered this Saturday at the library, compliments from the Arizona State Parks Region II Manager to Steve Filipowicz for signage for Lost Dutchman Park on US 60, compliments from La Hacienda RV Resort to the Public Works Department for paving the road in front of their resort, a $35,000 Green Technical Assistance Grant by the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority for the water district, a $10,000 grant from the Arizona Companion Spay and Neuter Committee for the Animal Control spay and neuter program, and read a resolution from the League of Arizona Cities and Towns calling for collaboration and partnership with the state legislature on budget issues. PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCE NO. 1369, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 1-6 GENERAL PROVISIONS AND EXCEPTIONS, SECTION 1-6-33, EQUINE REGULATIONS BY REQUIRING THAT REQUESTS FOR NEW HORSE BOARDING BUSINESSES BE SUBJECT TO A CONDITONAL USE PERMIT ) REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 3 OF 26 )Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the council on the item. Councilmember Wilson asked what the requirements would be for a conditional use permit if a horse facility came and applied after this was implemented. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated there is an application process.Conditional use permits are typically decided by the city's planning and zoning commission.Similar to the public hearing process, there would be a work session before the commission, there would be a public hearing before the commission, the commission would make a decision on the conditional use permit request, and any approval or denial of a commission decision, if the applicant was not in agreement with the conditions of approval, could be appealed to the council.If he is asking about what kinds of details they would be asking for as part of a conditional use permit request, the ordinance talks about a site plan showing where the horse boarding, trailer parking and the existing structures are on the site.They would also need to see access and circulation.The site plan would need to be reviewed by the commission.As part of the public hearing process, all property owners within 300' would be notified of the hearing.They would hopefully solicit public input and comment there.The two basic criteria for a commercial horse boarding facility are that it be a minimum of 2.5 acres gross and that the property be located in a designated low density area on the general plan.They are basically talking about properties north of Tepee and east of Ironwood for the most part, and the properties east of Idaho and north of US 60.Those are predominately low density areas of the city. Councilmember Wilson asked if there would be any additional requirements levied on them by planning and zoning. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they would look at each situation on a case by case basis.If the commission or development team determines that there may be some special features that are lacking on the property, there might be some conditions for adequate drainage. There would probably not be retention unless they were proposing to build a substantial structure.On a residential property, REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 4 OF 26 they probably would not require anything for that.The question is hard to answer without having a specific example to look at. There might be development conditions that could apply to a property for a conditional use request. Councilmember Wilson commented they could ask for plant screenings in the front to screen off the back. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he believes the original ordinance that was adopted does not require screening for horse trailers.They would probably not make that an issue if the base ordinance does not require it.He doubts they would be requesting much more than what the base ordinance requires.They do not want walls and turn them into commercial -looking properties.It is still a residential setting.Unless there was some special reason for requiring screening or a wall, it would probably not be typical. Councilmember Wilson commented that is reaffirming what he had said and been thinking. Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing on the item. An unknown male in the audience asked what it would cost. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated a conditional use permit has a $700 application fee and a $500 advertisement fee.Most of the $500 is refunded. Mr. William Wegeng, 1431 N. Cortez, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated he already has 3 boarding stables within a half mile of his house. They were put in before ordinances were thought about.He lives on 1.25 acres with his house 50' from the property line.There are 5 acre lots with houses near him.He believes the ordinance is a good thing.The public should be allowed to determine if horse boarding facilities should be near their houses. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 5 OF 26 Ms. Joan Theo, 739 N. Thunderbird Drive, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She has 2 horses that she boards in this city.She moved here 2 years ago after looking around for horse -friendly cities.She liked what she saw better here than in Queen Creek.There are a lot of parks here for them to ride in.She is renting but would like to buy.If it becomes difficult for her, she will look elsewhere.She does not understand the purpose of this when other businesses are not under this scrutiny.She asked why horse businesses are being targeted.Horses are not generally noisy and flies are generally around a manure pile, not a neighbor's yard.She wonders why they want to restrict new businesses when the city needs the income. Mr. Wayne Standage, 1920 E. 20th Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated he is a horse owner.He showed two pictures of Apache Junction, one in the 1960's and one now.There will always be change, and people will want to live where we live.There is a lot of area in the general plan that they want to keep low density.Horse boarding started about 20 years ago and slowly grew.They have recently done ordinances on horse boarding which are among the most lenient he has found in the state and west.The issue is businesses located in a residential area and most people want to the area keep residential.GR zoning does not require a conditional use permit and R-143 does.This would allow those in the GR zone to have some input on what goes in.He is not anti -horse, but they have to look to the future to maintain the image of a small town.His final comment was to question if all the horse boarding facilities already open are currently full. Mr. James Salisbury, 4308 E. Broadway, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He boards a horse here.There is a lot of regulation on horse boarding, but not on horse owning.He does not think horse owners need to be regulated, but there needs to be consistency.If you move to an area where there are horses and you do not like horses, you do run the risk of your neighbor having horses.The existing horse boarding facilities haul their manure away.There is a residence on Goldfield and Broadway that has horses that does not haul their manure.Another residence is located below grade from that residence and the manure rolls down the hill to their property line.That is against code.There needs to be REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 6 OF 26 consistency.A horse boarding facility will have limited traffic.It is not like Home Depot, Target or another business that needs a turn lane.There might be 30 people coming in per day.He boards his horse so that it can be fed on a certain schedule and kept secure.They also have the camaraderie of being with other horse owners.They do not want draconian regulations on horse boarding, or leave it up to oversight which has consistently been shown to be not fair in their decision making. Mr. Gary Peters, Rock Shadows, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He is a horse owner and snowbird.He spends a lot of money here.It amazes him that people buy a house here with horses all around them and then they suddenly want to change everything.They should have thought of that before they bought it.He had to help another horse owner move his stall 6 inches because the neighbor did not like the horses there.Others complain about the horses on either side of them but they still move there.It does not make any sense.It seems like things are getting worse instead of better. Mr. Paul Green, 5040 E. 20th Avenue, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated he thinks the conditional use permit is probably a necessary part of this whole package that has been put together.He is concerned that the fees will stifle entrepreneurship.He asked what the $700 is for and where it goes.He suggested they waive the fees if they show us $700 in fence improvements.Good fences make good neighbors.They need to look at the dollar end. Mayor Insalaco closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Eck commented in 14 years of being on the council he has learned he does not like to talk about horses.If they talk about one issue, it has happened in other communities so he believes they think it will happen here.Every council he has served on has always been very horse -friendly.He disagrees when people say the horse people are being targeted.This is simply about a new horse REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 7 OF 26 boarding opening and what it would take to get that done.It does not affect anyone that is currently horse boarding.He understands the threat of too many regulations, but he thinks through the years they have fought to have decent regulations but nothing that overwhelmingly wrong.If they did, the horse people would let them know it.He agrees that when people move in, as a lot of realtors know or do not know, people need to do research in their area to see what is in their area.If they see corrals, you would think a little light would go on and they would see there are a lot of horses in this area and they need to check out the location.They could come down to development services and see that where they are buying is what they expect it to be.If they want to be around horses then they are there. If they do not but they want a beautiful view of the mountains, then there may be some R-31 area they may want to go to.He does believe that they need to do some research.It is completely off what the actual item is on this.What they are trying to do is take care of neighbors.If they have a conditional use permit, then a new one comes in, and they could have lived there for 30 or 40 years and all of a sudden a horse boarding moves in.I think they should have a right to speak up about it.He hopes that is what they are trying to do here. Councilmember Coleman commented he agreed with Councilmember Eck.Mr. Salisbury cited some problems with a property that was not taking care of manure.What this would do is if they had a conditional use permit process, and that property wanted to start a commercial boarding facility, then the neighbors would all have a say. They could say they are not taking care of the property now. Right now the neighbors have no voice.That is what the conditional use permit is all about.It gives them a chance for a public hearing, and he is surprised anyone would be opposed to having a public hearing on something that affects properties within 300 feet of them. Councilmember Barker commented she has been listening for weeks on this particular issue and she has tried hard to be a good listener to both sides of the situation.Both sides have very valid points.But as she sits here this evening she has to come to a point where she will have to say yes or no and has to make up her mind.This strictly a business issue.For some reason, some people are REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 8 OF 26 trying to disguise it in equine clothing.It is not that.It is not anti -horse or anti -horse boarding.This is pro people. This is allowing people who already reside in an area to be able to meet in a venue where they can hear the plan that a business is planning to do.If a business is planning to open up, they should have the money to do that because businesses that go in without the funds to keep it going are businesses that are doomed to failure in the beginning.This is just a piece of doing business.She agreed with Councilmembers Eck and Coleman. People should have the opportunity to hear that plan, to make comments, and that builds good neighborhoods.That business then understands what that neighborhood would like to see.By conforming to that, or by trying to tell them that it can be done this way or that way, it creates good neighbors and a stable situation where there are no people calling and there are no problems.People are living together because they understand what the expectations are. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he agreed. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion with no for comments and called for a motion. Councilmember Coleman MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1369 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. read the motion by title only. Councilmember Eck SECONDED City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Councilmember Coleman MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1369, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 9 OF 26 VOTE:5-1 (Councilmember Wilson voted in opposition.) The motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 10-39, DECLARING AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 1-5 DEFINITION OF HOME- BASED OCCUPATION AND ARTICLE 1-6 GENERAL PROVISIONS AND EXCEPTIONS, SECTION 1-6-21 HOME -BASED OCCUPATIONS PERMITTED AS A PUBLIC RECORD/ORDINANCE NO. 1362, TEXT AMENDMENT TO CITY'S HOME -BASED OCCUPATION DEFINITION, AM -2-08 )Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the council on the item. Councilmember Wilson commented on the change for machine welding or metal shop.He asked if the examples of the horse shoe lamp and accessories that he showed would be involved in that.They are metal and they would be welded together. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he believed they would.They could be considered under the category of welding and manufacturing.Welding and manufacturing uses are normally placed in heavy commercial and industrial zoning.A home occupation that proposes welding and manufactured products is probably not a home occupation that they would approve. Councilmember Wilson commented the second part of his question is if an existing home -based occupation, currently in operation and maybe in violation of several of these things that we currently have, would be •grandfathered in where they can continue operating their business without any difficulty. Senior Planner Rudy Esquvias stated that is correct unless they propose to expand, or change, or change their location.The existing home businesses would be allowed to continue to operate unless they propose changes or REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 10 OF 26 unless they are otherwise violating the home occupation regulations under which they were approved. Vice Mayor Dietz commented those are currently licensed in the city home businesses. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct.The ordinance does not differentiate between what would be allowed on a large lot property versus what might be allowed on a small lot property.These criteria apply generally.In a situation where someone might be manufacturing small products on a large lot property, the nearest neighbor is 100 fee away, that neighbor might not be impacted.The regulations apply generally.If they approve something like that on a large lot property, they would also be approving something like that on a small lot property where your neighbors might be 10 feet away.They could be approving an application for someone who lives in an apartment with a neighbor a wall away from them.The home occupation regulations apply generally to the entire community.That is why some of the criteria may appear stringent, as manufacturing noise, special tools, and hazardous materials could affect those people in a closer living environment than others. Councilmember Coleman asked if they could write the ordinance to where if they had 1.25 acre they could have a welding shop. stated some of the ordinances that those criteria.One of the things commission took out was listing of They were comfortable with listing permitted.They stayed away from allowed uses as there is an infinite list of what might qualify as a home occupation.They stopped talking about specific uses and the idea of what might be allowed on large lot properties versus a small lot property. That provision was also not in the original model they modeled our ordinance off of.Some cities do have those provisions, though. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias they looked at had some of the planning and zoning things that were permitted. things that should not be Vice Mayor Dietz commented there are a number of them here that could be done on 1.25 acres REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 11 OF 26 if they are done properly.Someone could have a furniture refinishing shop out back.It could be ventilated and have all the correct precautions.It could be done.He would hate to see them and others being left out that could be done on a larger property. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated some of these uses will require fire walls, ventilation hoods, special paint or odor containment facilities.Those businesses would be subject to special building code and/or fire code requirements.If those should be typically allowed as a home occupation would be a policy question. Councilmember Barker asked him to define the word manufactured. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated it is basically the making of products for sale. Councilmember Barker stated that could be as simple as making dolls and that would be prohibited. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct. Councilmember Barker commented the word craft, that was in there at one point but was taken out because he no longer wanted to be that specific, is not outlawed.A craft would involve the putting together of things for possible sale.That would be manufacturing that could not be a home occupation. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he would ask for a detailed narrative of what the applicant is proposing.Generally speaking, the manufacture of goods from a residential property is not something they would permit as a home occupation. Councilmember Barker stated the horse shoe lamp would be manufactured.It would not be allowed. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 12 OF 26 Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct. Councilmember Barker commented she believes they have a long way to go on this ordinance.She does not feel that it is ready. Councilmember Wilson commented he mentioned yesterday about talking to someone about insurance and what is required.He addressed the question a little differently tonight, asking what would happen if he started a fire with his welder, had a home business where he does not have a city business license, but gets business insurance to cover his home and what he is doing.He said most likely the insurance would cover the damage, but since they are not a legal business they would deny the insurance when it came time for renewal.It would dramatically affect his ability to get insurance in the future.If his business is recognized as legal in the city, there would be no problem. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias asked where the liability is for the city if it approves a business use wherein somebody starts a fire.He asked if the city would be covered by their insurance. City Attorney Joel Stern stated anybody can sue for anything.However, the lawsuit would have to be crafted to where it proves that there was negligence on the city, that the city should have had conditions that would have eliminated those risks.It depends on the facts.There is a possibility that the city would have some exposure but it would be case by case. Councilmember Wilson stated that would be the same today if something were to happen now. It would be the same situation. City Attorney Joel Stern stated it would be case by case. Mayor Insalaco commented he knows that staff and planning and zoning worked very hard and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 13 OF 26 long on this, but he feels like Councilmember Barker.There are still some things in here that are not right. Councilmember Eck commented he has a problem with number 4 of the criteria, that there can be no more than one non-resident employee.There are so many different situations that could call for 3 or 4 employees.He does not think that one should be in there.He could see if it was some type of commercial business with a dozen employees.He does not think they should be using the number of one for non- resident employees. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the intent of that is to not have a lot of traffic coming to and from the home.The intent is to allow a business in the residence without changing the residential character of the residence.On a large lot property or maybe a 7,000 sq.ft. lot 2 or 3 employees would not be an impact.If someone is running a business out of an apartment, it very well could be an impact. Councilmember Eck commented if would have to be something like online or small for them to be operating out of an apartment. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated it could be. Councilmember Eck commented he is just saying at this time that number should not even be in there.There are also other things.He is not comfortable with this ordinance at all.He would have a very difficult time passing it. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he thanked Rudy for his time and work. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the thanks should go to Todd Kennedy as he did most of the work. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he thinks they should take what they have dated with today's date, with the new revisions, have each of us go over it, postpone it REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 14 OF 26 and bring it back, and see what we can do.See what kind of changes we are looking at. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is fine if it is the council's prerogative. Vice Mayor Dietz commented there are 4 or 5 people here that have a few ideas that, although late, would like to see a few changes. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that they do need to understand that in the meantime the only thing they have to rely on is the definition.The definition is very heavily geared towards protecting residential neighborhoods. Councilmember Coleman asked how a home arts studio where sculptures were being created would be viewed, and would there be first -amendment rights issues.He asked if that would be manufacturing.They are not selling it from the home but are taking it to a gallery. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated there was a provision in here that talked about studios and dance and music lessons.The council wanted those items taken out.When they talk about art, they are into a first amendment category.If they paint, sculpt, write or whatever else it may be at home, those may have extra protections as they are offering some kind of service, such as architecture, accounting or internet sales.The city attorney is much more versed at first amendment issues. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he agreed with Rudy. Councilmember Coleman commented what he saw from Councilmember Wilson last night would be labeled as art. Councilmember Barker commented it could be a craft. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 15 OF 26 Councilmember Coleman stated he is a little fuzzy on that. Mayor Insalaco commented he believed they are all fuzzy on that. City Manager George Hoffman commented if they do send them back to do some more work, which they can do, he is interested on if they want them to explore differentiating this based on land use size zoning. The consensus was that was a good idea. Councilmember Eck commented in his mind he is thinking of 1.25 acres.He thinks a majority of these will be large lots. Councilmember Barker commented she did not think that would be true. Councilmember Eck commented he thinks a majority of the home based occupations will be large lots. Councilmember Barker stated she thinks there are numerous and probably more small lot, single dwelling residential areas where people are manufacturing because they are creating dolls, jewelry and all kinds of things that by the definition means they are doing something illegal. There is something wrong with that.That is what these people are doing.She asked what other types of home based businesses, such as the plumbing he was talking about the other night, are there.Most of the rest of them are going to involve what he defines as manufacturing.There is something wrong with that. Vice Mayor Dietz commented he thinks they should get the latest update, go over that, get that information to Rudy and have another work session on it. Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing on the item. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 16 OF 26 Mr. Clark Smithson, 1700 S. Weaver Drive, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated he thinks there should be different treatment for the large acre lots.He has a hard time believing dolls, jewelry or quilts are manufacturing.It does not affect the neighborhood, and things that do not affect the neighborhood should not be prohibited. If there is no impact, there should be no problem.A person who does accounting and has someone come in occasionally is not an impact.He would consider those horse shoes art, along with dolls and jewelry.The overriding thing is that if it does not affect the neighborhood, the city has no business getting involved. Ms. Joan Theo, 739 N. Thunderbird Drive, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated she was glad they are reconsidering it.She does not see where lot size has anything to do with it.She was concerned with what stored inside means, especially caustic items.She asked if that meant in the house or garage, but that it was okay to put them on a patio.She also disagreed with limiting the number of employees as in this economy that is crazy.It is anti -productive to economic growth. Ms. Denise Moulson, 2094 W. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She commented it states that a home based occupation should mean an activity carried on by the occupant of a dwelling as a secondary location.She asked what a secondary location means.Someone would be violating that if they have their primary business there.This is the code that now stands in effect.She agreed with when it changes the dwelling and the character of the residence.When someone has a business and they expand it many times over, it is like running three businesses out of the same house on less than a half acre with noisy trucks going day and night.She works during the week and gets up early in the morning.She likes to sleep in on weekends, but when she hears a water truck starting up at 7 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday, that is a commercial business.It is not someone sitting in the house making quilts or jewelry, doing internet sales, making phone calls or doing tax returns.These are what home based businesses should be.Running trucks and vehicles, having customers come to the house all the time, and they know when the city is not working so they do as they please, and she is told REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 17 OF 26 to bring in evidence, pictures, dates, times and license plate numbers.She provided that to the city and was told they need more information.They need more proof.They need to come over there and sit there and see what is going on in this residence. She is not opposed to home based businesses, but not to this level where it is a commercial business.She asked how many businesses are they allowed to have at one location.She asked why they would be allowed to have customers come to their house. That should be zoned in a commercial location.She personally feels there is more hardship on the horse boarders and their conditions than zoning is doing towards people who are running these businesses.She does not have peace and quiet at her home.If the council lived across the street from her, she is sure they would agree with her.Someone needs to do something about it.There are so many different issues.It has been going on for the last two years.There should not be any employees or merchandise for sale at a residential location. There are so many things wrong with this.She disagreed with customer hours being from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.She asked if that is Monday through Friday or everyday.There are a lot of people with home based occupations that live on her street, but you would not know it if you drove down the street because they park their vehicles in the back and they are very conscious about when the times the start their vehicles.But then the water truck pumps the water on a daily basis, plus starting and stopping the truck, and then there are customers.They have a water truck, a dog kennel, and a casket and funeral business across the street.She asked what they mean by a mortuary. She asked if that includes selling caskets, headstones and having a hearse parked in the front yard.A lot needs to be changed, but every time an ordinance is changed something is left out or is forgotten to be taken out.She hopes they will take the time to think about this.She does not think any of them on the city council would like to live in her neighborhood and have to listen to this constantly.For the horse boarding they are requiring the neighborhoods to be notified and have the right to speak before they can open.The same should be done for residential businesses. Mayor Insalaco closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council discussion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 18 OF 26 Councilmember Eck commented he can relate to what Denise was speaking about as far as living in that kind of neighborhood.He has lived for 20 plus years on his lot and the entire area out back was mesquite and palo verde trees.The park that owns that finally bladed it off and put in fill dirt.Now he has $100,000 to $200,000 diesels 20 feet from his house running their engines at all hours of the morning and night.It is not a business, but he can tell you how annoying that is as his neighborhood was always so peaceful for all those years.It is just a small part of this whole ordinance.It is frustrating. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT STAFF GO BACK, MAKE SOME SERIOUS REFINEMENTS TO THIS ORDINANCE, KEEPING IN MIND LOT SIZES AS A POSSIBILITY, LET US FIGURE OUT WHAT MANUFACTURING IS, AND HOW MANY HOME BUSINESSES CAN A PERSON HAVE.THE BASIS OF THIS ORDINANCE WAS TO PROTECT NEIGHBORS FROM A VARIETY OF THINGS WHILE ALSO GIVING FOLKS THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A HOME BASED OCCUPATION.IT IS A VERY DELICATE BALANCE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.BUT SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER IF THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE AT ALL, THEY NEED TO FIND THAT BALANCE OR WE MAY AS WELL THROW IT OUT BECAUSE WE WILL KEEP COMING BACK AND REVISITING AND I THINK YOU GUYS ARE PROBABLY AS SICK OF IT AS WE ARE. Councilmember Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. COuncilmember Barker CONTINUED HER MOTION WITH IN ORDER TO AVOID THE PUBLICATION COSTS, HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE THIS PUBLIC HEARING TO APRIL 5 WITH A WORK SESSION ON APRIL 4. There was general discussion as to when the public hearing and work session should be held due to major changes having to be taken back to the planning and zoning commission.It was determined it should come back to have the work session in May and the public hearing in June. Councilmember Barker AMENDED HER MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS TO THE WORK SESSION OF MAY 2 AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OF JUNE 7. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 19 OF 26 Councilmember Eck commented they had a difficult time talking about neighborhood standards. It reached a peak.We could get it straight as to how we wanted to do it.We finally did an ordinance with a subcommittee. Councilmember Barker stated Councilmember Wilson has made that suggestion, also. Councilmember Eck commented otherwise we will stay where we are at right now.We are just talking and not giving directions.We are just saying we do not like it, not here is what they need to do.There are real strong opinions on each side.That is how they got the neighborhood ordinance through. Councilmember Barker asked him if he would like to amend the motion. Councilmember Eck stated he did not.He does not think they need to start a subcommittee now, just that it be something for them to think about.He does not know the time frame they would like to start it. Mayor Insalaco requested Councilmember Barker to repeat her motion. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT THIS ORDINANCE BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE MAY 2 WORK SESSION AND THEN THE JUNE 7 PUBLIC HEARING. Councilmember Coleman SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. USE OF FISCAL YEAR 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND STATE SPECIAL PROJECT FUNDS )Program Coordinator Heather Patel briefed the council on the item. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 20 OF 26 Vice Mayor Dietz asked if they could combine the two on the left side for the $99,000. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated they can as they want to get as close to the $140,000 available as we can.This project was one of the two projects recommended by the leadership team.She briefed them on the project recommended for the State Special Projects funding. Vice Mayor Dietz commented there had been some nice, special things they had wanted for North Apache Trail, nice downtowny things.He asked if by doing this it would interfere with the other improvements they want to do.He asked if they would have to rip part of this project out to continue the Phelps improvements as they go up. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated the original project submitted was a whole project. We picked the items we knew we could do without having to rip them up later.The sidewalks will look further away from the road because at some point they will be widening the road in some areas.They looked at the phased approach as to what they could do now and then fill in the rest of it with the next application. Councilmember Eck commented he really likes the continuation of doing the downtown and sprawling out from that.He thinks that is how they can create the downtown; they go from there and continue it.He does not understand why they no longer do it with Payson.He asked her to brief him on that. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated there are some changes going through the Community Development Block Grant program whether it is through the state or county.With the estimated shifts of things they believe will be happening 2012, if they entered into an agreement with Payson for 2011-2012, they would not be able to fulfill that obligation in 2012.So to be safe and to make sure we got our allotted amount of money, we decided to sever the relationship. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 21 OF 26 Councilmember Barker commented she liked option one of the sidewalks on the north side for the Community Development Block Grant because that comes up to the focal point and it lends some continuity to the project that they are trying to build.It seems to her that it would be a really good option. Vice Mayor Dietz asked what the cost of that is. Councilmember Barker stated it is $99,000.Option two goes from Quik Trip east and it seems that we want to fill in the hole on the north side first before we start going east on the other side. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated option one is actually a combination of the old Circle K plus the Quik Trip. Councilmember Barker commented she had misunderstood.Option one combines the two. Mayor Insalaco commented that it does not put them close to the $140,000. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated from the $140,000 there are also administrative costs that come off the top.This is actually quite a good number.They also have to include any contingency when they prepare the contract. Councilmember Wilson asked what the in house estimate was. Program Coordinator Heather Patel stated these estimates came from public works and they were conservative when they came up with these fees together. 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. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 22 OF 26 Vice Mayor Dietz MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING THE PROJECTS TO BE SUBMITTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 CDBG RA FUNDING AND FISCAL YEAR 2011 SSP FUNDING:THAT OLD WEST HIGHWAY BE SUBMITTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 CDBG RA FUNDING AND THAT NORTH APACHE TRAIL BE SUBMITTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 SSP FUNDING; AND THAT STAFF BEGIN THE PREPARATION OF THE APPLICATIONS AND ALL RELEVANT MATERIALS REQUIRED FOR APPLICATION SUBMISSION. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1370, AMENDING APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE 2-7-4 BY ELIMINATING THE ONE-YEAR TERM RESTRICTION FOR OFFICERS, AND CHANGES TO LIBRARY BOARD BYLAWS RELATING TO BEING AN OFFICER ON THE LIBRARY BOARD FOR CONSECUTIVE YEARS AND OTHER CLERICAL CORRECTIONS ) ) Paden briefed the council on the item. Library Manager Spencer 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. 1370 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 23 OF 26 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1370, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Dietz 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 Vice Mayor Dietz announced that the work session scheduled for Monday, January 17, 2011 is cancelled due to the Civil Rights Holiday.He MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:45 P.M. AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. BE HELD ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2010, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, RESPECTIVELY. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. CALL TO THE PUBLIC: REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 24 OF 26 Mr. Jorge Vera, 586 E. Navajo, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding city bus transportation. Councilmember Eck commented he is basically talking about public transportation.The city has looked into public transportation and it is very expensive.At the least they have tried to get the Metro Bus to come to Meridian Road but they will not come past Power.They said it is too expensive and the city would have to pay the cost.With this economy, the city would have to lay off employees if they wanted to go with additional transportation than what is offered at the multi -generational center.The city has tried to get public transportation. Mayor Insalaco commented he understands that Florence is discontinuing its bus service because it got too expensive for them to handle going from Florence to Casa Grande.There are not enough people that use it to make it worthwhile, especially with gas prices going through the roof. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Insalaco adjourned the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1. Acceptance of Agenda. 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 7, 2010. 3. Consideration of Award of bid to Cactus Transport, Inc. in the amount of $2.27 per gallon of CRS -2P applied used for street maintenance chip seal operations. 4. Consideration of settlement agreement to Croswell v. City of Apache Junction,Pinal County Superior Court No. CV200900441. ACCEPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2011, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2011. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 25 OF 26 ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk N S. INSALACO Mayor 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 4th day of January, 2011.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 12th day of January, 2011. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 4, 2011 PAGE 26 OF 26