Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-10-18 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 18.2005 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on October 18,2005,at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Coleman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Councilmember Insalaco gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Sippel led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Coleman Vice Mayor Eck Councilmember Insalaco Councilmember Severs Councilmember Sippel Councilmember Waldron Staff Present: (Councilmember Dietz was absent.) City Manager George Hoffman Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern Interim Public Safety Director Terry McDonald Community Relations Manager Pat Brenner Assistant to the City Manager Amy Malloy REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 1 OF 26 Others Present:Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias Grants Specialist Roger Hacker CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson Development Services Manager John Petroff ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED;AND THAT THE SECOND EXTENSION OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND TEAM PERFORMANCE,INC.FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION"FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $10.000 BE APPROVED;AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BEGIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE EXTENSION;AND THAT THE AWARD OF BID FOR PROJECT NO.PR -05-03,LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FOR RENAISSANCE POINT,ARROYO VERDE,PHELPS DRIVE PHASES I AND II,AND IRONWOOD COVE BE AWARDED TO UNITED RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE AMOUNT OF $72,494 PLUS 10% OR $7,249.40 FOR CONTINGENCY FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $79,743.40;AND THAT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND THE SONORAN INSTITUTE FOR CONSULTATION SERVICES FOR TECHNICAL PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO GUIDE STAFF ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000 BE APPROVED;AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT PENDING FINAL APPROVAL AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY;AND THAT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION AND CLARION ASSOCIATES FOR CONSULTATION SERVICES ON A MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT OVERLAY RELATED TO STATE LAND IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $35,000 BE APPROVED:AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT PENDING FINAL APPROVAL AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Councilmember Sippel SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 2 OF 26 AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Community Relations Manager Pat Brenner gave a powerpoint presentation on Proposition 400,the Pinal County Transportation Excise Tax,which is due to sunset unless approved by the voters.He briefed the council on what the funding has done for the city and for the county. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Mrs.Sandie Smith,Pinal County Supervisor,575 N.Idaho Road,Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding Proposition 400.She stated they can vote early;they can go on the website to the recorder's office to put in their request to vote early or they can come over to the county complex.I f this does not pass,they will not have matching money from the Arizona . Department of Transportation for the roads proposed nor would they have money for what the Environmental Protection Agency wants them to do which is surface the roads that are dirt to keep the air quality good.She urged them to vote for the proposition.She added there is not a week that goes by that she does not contact at least 5 to 10 city representatives such as the council,city manager, •Roger Hacker,Rudy .Esquivias and the person who answers the phone or the one who finds out the answers,and they are all courteous,they get back to her and they give her the answers.She appreciates the cooperation she gets from the city. Ms.Carol Urich,201 E.Southern Ave.,Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding animal control.She has seen the signs on the doors that they are full and closed on Saturdays.This is not serving the public.She requested protective security glass in the reception for the safety of staff and an area in private for lunches.She suggested city manager's staff ride with an animal control officer to witness their job challenges and added the city has 4 dedicated employees there,but she is concerned that if nothing is done, these employees may look elsewhere for employment.She requested they increase the staffing and study the information given during the work session last night on the subject. Mrs.Brenda Severs,Nicole Severs and Shania Severs,1184 N.Starr Road, Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding a Halloween fundraising event for animal control on October 28 at the Starlight Café with the proceeds being REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 3 OF 26 used to purchase 3 air conditioning units that are needed and a Tuff Shed for a break room. Mr.Louis Babin,2191 S.Belair Road,Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding Google relocating to the East Valley.The information is conflicting in the papers as to what they are looking for.He requested staff contact Google to promote Apache Junction to the company.He does not believe tech firms may want to be in a high rise,they might want to be in an area like this with mountain views,hiking trails,and a clean slate south of the freeway to build as they wish. Vice Mayor Eck commented Item 11 on the work session last evening was a powerpoint presentation and discussion on animal control staffing,service fee increases,and service operation.They are trying to help the animal control department.He also directed staff to make an attempt to contact Google. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None. PUBLIC HEARINGS BINGO LICENSE APPLICATION FOR APACHE JUNCTION SENIOR CENTER )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.She stated this is for a bingo license in the newly opened senior center portion of the multi-gen center.The packet contains responses from the planning division and the police department; neither has an objection.Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias noted that these events traditionally take place at private facilities;this is the first time the council is getting a request for a city public facility;it may be something the council wants to look at in the form of a policy for future years.Mr.Taylor from Mesa Senior Services and Terry Crawford from the senior center are in attendance. Mr.Dan Taylor stated this is a request for a Class A bingo license which is a social bingo where no profit is made.They do this at their other senior centers and i t is a very popular event. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 4 OF 26 Vice Mayor Eck had commented he had wanted to ask if they do this at their other centers. Mr.Dan Taylor stated that is correct.They have these licenses at their other sites. Vice Mayor Eck asked why they must be 21 years of age. Mr.Dan Taylor stated that is the way the law is written.There are 2 classes of bingo licenses;the Class A is a social bingo and no revenue is made,the Class B is a revenue -producing bingo.They have both licenses at their other sites and play both games. Vice Mayor Eck commented he does not think there will be a large demand. Mayor Coleman 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 Severs MOVED THAT THE BINGO LICENSE APPLICATION FOR THE APACHE JUNCTION SENIOR CENTER SUBMITTED BY TERRY CRAWFORD BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,BINGO SECTION. Councilmember Waldron SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. FISCAL YEAR 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT REGIONAL ACCOUNT )CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson briefed the council on the item.She stated staff is asking them to consider projects for submission for the regional account application for 2006.This is a grant for $200,000 and i t is guaranteed,not competitive. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 5 OF 26 The application is due June 1,2006 and the city has 2 years to complete the project.This public hearing is part of the federally mandated input process. A public meeting and a leadership committee meeting were also conducted.She provided some background information on the program as part of the public process.She requested council select a few priority projects to be researched to staff and be brought back to the council on November 15,2005. The contract will be awarded August 2006 and completed by August 2008.These grants were established in 1974 to assist urban and rural communities with housing,infrastructure improvements and economic development to benefit low and moderate income people,prevent or eliminate slums or blight or address an urgent need.It could be a city-wide project as the city is 53.3% low/moderate income,a neighborhood project or a project for target groups. She showed the different income levels,the census track,the target groups.a definition of blight and what are considered urgent needs and eligible projects.Past funds have been used to pay for the food bank expansion,the housing rehab program,and the kitchen equipment in the new multi -gen center. She provided information on how the money was spent in the 1980s and 1990s. The most recently funded project was part of the 800 megaHertz police communications system.She will be back November 15 with a report to the council and will ask for a resolution to be passed on December 6 authorizing submission of an application.Staff is mandated to provide technical assistance to applicants with a response time within 3 days.She described the grievance procedure.The leadership team suggested the following projects listed in priority:neighborhood street improvement;acquisition of land in the downtown area to rehab or demolish commercial buildings with possibly a service center built in a rehabbed building or new construction;the remainder of the 800 megaHertz police communications system;drainage and other infrastructure;bike trails;dog park;mobile stage:over road bridge at Apache Trail and Idaho;Phelps and Apache Trail;assisting neighborhood groups with the cost of dumpsters and clean up:housing rehab;and utility assistance with reconnection. Councilmember Waldron asked if there was a meeting today on how they were going to establish the priorities on the projects. CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated the meeting today was to have covered the State Special Projects,however,they never got that far.They will be letting her know by email and she will pass that information on to the council. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 6 OF 26 does not affect this grant. Melinda Larson stated it does not. guaranteed on getting this one. Councilmember Waldron commented that CDBG Administrative Assistant Mayor Coleman asked if the city is CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated i t is a guaranteed amount and it must be completed in 2 years.I t is not competitive and no environmental review must be done. Mayor Coleman commented one of the items suggested is a dog park.They have had a lot of discussion recently, including last night,on the animal control facility.He asked if some of this money could be used for remodeling the facility or for dog runs. CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated she could research that and come back with answers to that question on November 15. City Manager George Hoffman asked that to the extent that they can use development fees towards the 800 megaHertz,if the 800 megaHertz were funded with this grant money,would there be more development fee money which could be used for animal control expansion. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated that use would be allowed.As long as they can attribute the reason for the expansion as being due to growth,they can use the development fees. Vice Mayor Eck asked how many of the grants have they used towards the 800 megaHertz communications system. CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated they were awarded the Regional Account for 2005. Vice Mayor Edk asked how much that was for. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 7 OF 26 CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated that was for $310,000. Vice Mayor Eck commented he thought through their discussions that they had agreed that they were still keeping that as a priority until it was completed.We need items on the shelf:he has been trying to get Cedar and 16th Avenue paved for 5 years now.There has always been something of necessity.But in his mind he thought they were going to concentrate on getting that system complete and he thought they were going to use the CDBG funding until there were other funding mechanisms.He asked how far away they are from completing the system. CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson stated Roger Hacker has a breakdown on that. Grants Specialist Roger Hacker stated the project is being approached in 3 different phases.The first phase is the $310,000 from the Regional Account which is being used for first responders in the police department.It purchased the 40 handheld units and the 20 mobile units and the 6 chargers.The second phase is going to be outfitting the rest of the police department with 25 handheld units,40 mobile units and a trunked receiver.The cost for that equipment is $352,000.I t could be a State Special Projects competitive grant for $300,000 or they could use the guaranteed Regional Account of $200,000 for the purchasing of that equipment. Councilmember Severs asked if the $352.000 completes the system. •Grants Specialist Roger Hacker stated it completes i t for the police department only. Vice Mayor Eck commented he believed they were trying to get this for the whole organization. Grants Specialist Roger Hacker stated phase 3 includes public works for $315,000,parks for $122.000 and code for $38,000.That completes the entire project for the city. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 8 OF 26 Vice Mayor Eck asked if it would affect the State Special Projects if they also applied for a Regional Account with the same project.It appears they need almost 3 more full grants to complete this.He asked if it would possibly mean that they would only get the one grant. Grants Specialist Roger Hacker stated he believes that if they submit both applications for completing the police department portion and they get the State Special Projects,they could rework the guaranteed grant with the Department of Housing for another project.He would have to clarify it with their staff. Mayor Coleman 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. Councilmember Sippel commented they need to continue with the 800 megaHertz at least until i t is up and running in the police department as a whole. CDBG Administrative Assistant Melinda Larson asked if there are any projects they would like staff to research and bring back with additional information. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO STAFF REGARDING FISCAL YEAR 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT REGIONAL ACCOUNT PROPOSED PROJECTS:THAT WE ASK FOR INFORMATION ON THE 800 MEGAHERTZ,WHICH WE MIGHT ALREADY HAVE BUT WILL CONTINUE WITH THAT AS A PRIORITY ITEM,ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS CEDAR AND 16TH AVENUE,AND ALSO INFORMATION ON POSSIBLE ANIMAL CONTROL,WHETHER IT BE FOR A DOG RUN/PARK TYPE SITUATION OR JUST POSSIBLE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR ANIMAL CONTROL. Councilmember Severs SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 9 OF 26 The motion carried. INCREASING OF DEVELOPMENT FEES )Development Services Manager John Petroff briefed the council on the item.He stated the city is in the process of updating the road development fees.They had previously updated the entire development fee package in 2002.Duncan Associates provided that update and they are also providing the city with this development fee update. Mr.James Duncan,Duncan Associates. addressed the council.He complimented the city on the new building.He briefed them on what his firm does and where they primarily work.He gave a brief explanation of the trends that have been occurring over the last few years,the pattern of enabling acts,impact fees in Apache Junction,the five steps of impact fees,how to come up with fees that fit growth management objectives,and the service area.The fees they are updating exclude the core area of the city,the Apache Trail corridor.The infill incentive district established last year excludes the fees that had been adopted.However,they also cannot expend fees in those areas.He briefed them on the road development fee formula,which is designed to where new development does not have the right to depreciate local service for existing residents.To determine the new fees,they brought the 2001 road development fees forward and determined there were a little less than 300,000 trips per day on the system,and i t has the capacity for 3 times that amount because the city has a good level of service.To find out the cost of the road they took the figures from 2001 and updated them to 2005 using the Engineering News Record Annual Inflation Factor and that came out to a little less than $900.000 per lane mile.The 2004 City Transportation Study showed the figure at $990,000 and that is comparable.I t is their policy to use the conservative figure so they used the $871.000.Upon the completion of the formula they arrived at the amount of $218 for a total cost of vehicle mile of travel.Tax credits were not figured in as the city receives little.They figured in outside road funding for the 1999 street bond issue to reduce it by $34 to $184.He described how they determine the length of trip to be 2.3 miles culminating in 11 vehicle miles of travel per day.The net cost is figured by multiplying the vehicle miles of travel and the total cost of the vehicle mile of travel, arriving at the figure of $2,038.This is conservative as the national average is about $2,400.Currently i t is $1,485 so the increase is 37%.This is a reasonable increase over a 3 -year period.The bulk of the land uses should also be up about 37%.They can also include the cost of the study REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 10 OF 26 updates in the impact fees.The $17,000 amounts to about a dollar per unit increase. Vice Mayor Eck asked if the fees could be used for arterial streets as well as a street where a development is going in and they would have a large amount of unpaved road between in order for the road to get to the development. Mr.James Duncan stated most communities encourage them to provide the infrastructure and then they are given credit for impact fees.The impact fee creates a level playing field because there are a lot of owners and developers that are too small to do what he is suggesting,so large developers are in support of impact fees since they have to contribute anyhow.This makes everyone else come in.The money can be used to match the funds and extend it out a mile. Vice Mayor Eck commented that there is some development first with a single lane,and later they get the proper streets to get to the development.He asked how they could use the development fees to that. Mr.James Duncan stated there is always a problem with lag time.Impact fees will not solve it but they will work towards it.It is another revenue source to try and solve the problem. Other states such as Florida have tried to introduce concurrency which basically says if they are going to have development then services must be available at the time.I t is not working in most of those areas,bringing on a moratorium.The best thing is to apply the fees.They can juggle the fees to do what they need. Vice Mayor Eck commented he was looking to see if there was something that was working somewhere else.They have a list of unpaved roads in the community.He asked if they could use these fees to pave those roads. Mr.James Duncan stated they can use the fees for any use that is capacity -enhancing.They can use it to add lanes to a road or for signalization. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 11 OF 26 Vice Mayor Eck asked if they could be used even in an area that is 90% grown out. Mr.James Duncan stated if there is no new development in the area and i t is grown out,he would discourage them from paving a gravel road using the impact fees.The property owners did not contribute and the people who did contribute would not benefit from what was described. Councilmember Sippel commented he stated this would be implemented over a 3 -year period. Mr.James Duncan stated that is a policy decision.In the past this council phased in the fee increases.The first one they did in 6 months,the next 2 in three months. City Manager George Hoffman commented the petroleum manufacturers have not phased in the cost of asphalt. They did that in the past to get the development community to buy in as this was a new practice in this community.Now they need the ability to pay for the cost of the infrastructure.He asked if the data that he used to figure in the costs was from 2004. Mr.James Duncan stated they used the 2001 ratcheted up,which was less than the 2004 data.They used a figure of $870,000 per lane mile:they could have used $990,000.It would have made the fee a little bit higher. City Manager George Hoffman stated he was concerned because the concrete markets,steel markets,and asphalt markets are changing weekly and monthly.He feels like this is a lag issue on pricing:the price goes to one figure and the city has methodologically aimed at another figure.The price has already moved beyond the city,especially when they have up to 7 years to get that implemented.He asked if there were a way of closing that lag time by reviewing this more often.He is concerned that when the city faces substantial growth to the south,i t could be missing the mark by millions of dollars over time. Mr.James Duncan complimented the city on doing their updates as frequently as have been done.Very few REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 12 OF 26 communities update that frequently.They could have come up with a higher fee by not being conservative.They could take it up another 10% or 15% but they would have to be instructed to do so. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated there is language in the ordinance that allows for the city to come back every year and align that to some kind of construction project and that is something they have not taken advantage of. City Manager George Hoffman asked i f they would have to do a full study update. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated we do not. Mr.James Duncan stated when they did Orange County,Florida last year they waited so long that the gap was great.The homebuilders were frustrated because they do not like sudden jumps.They were going from $2,000 to $3,000 for road fees.After they did that,the homebuilders came back and stated that they wanted to index the fees.They tacked on a 4.5%increase annually.The homebuilders were more interested in having a smaller increase in 2008 when the next review would be. It was suggested by the homebuilders committee,it was adopted unanimously, and 5 other Florida counties did the same thing.Indexing could be added very easily. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated he believes i t is already in the ordinance.There is no need for an amendment. Mr.James Duncan stated it could be updated every year.His company would be glad to do it and they would not charge a lot for it.They can come up with a 5% or so index. Vice Mayor Eck stated the city manager's comments are a policy decision on whether they want to do the $990,000 or the $870.000. Mr.James Duncan stated they can change that figure impact the study.Both numbers are there and they are REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 13 OF 26 valid.They took a number and brought it up by indexing.He asked who provided the information on the traffic study. Assistant City Manager Bryant Powell stated it was a consultant. Mr.James Duncan stated the numbers in the table were for $990,000 and that would increase the fees. Vice Mayor Eck commented they want to be fair but he is concerned like the city manager.The increases have been so dramatic in the material costs.He wanted to be sure there would be enough funds to properly take care of the streets. Mr.James Duncan commented the city manager had mentioned earlier about how much of road construction is related to the petroleum industry and that has gone sky high in the last 5 years. City Manager George Hoffman stated the underlying goal is that the existing residents should not subsidize the new residents.They need to pay their way for the infrastructure needs imposed upon the community. Vice Mayor Eck agreed.A utility company here stated they needed to raise their utility costs because of growth.It is not fair to the current utility user because growth is forcing the fees up.Growth should pay for itself. Mr.James Duncan stated their revenues will drop because they are taking out the Apache Trail corridor.No fees will be collected there. Vice Mayor Eck commented they just did one for $35.000. Mr.James Duncan asked if they wanted him to go back and put in those other numbers,add in the indexing and bring it back. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18.2005 PAGE 14 OF 26 Mayor Coleman stated they do.He opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and moved on to the next item. OLD BUSINESS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO.1248,CASE PZ-15-05,A REZONING REQUEST BY AZIZ HELAL )Councilmember Severs commented he brought this up last night.He would like to consult with the city attorney about different possibilities and get direction on how they should do this. He asked if this should go back to planning and zoning if they vote to reconsider the item and what the pros and cons are of their actions tonight. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he has three options.One is to move to reconsider,pass it,set i t for the November 14 work session and November 15 regular session.The second would be to move to reconsider,remand it back to planning and zoning and get public participation,a public meeting,and a notice would need to be done.The third would be to motion not to reconsider the item.The neighbors are due due process in this process;they should be at every meeting where i t is discussed or any kind of final decision is made or a recommendation from planning and zoning.An argument could be made that it does not have to go back to planning and zoning as it has already been to planning and zoning i f the new design is a lesser use as the first use was a mixture of commercial and residential,and the proposal he saw was a full residential.On the other hand,if they remand it back,full notice would be given and they would avoid any kind of potential challenge..Everyone is given the opportunity to say what they want to say.They would have planning and zoning as the recommendation board and that is their job.If it is remanded back,there would not be any fees for the applicant except for publication fees.It would be a new zoning application.If someone makes a motion for reconsideration and i t is not seconded,or there is a vote on i t and i t does not prevail,then it will be status quo.The last vote on this was for denial.Mr.Helal could bring back his proposal in a year if it is the same proposal.If he wants to • change it,he can bring i t back but he would have to pay the planning and zoning fees. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 15 OF 26 Vice Mayor Eck asked if he would have to change the zoning,not just the plat. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he believes if it is the same zoning designation they have to wait a year. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated Mr.Helal's original proposal was for a mixed use development incorporating basically one acre of commercial and one acre of condominiums.It was a planned development request.If they do not vote to reconsider and he wants to come back with the same plan,same zoning and same concept,he would not be able to do so for a year.If he changes it substantially,then he can come back as soon as he pays another application fee or if council votes to continue it.He can come back with a CR-5/PD zoning with a different plan. The plan they had voted to deny was the half commercial/half condominium with a certain development plan concept.He can come back with something different sooner than a year. Councilmember Sippel commented that he would have to do the whole process. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated if they decide not to reconsider it,then he would need to reapply and i t would be a new zoning case. Vice Mayor Eck asked if he could bring back just C-2/PD or just CR-5/PD if this is continued. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he could go all commercial or all residential. Vice Mayor Eck asked if he could go with either one of those two for a year if this is denied. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated he could. Vice Mayor Eck commented he could not bring the combination back. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 16 OF 26 Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct.He could also bring another proposal. Councilmember Severs commented the new plan is all CR-5/PD.He asked if they voted to reconsider i t and send i t back to planning and zoning,they would have the opportunity to look over i t in addition to all the citizens and neighborhoods being notified but he would not have to pay the application fees. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct. Councilmember Severs commented i t would then go through due process and come back to us. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that is correct.It would go through the normal planning and zoning process and come back to the council in a couple of months. Mayor Coleman asked if he paid the publication fees as well as the application fee this last time. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated there is a $500 threshold somewhere.The fees to advertise the planning and zoning case and the council case were around $200,so he is under the $500 mark.If this goes back to planning and zoning and he has to readvertise he would be over the $500 mark and he would have to pay those costs. Mayor Coleman asked how much the application fee is. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated the original rezoning and subdivision fees together were $1,690.The rezoning was $820 and the subdivision fee was $870. Mayor Coleman asked if that recovers the cost of the review and advertising by the city. Senior Planner Rudy Esquivias stated they do not have a cost benefit analysis. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 17 OF 26 City Attorney Joel Stern commented they increased the cost several years ago.He does not believe i t is covered dollar for dollar.A study was done with several different agencies,and he thinks i t is about time to review those fees. City Manager George Hoffman stated he believes the general intent is for the general taxpayer to not fully subsidize the review process. Mayor Coleman commented that if it is sent back,although he does not have to pay,it would be the same costs to the city to review it again. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.There is staff time,how long the meetings are,and a public participation process he would have to go through before the planning and zoning meet on i t and give their recommendation to council. Vice Mayor Eck commented he had not thought about it that way. Councilmember Sippel commented i t is an interesting way to think about it.They would still have to use staff time.The fee would not be paid although the time is still being used. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. Councilmember Severs MOVED THAT THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO.1248,CASE PZ-15-05,A REZONING REQUEST BY AZIZ HELAL BE APPROVED FOR RECONSIDERATION AND SENT BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. City Attorney Joel Stern commented if it is his intent to remand it to planning and zoning,he can do that. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated the only thing they are able to do tonight is a yes or no on a vote for reconsideration.If it is a yes vote,they bring it back to whatever date and at that point in time they can discuss sending it to planning and zoning. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 18 OF 26 City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.Tonight they can decide whether it should be considered and then at another meeting on November 15 they can discuss sending it to planning and zoning.They have to advertise the public hearing so i t can be no sooner than November 15:it would be an open meeting where the neighbors can come and discuss the issue. Mayor Coleman stated the motion has to be date specific. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is correct.The work session is on November 14 and the regular meeting is on November 15. Councilmember Severs commented he believed Vice Mayor Eck had an idea. Vice Mayor Eck commented he did not. The only idea he had originally was if it were continued rather than be specific so that it would allow the applicant time to come up with a totally different plan rather than being denied.However,he was not thinking about all the costs involved that could not be recouped by the city.He is having a difficult time with this. Mayor Coleman commented they need to finish the motion. City Attorney Joel Stern asked him to restate his motion as he is unclear on it. Councilmember Severs commented he is not clear at this point.He is looking for options. Vice Mayor Eck commented they are trying to help him develop the property. Councilmember Sippel commented they are only looking at if they want to reconsider this and on what date. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 19 OF 26 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that is correct. Councilmember Sippel commented they are not looking at options,only if this should be reconsidered or not. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated under Robert's Rules that they have adopted by code,that is what they are limited to. Vice Mayor Eck asked if they can only reconsider what they decided,not any other options. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that is correct.They can only reconsider what they looked at previously and they would be announcing to the public when they would be doing that.At the next meeting they would then decide whether to send i t back to the planning and zoning commission,adopt it without sending i t back,or deny. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they can exercise their options at the next meeting. Councilmember Severs commented they are reconsidering what they have already looked at,not the new plan. City Attorney Joel Stern stated they would discuss at the next meeting whether they would look at the case again and whether they would like to make comments about the case.They will have options at the next meeting that they can talk about freely.Tonight is just whether they want to reconsider and what the dates are.A motion to continue would be improper as that is not on the agenda. Mayor Coleman asked Councilmember Severs if he would like to finish his motion or if he should call for another one. Vice Mayor Eck asked if they can take no action. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 20 OF 26 City Attorney Joel Stern stated there could be a motion with no second and that would be no action.It would remain status quo or if there is no motion that is no action. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Sippel MOVED THAT THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO.1248,CASE PZ-15-05,A REZONING REQUEST BY AZIZ HELAL,BE DENIED. Councilmember Waldron SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:5-1 (Councilmember Severs voted in opposition.) The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS None. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON ANY OF THE ABOVE LISTED AGENDA ITEMS None. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON OTHER PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR ACTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH APACHE JUNCTION MAIN STREET PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005- 2006 )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.She stated they were given a presentation by Rayna Palmer last night at the work session on the organization.She is asking for direction on whether or not to proceed with the professional services agreement for the current fiscal year.Her suggestion is that they use the previous agreement in the packet and add some of the components on pages 2 and 3 of the packet where they see Item and Desired Outcome.She REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 21 OF 26 would add them to the agreement excluding the one proposing to use Community Development Block Grant funds to acquire property in the downtown area. Mayor Coleman asked if they were pages 2 and 3 of last year's agreement. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated they are pages 2 and 3 that are behind her memo in the packet.There is no title to those pages but they will see Item in bold print and below that in another paragraph is Desired Outcome.These are suggestions to the city from Main Street.They do fit in with the development of downtown.The council had already looked at the Community Development Block Grant proposal earlier and did not proceed with the servicing. Mayor Coleman commented when they were building the Focal Point they were told that i t is a permanent easement where the old Don's Monument exists. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated all they would be doing is directing the Main Street organization to make those types of determinations.This does not tell them to move the monument, but to work with the Dons group to identify a possible place for relocation i f that can be done and to bring that information back to council. Mayor Coleman commented it would be nice to know if that information were accurate.He had been told they could not move the Focal Point,build a new monument or move the old monument over because the Don's Monument was permanent.It went with whoever owned the property.However,it would not hurt to take a look at that and talk to the Dons. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly commented it would be in a more visible location. Councilmember Waldron commented that in the agreement itself,on the title page,under 2A and 2E,the word developed shows up every year.He asked if they could insert "developed and maintained"as these are for the business guide and the business directory. It has already been developed. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 22 OF 26 Mayor Coleman closed the discussion with no further comments and called for a motion. There was a discussion between Councilmember Waldron,City Clerk Kathleen Connelly and City Attorney Joel Stern as to what was to be included in the agreement and how the motion should be worded. Councilmember Waldron MOVED THAT STAFF BE GIVEN THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION REGARDING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH THE APACHE JUNCTION MAIN STREET PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006:TO PROCEED WITH THE AGREEMENT WITH THE ITEMS INDICATED IN THE MEMO OF OCTOBER 6,2005,WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ITEM DEALING WITH THE PROPOSAL FOR USING THE CDBG FUNDS:AND ALSO THAT THE WORDING IN THE AGREEMENT ON SECTION 2A READ "TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN A DOWNTOWN DIRECTORY FOR INFORMATION AND REFERRAL PURPOSES,AND 2E BE CHANGED TO SHOW "DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN A DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GUIDE FOR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSES". Councilmember Sippel SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES Vice Mayor Eck MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON MONDAY.OCTOBER 31,2005,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS,RESPECTIVELY: AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 1,2005,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. City Manager George Hoffman asked i f the agendas looked light enough he would like to just have everything on Tuesday.He asked if this motion allows for that or if this is a discretionary thing that he or the mayor can do. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 23 OF 26 City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated the work session is always discretionary.The regular meetings are what the mayor can cancel. There was general discussion on having the meeting on Tuesday only. Vice Mayor Eck AMENDED HIS MOTION TO READ AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:30 P.M.ON OCTOBER 31 FOLLOWED BY THE WORK SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. City Manager George Hoffman asked i f he meant November 1. Vice Mayor Eck commented he was thinking of Monday.He AMENDED HIS MOTION TO READ THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON MONDAY,OCTOBER 31, 2005 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY: AND AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:30 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.BE HELD ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 1,2005 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated this way they can move their things from Monday to Tuesday. Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS Mayor Coleman announced the governor is having a mayors'summit with all of the mayors on Thursday of this week.It is taking a town hall format, dividing them into study groups.He is looking forward to it. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 24 OF 26 Mayor Coleman announced that Saturday is the grand opening for this facility and the multi-gen facility.I t begins at 9:00 a.m.and the jazz band from the high school will be playing. Councilmember Waldron commented they took a helicopter tour with Salt River Project last Thursday.They toured their water distribution facilities. ADJOURNMENT )Mayor Coleman adjourned the meeting at 8:37 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Agenda. 2.Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 4,2005. 3.Consideration of Second Extension of Professional Services Agreement with Team Performance,Inc.for consulting services for the project entitled "Organizational Development City of Apache Junction"for a total amount of $10,000. 4.Consideration of Award of Bid for PR -05-03,Landscape Maintenance to United Right -of -Way for maintenance service for Renaissance Point,Arroyo Verde, Phelps Drive,Phase I &II,and Ironwood Cove in the amount of $72,494 plus 10%,or $7,249.40 for contingency for a total amount not to exceed $79.743.40. 5.Consideration of Professional Services Agreement with The Sonoran Institute for consultation services for technical planning assistance to guide staff on sustainable development standards in an amount not to exceed $20.000. 6.Consideration of Professional Services Agreement with Clarion Associates for consultation services on a master planned community district overlay related to the State Land in an amount not to exceed $35,000. ACCEPTED THIS 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER ,2005,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER ,2005. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 25 OF 26 ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk DOUGLAS COUEMAN 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 18th day of October,2005.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated,this 26th day of October,2005. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18,2005 PAGE 26 OF 26