Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-01-20 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 20, 2009 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona, was held on January 20, 2009, 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 Coleman gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Wilson led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Insalaco Vice Mayor Eck Councilmember Barker Councilmember Coleman Councilmember Dietz Councilmember Serdy Councilmember Wilson Staff Present:City Manager George Hoffman Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Public Safety Director Jerald Monahan City Engineer Giao Pham Public Works Director David Fern Development Svcs. Director Brad Steinke Economic Dev. Director Steve Filipowicz Asst. to the City Manager Matt Busby REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 1 OF 28 Others Present:City Magistrate James Hazel CoMmunity Relations Manager Pat Brenner Business Advocate Janine Solley Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED; AND THAT THE AWARD OF BID FOR PROJECT PW 2007-10, TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT BROADWAY AVENUE AND PHELPS DRIVE, BE AWARDED TO HAN MAR ENERGY IN THE AMOUNT OF $112,350 PLUS 10% FOR UNFORESEEN CHANGE ORDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,235 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $123,535.00. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous, with the exception as indicated on Item No. 3 by Councilmember Serdy. The motion carried. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Community Relations Manager Pat Brenner gave a brief powerpoint presentation of the Home Rule Option. Department of Public Safety Director Jerald Monahan gave a brief synopsis on the career of Sergeant Ron Paul and Mayor Insalaco presented him with a retirement plaque honoring his 20 year career. CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Mr. Milo Hardt, 5770 E. Mining Camp Street, Apache Junction, addressed the council to thank them for honoring Ron Paul. Ms. Janice Stenglein, 733 W. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council to request they look at the fees for business owners to improve their properties. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 2 OF 28 Ms. Tess Nesser, 1511 S. Cactus, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding the Renaissance Festival approaching. Mr. Patrick LeClair, 2521 E. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council regarding the outbuilding ordinance with concerns for the fees and the restricted uses. Vice Mayor Eck commented the outbuilding ordinance is being discussed now as far as changing items in it.What they currently have could be revised soon. Councilmember Serdy advised Ms. Stenglein that the council is aware of the fees and they are working on that also. Vice Mayor Eck added the development fees are being worked on. She also mentioned a house being built outside the city.He does not know when that house was built but there was a time when it was much less expensive to build outside the city because of development fees.However, the county has a $9,000 development fee and they are holding to as high a standard as the city is with building codes and other standards.It used to be very easy to build in the county compared to the city, but it has equalized out over time. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CURRENT EVENTS Councilmember Coleman announced he would not be at the next meeting as his son-in-law is graduating from boot camp with the marines. Councilmember Serdy commented they have been trying to get the federal government to deed the rodeo grounds to the city.We missed the opportunity with the last administration.State Senator McGuire and State Senator Rios will now present the case to the new administration once the new cabinet gets settled. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager George Hoffman thanked staff and councilmembers for thanking citizens for shopping in our community on Saturday, read an email complimenting the library and its staff, and delegated Community Relations Manager Pat Brenner to present a video on the 30th anniversary of the city. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 3 OF 28 PUBLIC HEARINGS APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR ELKS LODGE #2349 FOR FEBRUARY 26, 2009, FOR LOST DUTCHMAN DAYS ) )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item. Mayor Insalaco requested the applicant address the council. The applicant declined to speak. 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 Dietz MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR ELKS LODGE #2349 FOR LOST DUTCHMAN DAYS ON FEBRUARY 26, 2009, SUBMITTED BY DENNY WALTER, BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilmember Wilson SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 08-38, DECLARING PORTIONS OF PUBLIC ROADWAY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON SIXTH AVENUE FROM VISTA ROAD TO WICKIUP ROAD AND RAINDANCE ROAD FROM SIXTH AVENUE TO BROADWAY AVENUE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE ) )City Engineer Giao Pham briefed the council on the item. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 4 OF 28 Mayor Insalaco requested the applicant address the council. The applicant declined to speak. 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 discussion, he called for a motion. Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 08-38, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, DECLARING THAT PORTIONS OF PUBLIC ROADWAY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON SIXTH AVENUE FROM VISTA ROAD TO WICKIUP ROAD AND ON RAINDANCE ROAD FROM SIXTH AVENUE TO BROADWAY AVENUE AS SET FORTH IN EXTINGUISHMENT CASE EX -2008-04 ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC USE, BE APPROVED. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1331, CASE PZ-5-08, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING BY 16TH AVENUE LLC TO ALLOW A 42 UNIT TOWNHOUSE SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY 4 ACRES )Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the council on the item. Vice Mayor Eck asked what guarantee does the property owner to the south have of having access to their property. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they will be asking the developers to prepare a cross access document as staff has done with other developments where access drives and parking lots are shared.It will be a REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 5 OF 28 recorded document to assure that property owner access across the private drive. Vice Mayor Eck asked if it was a gated community. Senior Planner Rudy Esquiv stated he did not believe so. Vice Mayor Eck asked if it Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias Councilmember Wilson commented they had also asked if the width of the road and circles are in line with the needs of the fire district. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the private drive down the center of the development does not meet a typical right-of-way standard for a residential neighborhood such as this.Staff would typically be asking for a 50' right-of-way.This is a 28' or 32' right-of-way. However, the blacktop is the same as if it were a neighborhood street.The drivable surface is the same width, however, you start running into property lines, buildings and sidewalks immediately off that surface.In a typical publicly -dedicated street there would be some extra room there before you got to property lines and setback lines.It is a little tighter, but the driving surface is the same.The cul-de-sac is adequate; the fire district did not express any concerns about the turning radii.Their one concern was the adequate placement of fire hydrants. Councilmember Wilson asked if there will be a problem when someone tries to back out of the A unit with it being as tight as it is. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the diagram represents the typical 3 -point turn.Within the little court streets themselves, there is enough room to back up out of the two -car garages.Staff normally requires a 24 -foot back up width, there is sufficient width in that area to execute a 3 -point turn. Councilmember Coleman asked how many total parking spaces are there. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 6 OF 28 Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated there are 2 parking spaces for each unit, each unit having a 2 -car garage, and they are just over the minimum of guest parking spaces.The ordinance requires 2.33 parking spaces for each residential unit with presumably the .33 being reserved for guest parking.There should be 1 guest parking space for every 3 residential units.The plan as proposed, because they do offer guest parking down by the cul-de-sac as well as parking spaces in certain areas along the street, exceeds the minimum guest parking by about 2 spaces. Mayor Insalaco asked if they had received complaints from any of the neighbors around the area. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they did not receive any written complaints.There was one gentleman who stood up in protest at the planning and zoning commission meeting. Mayor Insalaco commented he drove by there when they had the original proposal and he had no problem with that.Now they have doubled it to 42.The townhouses are close together and to him it will look like a monstrosity.It is like putting a 200 home subdivision on a 1.25 acre property.It does not look right and does not fit. However, there have been no formal complaints. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the applicants held a neighborhood meeting.They only had a couple people show up at the meeting and they were in favor of the project.The gentleman who spoke up at the planning and zoning meeting is a winter visitor so he was not there when the applicants had their original meeting. Councilmember Coleman commented they had the one gentleman talk to them that owns the property just south of this site. Vice Mayor Eck commented that was Mr. Bordrero. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 7 OF 28 Mayor Insalaco requested the applicant address the council. Ms. Susan Prichard, member of the LLC representing the Villagio, addressed the council.She stated she agreed with Councilmember Barker that a concrete entrance would not be the best approach.She showed an example of what the front entrance might look like if they had wrought iron and block, rather than just block.They are trying to show off what they have to offer to the city, not block it from view. They believe a view fence would do that.There had been a concern of the vice mayor on a measurement on the plat. Vice Mayor Eck commented he had a measurement of 9'5" on the plat at the work session.He talked to Rudy afterwards and was shown a revised version that had the minimum space for parking. Ms. Susan Prichard stated there is a measurement on the larger plat and there was a 5' measurement that references water and sewer for easements on that property. Vice Mayor Eck commented his concern was parking lots next to the 28' easement.He wanted to make sure they were adequate enough so that when someone parked there that they were not out on the 28' as it is a minimum.He was told they were up to standard. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated parallel parking spaces need a 9' by 23' space. Ms. Susan Prichard stated they met with the neighbors in May.It was a productive meeting; they listened to everything they had to say and took those suggestions into consideration and incorporated those into the preliminary plat that has been presented.They are trying to build a home that can be affordable to policemen, firemen, teachers, nurses, first time home buyers such as students that have just graduated from college, and retirees.They would like to have a mixed neighborhood that is not isolated to 55 plus or first time home buyers.Recognizing the environmental impact of the homes, they like to build homes as green as possible.They REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 8 OF 28 are looking at appliances, recycled carpet, paints that are low VOC or no VOC, and things thai will improve our environment such as placing the windows on the product to catch the best light and the positioning of the buildings on the lots themselves. They initially talked about a gated community but there is no gate planned at this time.They have contacted the neighbor to the southwest and recognize that he has a place in the community.They will work with him on that.She believes there is a recorded easement for his ingress and egress.They will have it reworked so that it fits within the boundaries of the product they are building.She had her architect and civil engineer there to answer any questions. Councilmember Barker asked if they doubled from 21 to 42 because they have sold a lot of these or have had a great amount of interest in them. Ms. Sue Prichard commented the reason for doubling is to increase the current economic status of projects and where they are going in the near future. They are trying to bring a product to the market that is sellable at a price that is viable to the market.The way they felt they could do this was to increase the density to today's proposal.They think there is a need for it.A lot of people that are winter visitors do not want a large yard or something that they are responsible for in the months when they are not here.This provides a product that takes care of that need.If it is a dual working family, they do not necessarily have the time to come home and do yard maintenance but they would like to own something that is their own home to raise their family in. Vice Mayor Eck asked what their price range would be. Ms. Susan Prichard stated that is not totally determined.They are trying to keep them in the $140,000 to $180,000 range for 2 bedroom/2 bath to a 3 bedroom/2 bath with a 2 car garage on all units. Councilmember Coleman asked her to explain the 900 square foot model as he could not see it on any of the paperwork. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 9 OF 28 Ms. Susan Prichard stated they have not totally identified where the bedrooms and bathrooms will be located.It is a flexible figure.She asked the architect to join her. Mr. Edmir Dzudza, architect, stated the 900 square foot unit will be Unit Type A, it will have the same layout for the plat for Building A in the indentation area, but the extra 200 square feet will be someone's backyard instead of living space.They will cut one bedroom to make Unit A.It will be a one bedroom/one bathroom unit.It is an option to the buyer. Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing on the item. Mr. Cliff Axt, 10322 E. Breathless, Gold Canyon, addressed the council.He worked hard to get his financing when the 21 -lot subdivision was approved. He became ill when he was halfway through.If he had to do this in this economy, he could not pencil in 21 units.He lost money on the sale.Knowing the real estate market, the density has to happen and affordable housing is what we need.He requested they approve it. Ms. Kim Bongiorno, one of the owners, addressed the council.Their goal is to transform a dirt lot into a functional and enjoyable piece of property. They feel it will enhance the area.It is currently not pleasing to the surrounding neighbors.She and her husband, Mark Singer, knocked on doors to get feedback from people on what they would like to see.Most of the people wanted something eye -pleasing and vibrant that would have a community feel.Their group has been in real estate for many years and she prides herself in finding floor plans and price points for first time homeowners where they can be comfortable.They will be functional, smart floor plans of slightly less than 1,000 square feet to just a little under 1,400 square feet.They are the owners so the homes will be pleasing so they can sell as quickly as possible so that they do not fail and lose money. They will have desert color with contrasting colors to make them look vibrant. They will have archways, popouts and overhangs. The homes will be green built.They would like to establish a REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 10 OF 28 LEED system here for green buildings.They will apply for FHA and VA financing.They will also offer seller financing for those that cannot qualify through the banks. Mr. Mark Singer, 32531 N. Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, addressed the council.The views are important to people.They spent some time with staff and learned there is a great need for development, but development in the right way.There have been little new housing projects in the city in the last year, and those have been badly planned with dysfunctional floor plans and the price points too high. They would like to use this as a template to succeed in the next development.They would like to continue doing projects in the city; they have had good cooperation from staff.They looked at Peoria and Phoenix but Apache Junction has more to offer in the future.Other projects that can be done here in the future are senior housing and hotels. Mayor Insalaco closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak and reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Barker stated she came in thinking no due to the density.She really liked the original concept.But now Mark and Kim and Cliff have convinced her to build more rather than less. Vice Mayor Eck commented he thinks they would all prefer to see the 21 unit subdivision but this is more realistic.He thinks it is a benefit to the area. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1331 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 11 OF 28 The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1331, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT:THAT NUMBER 3 ON PAGE 2 OF 4 OF THIS ORDINANCE BE AMENDED, INSTEAD OF SAYING A DECORATIVE MASONRY WALL, BE AMENDED TO A DECORATIVE VIEW FENCE. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Mayor Insalaco called for a ten minute break. Mayor Insalaco reconvened the meeting. RESOLUTION NO. 08-40, CASE SD -1-08, REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE AN APPROXIMATE 4 ACRE PARCEL INTO 42 LOTS FOR A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT ) )Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias had briefed the council on this item with the previous ordinance. 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 discussion, he called for a motion. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 08-40, A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA, APPROVING A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR THE "VILLAGIO" TONWHOMES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 12 OF 28 SUBDIVISION, IN CASE SD -1-08, BY 16TH AVENUE LLC, REPRESENTED BY SUSAN PRICHARD AND MARK SINGE:R, BE APPROVED. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. DEVELOPMENT FEE WAIVER APPEAL BY MUHAMMED AND ZEE ZIAULLAH FOR A PROPOSED PIZZA PUB AT 2341 NORTH APACHE TRAIL )Development Services Director Brad Steinke briefed the council on the item. Mr. Mehmood Ziaullah, 2341 N. Apache Trail, owner of the Dash In, addressed the council.He bought the property over 2 years ago.It was run down.With 2 years of hard work and customer service they have turned the business around.They have doubled their sales, helping the city make more money off this business.Their goal was to provide the citizens and visitors with great products, a great price and great customer service set in the western atmosphere with Superstition Mountain as the backdrop.They have had a great response.They believe everyone is aware of the hard work they have put in.They also own the building next door.They would like to add another business to the city with the same atmosphere and great price.They would like to open a pizza place which will assist in stimulating the city economy.Their goal is to create a place for passersby to stop in the city and spend their money there.They hope to attract the people going to the lake, campgrounds, mountains, trails, museum, ghost town, etc.By doing so, they will be contributing to the Shop Local program and the tax base.In addition to the pizza pub, they would like to have a game room, gift shop and a live music area. It will have a western theme to attract the horsemen and historians while the game room will give the young in the community a safe place to hang out.They will provide local entertainment at night.After starting this project, they learned the development fees will be between $52,000 and $61,000.With the economy the way it is, and having a realistic REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 13 OF 28 but limited budget for the project, those fees will put a stop to their dream.He has done extensive research on the ordinance.On page 1, number 2 states the fee shall bear a rational relationship to the burden of the developer.On applicability, it says development fees shall apply to all the new development in the area.While they are in the city, they are on Highway 88.The ordinance also states it applies to new buildings and this is an existing building.On page 2, number 1 states the fee applies to parks, open space, and the library for new residential development, not commercial development.The next page has road development fees.They are on Highway 88 which is maintained by the Arizona Department of Transportation, not Apache Junction.These fees do not apply to this building. If they subtract the road fee, park fee, open space fee and library fee, they are left with only the municipal building fee at 0.67% and the police fee at 11.6%, combined to 12.27%.It would be $2.55 per square foot multiplied by 2,800 square feet which equals $7,140.That is the fee he believes should be applied and that he is willing to pay.The initial fee of $52,000 does not apply to this case.He asked for their consideration.He is currently renting the building to Mediacom for $3,000 a month.Apache Junction gets $66 per month and $792 a year.As a pizza pub, they will do approximately $2,000 of business a day with the sales tax of $360 a month and $15,840 a year going to the city.He will employ at least 15 people at that location.He requested they recalculate this fee. Mr. Milo Hardt, 5770 E. Mining Camp Street, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He commented on the improvements to the building and their great customer service, that it is not a rational development fee, and that it is the city's opportunity to more than double the retail at this location. Mr. Patrick LeClair, 2521 E. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated the facility has been improved remarkably and he believes they would do a great job with a pizza place in that area. Mr. John Kantowski, 835 W. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated there is something wrong with the fee structure and it needs to be fixed soon, nothing is being built here, and the need to find REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 14 OF 28 a place that is similar to us to draft ordinances from, not the other cities in the valley. Mr. Don Holston, 3151 N. Val Vista, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He stated the previous owner was unpopular, these new owners turned the place around, it would be nice have a pizza place up there and requested they reduce the fees if possible. Mr. Don Masden, 6089 E. Mining Camp, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He spoke of the improvements made and the great job the applicants are doing. Mrs. Shannon Flynn, 305 N. Acacia, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated she was there to give the owners some support and does not believe the $53,000 development fee is right. Ms. Christa Rizzi, 1755 S. Sombrero Road, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated if it seems common sense, lower the fees, let him come in, let the community support him and get the continuous revenue. Mr. B.J. Taylor, 5680 E. Bell, Apache Junction, addressed the council.He complimented the council on doing a good job, and then commented about the success and growth of the applicants.This is about supporting small businesses. Ms. Janice Stenglein, 733 W. Windsong, Apache Junction, addressed the council.She stated these people are hard workers, have turned the store around, that they should support small businesses and that the fees are excessive for a lot of small businesses. Mayor Insalaco closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak and reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Coleman commented he is generally in support of development fees.There REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 15 OF 28 are only two places money for infrastructure can come from which is either the taxpayer or tti3 developer. Those are the only two places they can come from.Some of the comments were interesting, as in using Maricopa for an example.He believed the New York Post called Maricopa the capital of repossessions, short sales and foreclosures.He does not want to be like Maricopa.This one was hard for him because it is an existing building.They are not trying to put him out of business; people are starting to mix things.This is the warehouse next door to their already operating business.It is on Highway 88 and part of those road fees go for the arterials to get people there.It is not for Highway 88.The part he has trouble with is the part where the development fees apply to an existing building if the intensity of the use is changing.If the intensity of the use is a warehouse where they might get 3 or 4 cars in there a day to a restaurant, that is a significant change.However, it is already attached to a gas station which generates a lot of traffic already.To him, it is more like the existing use for it.He was genuinely surprised at the amount of the impact fee.At the last meeting, he requested the assistant city manager find out what it would cost for a 2,800 square foot building in another community.Generally, our impact fees are reasonable.They are a small percentage of a project's cost.They probably paid that or more for their liquor license. he paid $1,500. he got a deal. Mr. Mehmood Ziaullah stated Councilmember Coleman stated City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated it is strictly beer and wine. Councilmember Coleman stated he was told that for a building of that size the city is the most expensive. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated that is correct. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 16 OF 28 Councilmember Coleman stated that is not their intent and Wae not their intent.They do not want to be the most expensive.He thinks there is something wrong.Development fees are based on the level of services that are being provided to the community right now.They are not evil or bad.They have been used for a lot of good things in the community.Most of the time, depending on the size of the building, they are in line.We need to find out why ours is so much higher at this level.He thinks the mitigating factor for him is the two buildings together already generate a lot of traffic.They are already there and it will not change the intensity of the use to the degree of taking a warehouse standing alone and converting that to a restaurant would.He is amenable to asking staff to work out a development agreement with the owners and going about it that way.He thinks some of the comments about development fees have been unfair and uninformed if the development fees are less than some of the surrounding communities except for this size of building. Everyone would be coming here if that were the only factor because the city is less.But it is not the only factor.When he goes out and talks to businesses, such as the gentleman who was one of the developers on San Tan Village and lives in Gold Canyon, and asks him why he does not do a project in Apache Junction, he is told it is because they do not know what is going to go in next to them.The city has no standards.He wanted to see his assets protected.That is where the city is at a disadvantage.He also talked about political instability driving them away, as they do not know who will be making the decision.They question coming into a community and investing money when they could have three different councils in the next 6 months, depending on who wins in the recall and who wins in the regular election.It is that kind of instability that drives them away, and that is why it hurts the community to go through that process.Generally speaking, he thinks the community needs development fees.One of the things he prided himself on when he previously served on the council was people telling him they do not mind growth too much, but they want growth to pay for itself, and that is what development fees do. In his opinion, this project is not new growth; it is an extension of an already existing business that already has the intensity because of the gas station.He thinks what they should do is send it back to staff with the direction to work REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 17 OF 28 out a development agreement with the owners.Looking at their figures, he cannot say that he disagrees with them too much. Vice Mayor Eck commented he liked the way the gentleman stated it is not always easy being back here.He believes the majority of the council have city business licenses and have small businesses.He does.The tone of some of the comments are that they are not concerned about small business when they are small business.It is kind of frustrating.He knows there are people operating out there who do not have a business license and are not paying their proper sales tax.He thinks they need development fees, but on a renovation they are out of line.He agreed with Councilmember Coleman to send this back to staff in order to come up some kind of agreement with the owners. Councilmember Serdy commented he brought something similar several months ago and it went nowhere.He is all for the impact fees south of the freeway, but where they have infill and business where there is nothing he would like to see something like this happen.He hopes it will lead to some of the older parts of town being renovated. They are not losing anything if they are not collecting any fees now.The streets and sidewalks are already there so there is not as much impact.He is hoping they can look at lessening the fees north of the freeway and getting more infill. Vice Mayor Eck commented they were shown all the beautiful development earlier on the video, all from two -tenths of a percent tax.That is not true.It was $6,000,000 plus the two -tenths of a percent tax.The $6,000,000 came from development fees to build those buildings.He thinks they should be equal.They should not have a redevelopment area where one business saves money on fees and these people here do not.When they have them at zero, they will have to bring those up to equalize them. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. Councilmember Barker MOVED THAT THE APPEAL BY MUHAMMED AND ZEE ZIAULLAH, I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO NEGOTIATE SOME KIND OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 18 OF 28 REASONABLE AGREEMENT AND TO COME BACK TO US NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 17. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked if that was a development agreement. it is. asked what the date was. February 17. MOTION. Councilmember Barker stated City Clerk Kathleen Connelly Councilmember Barker stated Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE There was general discussion on the deadline for bringing it back to the council. Councilmember Barker AMENDED HER MOTION TO SAY IT BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 17 AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BRING IT IN EARLIER. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked if this is with the property owners. Councilmember Barker stated that is correct. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1332, AMENDING VOLUME I OF THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 4 FEES, ARTICLE 4-8 MUNICIPAL COURT FEE SCHEDULE,BY AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 4-8(E)MUNICIPAL COURT ENHANCEMENT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 19 OF 28 FUND,AND 4-8(H)COURT DEFERRED PROSECUTIONS/DIVERSION FEE,AND BY ADDING NEW SUBSECTION 4-8(J) PROSECUTION ASSESSMENT RECOVERY FEE) ) briefed the council on the item. City Attorney Joel Stern Mayor Insalaco opened the public hearing on the item.There being no on wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and reopened the item to council discussion.There being no discussion, he called for a motion. Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1332 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1332, AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK, BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilmember Wilson SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1333, AMENDING VOLUME I OF THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 4 FEES, BY ADDING NEW ARTICLE 4-7(N) VEHICLE REMOVAL, IMPOUND, IMMOBILIZATION, STORAGE AND RELEASE FEE ) REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 20 OF 28 )City Attorney Joel Stern briefed the council on the int:ern. Councilmember Barker asked if the person involved, the owner of the vehicle, does not choose another facility for the vehicle or have someone to drive it, this will impact him. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he believed that is correct.If they are the ones driving the vehicle, and they have a suspended license, they can call someone like a spouse.However, he believes that they tow the car and immobilize it if no one else is in the vehicle. Councilmember Barker asked if the police department tows the car. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the police department would call anyone on the towing list. Councilmember Barker asked if they can choose their own towing company or must they go along with the towing company that is in the rotation. City Attorney Joel Stern stated if they are able to speak and answer the question as to if they would like another tow company, then the answer is yes. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked if it has to go to a city impound yard.She believed it still had to be impounded by the city. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the towing policy says that when a vehicle is disabled as a result of a traffic collision the responding officer will consider any alternative to towing that is offered by the owner/driver.The towing of the vehicle will be considered as a last resort.The city can tow it, and if they have someone else they want to have tow it, then the city will honor that and try to call that tow company. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 21 OF 28 Councilmember Barker commented they are giving this person a choice.The city is just not grabbing their car and saying they have a car to impound. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the towing list is typically used when someone cannot speak, was hurt in the accident, or have gotten belligerent and are being unreasonable.If they cannot make a decision, they will use the tow list and take the first available company. Vice Mayor Eck commented he believes they just call the tow company that is next on the list if it is an arrest.If it is an accident, they can request a local towing company and it will be contacted. City Attorney Joel Stern stated both of those statements are correct. 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. Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1333 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only with the emergency clause. Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1333 BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 22 OF 28 Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS None. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF SIZE AND DESIGN OF OUTBUILDINGS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ) )Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the council on the item. Councilmember Barker asked how far staff has gotten on this.This is from March 6, 2007. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they have not taken any language to the planning and zoning commission yet.After that direction was given, a couple of other projects took the forefront.He apologized as this was put on the back burner and they are now ready to proceed. Councilmember Barker stated the last direction asked staff to go forward with items 2 and 3, which was redrafting the ordinance and exempting R143 and R143 mobile home zoned areas.No other changes were necessary to separately begin a new text amendment to address those two zoning areas. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated staff would like a little more flexibility.There may be other ways to fix the problem that are not as complicated as this.If they are going to change the rules in R143, basically they would have to notify every single owner of R143 property REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 23 OF 28 and everyone that lives within 300' of an owner of R143 property.That is a huge project.There might be other, simpler fixes.He would like to ask for room for creativity to explore all other options to address this problem in the most painless way possible. Councilmember Barker asked how much room for creativity they would need. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he and Brad talked about tossing in an exemption for R143 which basically says that in the R143 zone, the limit on all buildings will be under the maximum lot coverage that is already allowed in R143.That may or may not be a solution.Right now the R143 zone allows 20% maximum coverage by all buildings.If you have a 1.25 acre R143 lot, 20% lot coverage is just a little shy of 11,000 square feet for all buildings.In some cases it might work, in others it may not.Those are the types of options they are looking at and they will see which ones make more sense, and come back to the commission and the council with some options.They can then choose the one that works best. Councilmember Barker asked how rapidly they might see this. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated a typical text amendment process would require two meetings with the planning and zoning commission and two meetings with the council so it would realistically be 90 days. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is assuming there are no continuances from the planning and zoning commission level.He agrees with Rudy that if they start messing with the actual zoning districts, you should not change the provisions. If they are general provisions, they do not have to do the 300' notice into other areas surrounding these areas.Otherwise, you would have to do that for every property owner that is listed with the Pinal County Assessor. Councilmember Wilson commented he is the one who stirred up the hornet's nest on this one.When he discussed it with the city manager, they realized REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 24 OF 28 that this had already been started.It was explained to him why this was not continued on ahd he understands that now because of the cost in notifying everyone of the change.He definitely feels they need to address it, whether it should be done the way it was described before or just make a direction to staff to come up with changes that mirror the GR requirements if possible.Make it as easy as possible to remove the restrictions on the larger lots. Councilmember Coleman commented the gentleman who got up earlier and spoke about this talked about a grandfathering fee.If he were to build something else on this property he would have to pay a grandfathering fee for a building that was already there. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he thought the gentleman meant where you have a R143 property which already exceeds the maximum lot coverage allowed under Ordinance 1279 in general.For that you would need a grandfathered letter before you can do anything else.The answer is not necessarily bad, but the news is not all good. The way the new ordinance is drafted, if they want more coverage in terms of square footage than the ordinance allows, they would have to do it through a conditional use permit process.The process involves two meetings where a request goes to the planning and zoning commission and if there is an appeal of the commission decision it goes to the council.The bad news is applying for a conditional use permit is more expensive than applying for a grandfathered letter.A grandfathered letter only acknowledges what is there; it would not allow for expansion.The better process or more permissive process is the conditional use permit. Councilmember Coleman asked if this is a fee to get the letter saying it is an already existing condition. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct.A letter of lawful nonconformity only acknowledges what is there if a property owner can prove that it has been there for a certain amount of time. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 25 OF 28 Councilmember Coleman commented they would only need that if they wanted to expand further. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they should probably apply for a conditional use permit. The grandfathered letter does not allow for more expansion, only for what is already there. Mayor Insalaco closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. Councilmember Wilson MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING THE SIZE AND DESIGN OF OUTBUILDINGS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS: THAT THE R143 AND R143/MH BE CHANGED TO ALLOW REMOVAL OF THE CURRENT RESTRICTIONS AT THE BEST/LEAST COST TO THE CITY INVOLVED IN THIS THAT WOULD ACQUIRE THIS TO MEET THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF TRYING TO MATCH THE GR WHICH IS 33% COVERAGE. Vice Mayor Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES, TIMES, LOCATIONS, AND PURPOSES Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. BE HELD ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2009, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, RESPECTIVELY; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. BE HELD ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2009, IN THE CITY COUCNIL CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilmember Barker SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 26 OF 28 The motion carried. ADJOURNMENT ) )Mayor Insalaco adjourned the meeting at 9:33 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1. Acceptance of Agenda. 2. Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 6, 2009. 3. Consideration of PW 2007-10, Traffic Signal at Broadway Avenue and Phelps Drive in an amount not to exceed $123,585.00. ACCEPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2009, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2009. ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY V City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 27 OF 28 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CEkTIFICATION 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 20th day of January, 2009.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 28th of January, 2009. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 2009 PAGE 28 OF 28