HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-19 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 19,2000
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction,
Arizona,was held on December 19,2000,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
Vice Mayor Surra gave the Invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Dietz led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present:Mayor Coleman
Vice Mayor Surra
Councilmember Dietz
Councilmember Durbala
Councilmember Insalaco
Councilmember Urich
Staff Present:
(Councilmember Eck was absent.)
City Manager Curtis Shook
Assistant City Manager George Hoffman
City Clerk Kathleen Connelly
City Attorney Joel Stern
Public Safety Director Robert Warner
City Engineer Ron Grittman
Finance Director Keith Lewis
Development Services Director Glen Van Nimwegen
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 1 OF 35
Others Present:
Library Director Pam Loui
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
Community Relations Manager Pat Brenner
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid
Management Assistant Shari Watson
Economic Development Specialist Kerry Lyman
ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA
)Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT
THE CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED;AND THAT WE RECOGNIZE THE
OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY BY THE FOLLOWING CITY EMPLOYEES:PARK
ATTENDANT BILL LANT,PARK ATTENDANT MATT KING,AND PARK ATTENDANT AARON
MCDONALD FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE WITH THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT'S SLUMBER PARTY
AND HALLOWEEN CARNIVAL;ASSISTANT PLANNER JULI MCDAID FOR HER WORK IN
CONNCECTION WITH THE TONY VEHON LAND SPLIT;AND RECREATION COORDINATOR LIZ
LANGENBACH,RECREATION COORDINATOR JAMIE ZACHER,AND THE RECREATION CREW FOR
THEIR ASSISTANCE AT THE TURKEY DAY ACTIVITIES AT THUNDER MOUNTAIN MIDDLE
SCHOOL;AND
THAT THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN PINAL COUNTY AND THE CITY OF
APACHE JUNCTION FOR VOTER REGISTRATION AND ELECTION SERVICES FOR THE 2001 CITY
ELECTIONS BE APPROVED AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN TO THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
AGREEMENT.
Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Mr.Tom Schuelke,1889 S.Palo Verde,Apache Junction,addressed the council
regarding using school facilities to hold council meetings.The current
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 2 OF 35
council chambers could then be dedicated for court use only.Larger school
facilities would alleviate overcrowding that has occurred at previous council
meetings.
Mr.Kurt Decke,548 S.Prospector,Apache Junction,addressed the council
regarding home rule option.He and his family have lived in the area since
1980 and they have watched the city grow.He believes a lot of the growth is
due to home rule,including the growth in the library and the recreational
programs.He commented on the lunch time program sponsored by the parks and
recreation department over at Desert Shadows Elementary School.He believes
that these changes have occurred more rapidly due to the city having the
ability to say where its tax dollars go,and he urged everyone to vote yes on
home rule option.
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Curtis Shook introduced Management Assistant Shari Watson to the
audience.He announced that Assistant City Manager George Hoffman had
completed and received his diploma for the Certified Public Manager Program.
Steve Francis from the police department has also completed the program.
There are currently three other department heads going through the program.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
SECOND REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
CONTINUATION OF THE LOCAL ALTERNATIVE
EXPENDITURE LIMITATION -HOME RULE OPTION )
)City Clerk Kathleen Connelly
briefed the council on the item.Two public hearings must be held on this
item;the first was held December 5,2000.State law requires that
immediately upon the conclusion of the second public hearing a special meeting
must be called to vote upon the proposition.Staff has additional information
on the item.
Community Relations Manager Pat
Brenner spoke on the item.Home rule allows the city council to make budget
decisions for the city at home rather than using a state -imposed expenditure
limitation.He gave a brief history on its establishment.The city had no
library nor parks and recreation budget at its inception,and there would be
no funding included for those services under the state -imposed expenditure
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 3 OF 35
limitation.Passage of the home rule option will allow the city to spend the
general fund monies already received for programs and services the citizens
have requested.Failure of the home rule option would necessitate a cut of
one-third of the general fund budget over a four-year period.He gave an
accounting of the unavailable monies for each budget year.
Councilmember Dietz asked if the
city would lose $29.6 million over the four year period.
Community Relations Manager Pat
Brenner stated that would be the cumulative effect after four years.
Mayor Coleman commented the money
would not be lost,it just could not be spent.Mayor Coleman opened the
public hearing on the item.
Ms.Eva Grace Johnson,2136 S.
Mariposa,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She represented the senior
center.They feel that if home rule is approved,the city would be able to
continue to support the activities at the senior center,such as home
delivered meals and outreach services for the homebound.Failure of home rule
would drastically cut or even eliminate many of the services that are relied
upon.They believe the spending of city revenues needs to be under city
control.The city is growing and needs additional services for all residents.
She urged everyone to vote to renew home rule.
Ms.Evelyne Chaffey,603 E.Hondo
Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She commented those people
who have lived in communities that have not been able to control their monies
have suffered in the long run.She believes home rule is a good thing.She
is a volunteer at the library and she would like to see these services
continued and expanded.She would not like to see any cuts in the police
department.She urged everyone to vote for home rule.
Ms.Linda Overacker,3355 S.Cortez,
#97,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She is the president of the
Friends of the Library.She would like to see home rule renewed.She would
not like to see children turned away from the library because there are no
books for them,or other people if there are no computers or Internet services
for them.The people have the choice of where their money should go and they
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 4 OF 35
should determine where i t should be spent.Home rule insures spending the
money in our community.She urged everyone to support home rule.
Mr.Tom Schuelke,1889 S.Palo
Verde,Apache Junction,addressed the council.Arizona citizens have a
constitutional clause that prevents an increase in the level of per capita
spending without a vote.He believes the spending limit of the proposition
limiting the spending to revenues collected makes a mockery of this
protection.I t does nothing to protect the citizens from runaway spending.
The loss of control is heightened by the council's recent action to raise the
sales tax without a public vote in a manner to prohibit a referendum.He
suggested changing the base limit.He had asked that erroneous statements
made at a previous meeting be corrected and that has not been done.According
to his contacts at the auditor general's office,the League of Arizona Cities
and his understanding of the constitution and statutes,more than one
expenditure limit may be placed on the ballot.There is no ballot format
requirement that prevents this.He commented the cost of the city complex
plus the extra sales taxes already collected almost equals the amount of
borrowing envisioned to be supported by the sales tax increase.He suggested
they put the language in the packet as one proposition and language
disallowing funds for the building of the city complex,and possibly
rescinding the recent sales tax increase,in another proposition,and let the
people vote.The services people need will not be affected under either
proposition.I t is not possible to rescind the sales tax increase in this
measure,but it would be reasonable to conclude that if the council is
prohibited from spending the money collected by the tax,it will stop
collecting it.He urged them to give the voters two propositions to vote
upon.
Mr.Richie Stoddard,107 W.16th
Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He represented the Apache
Junction Little League.He commented the ability of a child to pay for Little
League is not included in their charter.About one third of their 600 kids
cannot pay that fee.Local business support pays for these kids.The city
used to be called "Tin City"in the past because of the history of the city.
Lately,the city now has the reputation of having the finest fields in the
district,hosting championship tournaments.The work that Parks and
Recreation does to support the Little League is impressive.He commented the
ability for them to offer their program would be severely hurt if it were not
for home rule.The Little League supports home rule.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 5 OF 35
Mayor Coleman closed the public
hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He opened the item to council
discussion.
Vice Mayor Surra asked if the city
has the authority to adjust the base limit set by the state.
Assistant City Manager George
Hoffman stated the adjustment of the base limit may be something the city can
look at after considerable study and discussion.I t could be an option in
several years offered by staff.However,i t needs to be carefully thought out
and communicated with the public.
Vice Mayor Surra stated that would
require a study involving a certain amount of time before i t can be offered as
an alternative.
Assistant City Manager George
Hoffman stated that is correct.Staff believes it deserves some study.
Vice Mayor Surra asked what the law
allows for the language in the proposition.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated the
language seen in the packet has been approved by the auditor general.The
League of Arizona Cities and Towns is paid by the municipalities in the state
to write the language to be approved by the auditor general.To change the
language could result in the ballot language being rejected by the state.The
council may place more than one item on the ballot if they wish.Mr.Schuelke
requested having a question placed on the ballot concerning the capital
facilities plan which would allow having the voters decide how much money can
be spent on that.He believes that would be an illegal advisory opinion being
sought from the voters.This was brought up over a year ago when the council
first looked at the capital facilities plan and the sales tax increase.In
his opinion,there should be only one question on the ballot and the two
should not be mixed.The city could be risking problems with the auditor
general and the voters may be confused on what is being passed.
Mayor Coleman closed the item and
called for a motion to convene a special meeting at this time.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 6 OF 35
Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT WE
CONVENE IN A SPECIAL MEETING IMMEDIATELY TO BREAK FOR THAT MEETING WITH NO
RECESS OF ANY LENGTH.
Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
SPECIAL MEETING
PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO.00-40;PROPOSING
AN EXTENSION OF THE LOCAL ALTERNATIVE
EXPENDITURE LIMITATION -HOME RULE OPTION )
)City Clerk Kathleen Connelly
briefed the council on the item.The resolution will provide her with
instructions to place this particular item on the March 13,2001 primary
election ballot.
Mayor Coleman opened the item to
council discussion.
Vice Mayor Surra commented the
council can only vote to place this on a ballot;the people must vote in order
to establish the local alternative expenditure limitation.That would allow
the city to spend what it takes in and no more.
Councilmember Urich commented there
are two typographical errors in the resolution.
City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated
the corrections have already been done on the original.
Mayor Coleman closed the discussion
with no further comments and called for a motion.
Councilmember Dietz MOVED THAT
RESOLUTION NO.00-40,A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 7 OF 35
OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,PROPOSING AN EXTENSION OF THE ALTERNATIVE
EXPENDITURE LIMITATION -HOME RULE OPTION,BE APPROVED.
Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
Mayor Coleman adjourned the special
meeting and reconvened the regular meeting.
PZ-00-14,REQUEST BY LOVEN CONTRACTING ON
BEHALF OF SONIC DRIVE-IN FOR A WAIVER OF
THE MASONRY WALL REQUIREMENT ALLOWED UNDER
THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE,VOLUME II,
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,CHAPTER 6,ARTICLE
6-1,LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
REQUIREMENTS,(ORDINANCE NO.940 AND
AMENDMENTS THERETO)
)Assistant Planner Juli McDald
briefed the council on the item.A 6'wall is required under the current code
along interior property lines to separate individual development sites.An 8'
wall is required along the south side as the property abuts residential land
there.The appellant is requesting a waiver to install additional landscaping
instead of a wall on the east property line,and to eliminate the walls along
the remaining perimeters due to the existence of a natural wash.They also
will change the exterior of the Sonic Drive-in to a southwestern style by
adding and painting stucco pop -outs and varying the parapet height.The wash
runs inside of the east property line,extends beyond the southern property
boundary and veers due west along a substantial portion of the south property
line.There are engineering concerns regarding the construction of the walls
due to the location of the drainage ditch.Staff is unable to see any reason
for the waiver of the wall requirement on the east and south boundary lines.
The west wall seems appropriate due to the charter school going in on that
side.
Mayor Coleman requested the
applicant address the council.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 8 OF 35
Mr.Mike Loven,1100 Pinnacle,
Flagstaff,addressed the council.He gave the council an aerial photo showing
the existing drainage at the site.They do not believe the wall requirement
is applicable due to the existing wash area.An imposed structure would
create a detrimental view across the south and east property lines.They are
concerned about the security on the high school boundary line with a wall
constructed there.It would create a narrow,hidden space between the two
buildings.He gave examples of the site with a wall and the site with
additional landscaping.They are willing to modify the existing building and
augment the existing vegetation in exchange for the waiver.This would be
more in keeping with the natural setting than a manmade structure.
Mayor Coleman opened the council
discussion.
Councilmember Insalaco asked if they
were asking for a waiver of the wall on the south side.
Mr.Mike Loven stated they are
because is i t adjacent to the existing wash.The vegetation and the width of
the wash is sufficient.
Vice Mayor Surra asked if they had
asked the high school how they would feel about not having a wall between the
two properties.
Mr.Mike Loven stated they have not.
They have only discussed the project with the corps of engineers and they have
no comment on the project.
Vice Mayor Surra stated they have no
comment because i t falls outside of their jurisdiction.
Councilmember Dietz asked how far
away they would be placing the additional landscaping from the school,and i f
there was a road there.
Mr.Mike Loven stated there is no
road or dedicated easement there.They will work with city staff as to what
is appropriate for the landscaping in that area.He commented it would be
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 9 OF 35
appropriate to meet with school officials to make sure they are comfortable
with what is being proposed.
Councilmember Dietz asked how far
the school building is from the property line.
Mr.Mike Loven stated i t is about
12'to 15'from the property line.
Councilmember Dietz asked if there
would be anything in that area.
Mr.Russ Ruggles,1100 Pinnacle,
Flagstaff,stated the school has already landscaped that area.
Councilmember Insalaco stated the
doors at the back of the school are only used for fire exits.There is no
foot traffic on that side.
Mr.Mike Loven stated they would be
sensitive to the issue of the doors being fire exits.
Councilmember Dietz asked if they
would have a problem with doubling the landscaping requirements.
Mr.Mike Loven stated they would
not.They believe a natural buffer would be the best buffer for the site.
the plants would be when they put them in.
have to meet the intent of the code.
go beyond the code.
Vice Mayor Surra asked how mature
Mr.Mike Loven stated they would
Vice Mayor Surra stated they could
Mr.Mike Loven stated they are
prepared to negotiate that this evening,but it may not be the right forum.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 10 OF 35
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 Dietz asked what the
size requirements of the box trees are in the ordinance.
Assistant Planner Jull McDald stated
25%are to be 24"box trees.They will be doubling the number of plants,so
they will have 50%of the trees at 24"box.
Mayor Coleman closed the discussion
with no more comments and called for a motion.
Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT
THE REQUEST BY LOVEN CONTRACTING ON BEHALF OF SONIC DRIVE-IN FOR A WAIVER OF
THE MASONRY WALL REQUIREMENT ALLOWED UNDER THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE,
VOLUME II,LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,CHAPTER 6,ARTICLE 6-1,LANDSCAPING AND
SCREENING REQUIREMENTS (ORDINANCE 940 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO)FOR THE SOUTH,
EAST AND WEST PROPERTY BOUNDARIES BE APPROVED.
MOTION.
conditions needed to be added.
Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE
Mayor Coleman asked if the
City Attorney Joel Stern stated i f
he wants them to be part of the motion,they need to be added.
Councilmember Insalaco AMENDED HIS
MOTION TO ADD THE CONDITIONS OF THE APPROVAL AS HERE FOLLOWS:THE PROPERTY
OWNER SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ALONG THE SUBJECT PROPERTY EAST
BOUNDARY AS TWICE THE REQUIRED AMOUNT.
Councilmember Urich asked if they
wanted additional landscaping on the other boundaries.
Councilmember Insalaco commented i t
already states i t about the southeast and west property boundaries.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 11 OF 35
Councilmember Urich commented i t
does not mention anything about doubling the landscaping.
Councilmember Insalaco AMENDED THE
MOTION TO SAY EAST,WEST AND SOUTH.
Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
Mayor Coleman called for a ten
minute break.
Mayor Coleman reconvened the
meeting.
CUP -00-09,APPEAL OF BLOCKBUSTER'S CUP
ISSUED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 24,2000,PROPOSED
RESOLUTION NO.00-39,UPHOLDING THE
DECISION,PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO.00-41,
OVERRULING THE DECISION,AND PROPOSED
RESOLUTION NO.00-42,MODIFYING THE
DECISION
)Assistant Planner Jull McDaid
briefed the council on the item.The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to
approve a second detached sign for Blockbuster at 400 S.Idaho Road.The
property currently has a detached sign advertising Fry's and i t has four
tenant spaces.The existing sign is part of the comprehensive sign package
for the development.The sign package also includes two other signs,one on
Phelps Drive and one of Apache Trail,and they were installed prior to
Blockbuster being built.Mr.Rosenburg bought the parcel where Blockbuster
has been constructed at a later date.He has had discussions with Fry's and
the city on the sign package.As they are part of the overall Fry's
development,the city typically does not get into discussions on how the signs
will be handled.The existing Fry's sign is located on the Blockbuster
parcel:exceptions to particular code requirements should only be granted i f
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 12 OF 35
there are circumstances warranting the exception and the criteria is included
in the land development code.Staff believes the granting of the conditional
use permit for the proposed ground sign was unnecessary due to the high
visibility of the existing building signage.She then gave examples of the
current signage and the proposed signage.Staff does not believe the
placement of an additional ground sign will provide an adequate level of
increased visibility to justify the precedent being set.There is a variety
of existing media that will market the subject property.The proposed sign
would only serve the traffic going northbound on Idaho.
Mayor Coleman commented this sign is
40'south of the Fry's building and it would be close to the mobile home park.
The height would be 6'.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
that is correct.The Fry's sign is 12'.
City Attorney Joel Stern commented
they have three resolutions;the first one upholds the decision,the second
one overrules the decision,and the third one allows the decision to be
modified.
Mayor Coleman commented the height
appears to be the same,but they want more square footage on the sign.
Councilmember Dietz asked exactly
where they want to place the sign.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
they want to place i t south of the Fry's sign by about 4'.It would be just
north of their south property line.
Councilmember Dietz asked if it
would interfere with traffic leaving Fry's.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
it would not.If is approved,they would be required to locate it where i t
would not be a visibility problem.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 13 OF 35
Mayor Coleman asked i f it would
create a problem in seeing the current Fry's sign.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
i t should not affect the Fry's sign,as i t is half the height.However,she
is unsure how it would affect the tenant signage underneath the Fry's sign.
Councilmember Durbala commented the
sign on the side of the building appears to be pretty prevalent.If this sign
is approved,the next store coming in will also want a sign and there would
eventually be numerous signs down the road.He does not want the additional
signage.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
she is concerned with a precedent being set.The existing sign can be seen as
there is no development across the street.
Councilmember Durbala commented he
does not see how the smaller sign will be seen because of the landscaping.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid
commented their existing signage is adequate.
Vice Mayor Surra asked i f
Blockbuster is not considered a tenant to be included on the tenant part of
the Fry's sign.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid stated
she does not know what the agreement says.The representative should be able
to answer that question,but they are apparently unable to reach an agreement
on that signage.
Vice Mayor Surra stated she has been
to Fry's since Blockbuster has opened,and i t seems that everybody has found
them.She does not think they need another sign with the number of people she
sees going in there.
Councilmember Urich commented she
approached the building from all different angles last night and the signs on
the building were very clear.She added she went by a Blockbuster in Gilbert
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 14 OF 35
also in a shopping center and they do not have an individual,detached sign.
She does not believe they could have anything more clear then their sign that
is attached to the building.
Assistant Planner Juli McDaid agreed
that the attached signage is real effective.
Mayor Coleman requested the
applicant address the council.
Mr.Rory Kelly,representing the
owner,Eric Rosenberg,addressed the council.He was asking for fairness.He
does not believe staff had proper foresight in the placement of the Fry's
sign.Mr.Rosenberg is not a tenant of the Fry's development;he owns his
parcel.On his property is a Fry's sign that was not built in accordance to
what was submitted to the city.There are no electrical components or panels
to handle tenants'signage.Blockbuster has asked for a tenant panel and they
have been denied by Fry's.Blockbuster does not own the building;Mr.
Rosenberg wants a sign for his building.If Blockbuster moves to another
location later,he should be able to market his building.They would like a
20 square foot sign.If he was anywhere else in the city,the code states he
would be allowed one detached sign,and he gave the dimensions they would be
allowed and the additional signage they would be allowed.He has worked out
this detached sign deal with his tenant.They are looking to maximize their
signage.He suggested an alternative would be to make Fry's comply with the
code and build i t accordingly or revoke their permit and make them move it to
their property.According to the permit,the sign was not to be on his
property,but that is where it was built.He feels the commission made a fair
decision and that staff made an error.He commented if the Fry's sign was not
there,he doubted he would have to be there as they would have been allowed
one sign on the property.
Mayor Coleman asked if there was any
agreement between Mr.Rosenberg and Fry's to locate a sign there.
Mr.Rory Kelly stated there is not.
Mayor Coleman asked how that
happened.If someone built a sign in his front yard,he believes he could
remove it.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 15 OF 35
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated they had discussions with Mr.Ron Alt who is marketing the tenant
spaces for Fry's.He sent staff a letter addressed to Mr.Rosenberg advising
him that he could not put his identifier on the tenants'sign while he was
buying the property but he would have the option of pursuing a conditional use
permit with the city.Staff believes he knew what he was buying and then he
came in afterwards for the conditional use permit.The knowledge was there
prior to the completion of purchase.The signs are the way they are because
of the planned development approval,which was done before the property was
subdivided.This resulted in the off -site sign.
Vice Mayor Surra asked if Fry's has
indicated they would not move the sign or is staff indicating the sign cannot
be moved because of the way it was approved.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated Mr.Alt said they would not move i t and that Blockbuster knew
everything about it.
Mr.Rory Kelly stated Blockbuster
did not buy the property:Mr.Rosenberg did.
City Manager Curtis Shook stated the
city tried to help facilitate something.However,this is actually a problem
between two property owners and i t is not one of the city's making.
Mayor Coleman asked if this was
staff's error.
City Manager Curtis Shook stated i t
is not.The signage was approved as part of the general plan for the site and
the land had not been subdivided.I t is up to Fry's and whoever buys the
property.The city put the two parties together but it could not facilitate a
solution.
Mr.Rory Kelly suggested Fry's sign
be in accordance with the plans they submitted for the permit.
City Manager Curtis Shook commented
that is not up to the applicant to ask.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 16 OF 35
Mayor Coleman opened the public
hearing on the item.
Mr.Tom Schuelke,1889 S.Palo
Verde,Apache Junction,addressed the council.This business has a lot of
repeat users and the signs for this business are not that important other than
for the first time someone visits.A detached sign at the requested location
may also confuse a first time visitor into believing that is the entrance to
Blockbuster instead of the Fry's shopping center.The letters on the north
side are more visible from a distance than a small sign.He suggested he may
want to repeat that sign on the south side of the building and he would get
much more visibility with the corporate colors at a distance.
Mr.Rory Kelly stated they did not
put signage on the south elevation due to the neighbors on that side.They
did not want anything that high up exposed to the travel trailer park.
Vice Mayor Surra stated Rock Shadows
has its -own big sign on the south side of the Blockbuster building.I t has
two big lights that hit i t at night.She does not believe the Blockbuster
sign could be any more offensive than what is already there.She agreed a
sign on the south side would be a good idea.
Mayor Coleman closed the public
hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council
discussion.
Councilmember Durbala asked if the
planning decision would remain as is if this should end up a tie vote on the
council.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated that
is correct.It would take a 4-2 vote to overrule or modify.
Mayor Coleman closed the discussion
and called for a motion.
Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT
RESOLUTION NO.00-41,A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,OVERRULING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 17 OF 35
DECISION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN CASE NO.CUP -00-09,ALLOWING A
SECOND DETACHED SIGN ON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY (C-3/PD)ZONE,LOCATED AT 400
SOUTH IDAHO ROAD,APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,BE APPROVED.
Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE
MOTION.
City Attorney Joel Stern commented
there should be specific findings attached to the motion.
Councilmember Durbala commented he
thinks it will actually create problems for the community as a whole and he
does not like a detached sign there.
Vice Mayor Surra AMENDED THAT SHE
WOULD FIND THAT THE SIGNAGE,AS AGREED UPON DURING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,IS
ADEQUATE AND THE SIGNAGE THAT APPEARS CURRENTLY ON THAT BUILDING IS ALSO
ADEQUATE.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated that
would be an amendment with the findings.
Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE
AMENDMENT.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The amendment carried.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1146/PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL REQUEST BY SFII,
LLC,FOR A HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT AT
SUPERSTITION FALLS
)Associate:Planner Rudy Esquivias
briefed the council on the item.This is for the Apache Junction Medical
Center.They are asking for a three story main hospital unit,a three story
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 18 OF 35
medical office building,a one story lobby with a pedestrian overpass,and a
one story emergency unit.Staff parking will be at the northeast corner and
public parking will be to the south and west of the main building.
Surrounding residents have talked to staff and attended commission meetings,
with the majority of them being in favor of the proposal.They are concerned
about the helicopter pad,increased congestion and some flight path issues.
The general plan calls for commercial/employment retail opportunity for this
location.The housing in the area is medium to high density.The Planning
and Zoning Commission acknowledged the residents concerns,but felt that a
hospital was greatly needed in the area and recommended i t for approval along
with conditions.This is not a level one trauma center so i t should not
create that big of an impact on the neighborhood.The applicant held a
meeting at Superstition Falls clubhouse with neighborhood involvement.
Council had been concerned with the entrance drive.Condition number three
addressed the road issue and staff has suggested some options for council
regarding the entrance drive.
Councilmember Durbala asked if he
had a copy of those options and if they could be passed out to the council.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
passed out the options.The suggestions were given to the applicant this
evening.The first suggestion is for if the road remains a private road,then
easements must be recorded for public vehicular and pedestrian use and
utilities with a commitment for maintenance.The second suggestion is to
accept the entrance drive as a private road,but the applicant must dedicate
and construct an additional 20'of right-of-way.This would be basically
along the north side of the hospital,and it would incorporate the area
normally used for landscape frontage.The road would have to be built to city
standards,requiring core sampling.I t is suggested that the roadway be four
lanes;five lanes would not meet the city standards for 80'right-of-way,with
i t narrowing to 2 or 3 lanes going into the mobile home park.
Councilmember Durbala asked if they
were to tear up the sidewalks,construct the road,reconstruct the sidewalks,
and move the helipad because of the 25'distance.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated the helicopter pad is not a structure so it would not have to be moved.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 19 OF 35
Councilmember Durbala asked if there
are guidelines stating how far away from a road it must be.
stated there are no guidelines.
could be right up next to the sidewalk.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
Councilmember Durbala asked i f i t
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated the code has no provisions for setbacks for helicopter pads.
Councilmember Durbala stated they
should use some common sense with this.The helicopter pad should not be next
to the sidewalk.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated there is some space in the area;the helicopter would land in the
square.The architect should be able to address the issue.
Councilmember Durbala commented they
are only moving it to just past their service entrance.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated that is correct.It will be just past the hospital site.
Councilmember Durbala asked if the
other side of the development would also be widened in the right-of-way.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated that would remain as is.
Councilmember Durbala commented he
could not see their having to tear up all the sidewalks on the one side that
has them already in so that the roadway can be widened when they could easily
widen the roadway from the other side where no sidewalks have been
constructed.He thinks the other side should be developed with the additional
25 feet.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 20 OF 35
Vice Mayor Surra asked if they could
determine how the road was built if the sidewalks were taken up.
City Manager Curtis Shook commented
he did not know if it would be a problem moving it to the other side;the
problem is trying to get an additional lane because of the multiple uses.
Councilmember Durbala commented the
majority of the traffic will be going in on the opposite property where all
the stores will be located.The hospital should have a service entrance and
an emergency entrance only.He is certain they will come back later and
determine that the helipad is too close to the road or sidewalk if they take
the 25'away on the hospital side.He would prefer to see the 25'taken from
the shopping mall side.
Mayor Coleman asked if it is the
same owner.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated i t is.Council had already approved the development plan on the north
side.
Mayor Coleman commented they are
asking for i t on the south side because the north side is not asking for
anything.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated that is correct.
Councilmember Insalaco commented the
reason for the additional lane is to relieve any traffic backup there may be .
for the hospital.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated he believed the traffic going to the hospital in that lane will be
minimal.It will be to handle the commercial and manufactured home park
traffic.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 21 OF 35
Councilmember Insalaco suggested
they have a deceleration lane to the end of the service entrance instead of
widening the lane to the end of the property.
City Engineer Ron Grittman commented
staff had met to address council's concerns on the roadway being private,how
i t could get into public hands,and how the city would contend with the
various traffic elements.The traffic on it will be minimal,but it will
primarily be making right turn movements.It could be addressed with
decelaration lanes,but they require specific distances that may not be
available.He recommends a four lane road with two lanes eastbound with a
dedicated left turn movement and one lane heading westbound.The second lane
eastbound will allow traffic to flow around the right turn traffic.
Councilmember Dietz commented he
said the majority of the traffic will be right turn traffic into the hospital.
He recalled Rudy saying that the majority of the traffic would be coming in
off of Goldfield and into the retail center and the manufactured home park.
City Engineer Ron Grittman clarified
that he had been talking about the majority of the hospital traffic.They are
providing a lane whereby access to the hospital can be gained and access to
the remainder of the uses can be unencumbered.
Councilmember Insalaco asked why
they could not put the lane to the end of the second entrance only.They
should not have to go to the end of the property.
City Engineer Ron Grittman stated
that was a means to accommodate all of the commercial uses,including hotels
and restaurants on the north side.
Councilmember Durbala stated i t
makes no sense to make the hospital property put in the additional road as all
the hospital traffic will be off the road before that additional portion of
road.
Councilmember Insalaco commented
there is another keypad entrance on Goldfield and the residents will probably
use that more because they will not want to go through the gate.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 22 OF 35
City Engineer Ron Grittman commented
restricted access with all hospital traffic coming off of Goldfield had been
suggested.This would keep the roadway private.
Councilmember Durbala commented they
would not then need all of the extra roadway.
City Engineer Ron Grittman stated
that is the intent,but since i t is their private roadway there is no way to
restrict that.
City Attorney Joel Stern commented
i t had been suggested at the beginning of this development that the road be
made public,but the council did not wish to do that.This was before the
hospital was anticipated.The city cannot demand the roadway be maintained
since it will be private.
Mayor Coleman asked if the council
opted to go with Condition E would it then become Condition D since there
would then be no Condition D.I t has to be one or the other.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated that
is correct.
Councilmember Durbala asked if the
commitment for maintenance would be legal and binding if it was passed with
Condition D.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated he
would have to see the actual language.
Councilmember Durbala asked i f i t
would be binding if they stated they would do the maintenance on the road.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated i t
could be binding between them and the users,but not with the city.
Councilmember Durbala commented i f
the city and the developer made an agreement for the road to be maintained to
city standards,the developer could walk away from that agreement.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 23 OF 35
City Attorney Joel Stern stated they
could end up in court over it.
Councilmember Durbala asked if he is
required in concept if he signs a commitment to the city.
City Attorney Joel Stern stated he
would agree in concept but would not discuss the issue any further without
going into executive session on it.
There was general discussion between
Councilmember Durbala and City Attorney Joel Stern whether this issue could be
discussed during the meeting or during an executive session,and if an
executive session could be called immediately to discuss the issue.
City Attorney Joel Stern commented
staff recommends that the plan not be approved unless this becomes a public
roadway,and the extra roadway would be needed.He added they should want to
give the city the roadway in case of automobile accidents so that they do not
get sued.
Mayor Coleman added there is also
the maintenance factor.He closed the discussion with no more comments and
requested the applicant address the council.
Mr.Tim Mahoney,SFII and AJH
Development Group,addressed the council.He displayed a model for viewing
and gave a description of the entire project.The first phase will be two
stories stepping down to the emergency room.The hospital is as far to the
northeast as possible to take into consideration sight lines and distance.
The building is canted to match the mountain so that only one side of the
building can be seen when looking at the mountain.The lowest portion of the
building is adjacent to the neighbors.They held an open house for the
neighborhood on November 16 to give themselves time to address any of their
concerns.They handed out over 2,500 door hangers and notes were sent to the
council,staff,planning and zoning commission and the county.They had 500
people attend the meeting and a lot of their concerns were allayed.They told
the residents of Superstition Falls that they would have additional
landscaping and that they would design the project to minimize the effect of
any additional traffic they would cause.The original road was to be a 3 -lane
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 24 OF 35
with the center lane being a left turn lane for both directions.As Goldfield
will be a main arterial road,they set their main entrance to the south and
put most of their parking on the south side,allowing easy ingress and egress.
The emergency entrance is only for dropping off emergency patients.There
will not be heavy traffic to that entrance.He described the general traffic
flow and pedestrian traffic from parked cars.They believe the traffic will
be less for the hospital than what was originally proposed for the area.They
are asking for a three story medical office building,with the first floor
being used for the administration offices of the hospital,which would allow
the hospital to be only three stories.This will protect the neighbors yet
provide the services needed.The helipad was a minor issue with some of the
neighbors.Most realized they need a hospital but they would prefer one
without a helipad.From an emergency standpoint,i t is necessary.The
hospital is a full service hospital but it will not have every service.The
emphasis will be cardiac and orthopedic.It will be a for profit hospital,
privately owned and operated.These services will help support the hospital.
The area deserves a high level medical facility.
Councilmember Insalaco asked what
they would like to do about the road.
Mr.Tim Mahoney stated he believes
the road suffices the way i t is.The traffic study that was done took
everything into consideration.
Councilmember Insalaco asked why
they have not done a core sample of the road as of yet.
Mr.Tim Mahoney stated they have not
been told that the city had requested a core sample.They have been busy
putting the other aspects of the hospital together.They would be willing to
provide core sampling to determine whether the road meets the criteria.
City Manager Curtis Shook commented
the city would ask for core sampling if it is considering making i t a public
road.I t is the city's understanding that the developer now wants to switch
from a private road to a public road.The council has expressed some concerns
over this,so staff has offered some suggestions.If the developer wishes the
road to remain private,the proposal fits that.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 25 OF 35
Councilmember Insalaco asked if they
wanted to keep i t a private road.
Mr.Tim Mahoney commented he did not
understand what he city manager had said.
City Manager Curtis Shook asked i f
they had requested the city take the road over as a public road.
Mr.Tim Mahoney stated they had
requested that at the onset of the original split for the manufactured home
park and the commercial property and they were told by a planner that the city
would not accept it,that she would not support it.The road was therefore
put in to accommodate the design for the uses that were planned.
City Manager Curtis Shook stated the
plat did not show eight commercial spaces on the north section when the
traffic study was done.Nor was there a hospital.
Mr.Phil Entz,11201 N.23rd Avenue,
addressed the council.He commented the traffic study utilitized a shopping
center on the 12 acres that included a grocery store,a hardware store,30,000
sq.ft of specialty shops,30,000 sq.ft.of general office and a motel.The
weekday traffic generation would be approximately 850 in the morning and 870
in the evening.It overlayed the Superstition Falls Mobile Home Park traffic
and the traffic from Golden Vista,Cortez Ranch and the condominiums.
Different configurations for the entry road were also submitted.This study
resulted in the entrance being moved 190'to the south.The road was set for
three lanes.I t is based on commercial trip generation to TIE standards.The
city accepted this at the time,and the city did not want the road public.
The issue has come up during the subdivision of the property and the northern
development plan.I t has been suggested the northern tier be made public,but
the property is now under two separate ownerships,as Phillips 66 has closed
escrow on their property.
Mayor Coleman asked if the city
requested the road to remain private because the number of lanes involved and
that it would not be built to city standards.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 26 OF 35
Mr.Phil Entz stated he understood
the road was designed to city standards but it was not inspected.Core
samples are needed to show it is up to standards in order for it to be
dedicated.He understood the city did not want the road dedicated because of
the guard station at the bulb leading into the Superstition Falls residential
area.The city did not want to assume the liability there.
Vice Mayor Surra commented that was
because it would not have any public access way.The city should have the
upkeep on a road that the public is unable to drive on.
Councilmember Durbala asked who
would maintain the road if it remains private.
Mr.Phil Entz stated if they are
stipulated to enter into a maintenance agreement between the residential and
commercial portions of Superstition Falls for the landscaping on the wash,the
landscaping along the roadway,all of those items,the maintenance of the
roadway,if it is not dedicated,would be wrapped into the same maintenance
agreement that already is in place for the landscaping and the other common
items that are part of Superstition Falls.
Councilmember Durbala commented i t
would be the property owners and the homeowners.
Mr.Phil Entz stated that is
correct.
Mayor Coleman opened the public
hearing on the item.
Mr.George Diehl, _653 S.Palo Verde,
Apache Junction,addressed the council.The Veterans of Foreign Wars have
been pushing to get a medical facility out here for two years.He thinks they
need the facility to take care of the residents.He has had toAake members
from his Post all the way to Sun City West.He is in favor of the hospital
and urged the council's approval.
Mr.Fritz Kuyt,2400 E.Baseline
#31,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He has lived here for five
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 27 OF 35
years.There are many handicapped retirees in the mobile home park where he
lives.They often need medical service,and currently they have to be driven
12 to 14 miles to the facility on Power Road,and the people are frequently in
excruciating pain.The hospital will be a tremendous boost and asset to the
morale and life span of the elderly retirees,here in the city and the
surrounding areas.He is enthusiastic about the hospital,emergency room,
helipad,gas station,hotel,restaurants and office and commercial facilities
for the usefulness and convenience.He hopes the project will continue
without any hesitation.He urged the council to vote in favor of the
hospital.
Mr.Tom Schuelke,1889 S.Palo
Verde,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He asked if the right-of-way
would be taken away with the additional parking needed when there is
expansion.He asked if it would be possible to have the helipad on the roof
of the one story emergency room;it would free up land for space problems.He
asked if there would be pedestrian access for the hotel and restaurants
nearby.He asked if the developer would give up some land to release him from
the maintenance costs and legal liabilities of the road;and if this would
make good financial sense to the developer.
Mr,Robert Akin,2800 N.Central
Avenue,Phoenix,the architect for the project,addressed the council.He
stated helipads are either ground mounted or on top of buildings.They do not
make sense if the roof structure is below three stories.They need to be high
as i t is easier for the pilots to land.The fire department likes ground
mounted as i t is easier for them..On top of a building,there is a lot of
spill and fuel evacuation.As for parking,there is in excess of 300 spots.
They are to have 1.8 spaces per bed;there are different types of beds but
only recognized beds are recognized.There are 40 licensed beds here,plus 35
recovery beds,operation beds and emergency room beds that are not part of
that.They did not feel the normal calculations would give them enough
parking spaces.They generally use 3.5 per 1:000 gross sq:ft.to 5 spots to
1,000 sq.ft:of building.This facility will include oncology.They
estimated they would need 300 parking spaces and i t should be ample.They did
not want to have all parking on one side of the building.They wanted to be
sure the emergency access,service access and public access do not cross in
order to maintain safety.He described the public access through the entrance
to different parts of the facility.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 28 OF 35
Mr.Phil Entz commented the
dedication of the roadway would depend on trade-off for the improvement costs.
The improvement costs are substantial with the request from staff.He
described the improvements that would have to be removed and relocated
creating a substantial first cost.The owners would have to carry the
maintenance and liability in perpetuity.He believes it would be best to keep
i t a private road at this point.
Mayor Coleman asked if they
anticipate turning it over to the city at some future point.
Mr.Phil Entz stated they do not due
to the separate ownerships of segments of the road.Each would have to give
their approval;it could not be dedicated unless all of them agree.The
guardhouse would have to be located along with other revisions to the cul-de-
sac to meet city standards to include emergency accesses.He has suggested to
staff that a public access easement be recorded across the entire road to the
bulb,or lot number five.
Councilmember Durbala asked if staff
would find i t acceptable under proposal B,if council added at the end of
easements recorded for public,vehicular,pedestrian use,and utilities with
a commitment for maintenance"the words "in addition to any maintenance
obligation set forth in the underlying zoning of the property".
City Attorney Joel Stern stated
there is an original agreement under the rezoning of 1998 that stated the
maintenance would include the maintenance of the roadway,and the roadway
would have to be maintained by the owner.He asked if there was a stipulation
in the original agreement.
stipulation in the agreement.
the city had received that.
the original zoning case.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 29 OF 35
Mr.Phil Entz stated there is a
City Manager Curtis Shook asked i f
Mr.Phil Entz stated it was part of
City Manager Curtis Shook asked i f
it was attached to the zoning or if it is still outstanding.
i t is still outstanding.
the roadway is considered a common area.
Mr.Phil Entz commented he believed
City Attorney Joel Stern asked i f
Mr.Tim Mahoney stated i t is.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated he could not find anything in Ordinance No.1042,the original
rezoning,regarding maintenance of a roadway.
Councilmember Durbala asked him to
go back to the original zoning.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated the residential does not have anything to do with the commercial
property.
Councilmember Durbala commented i t
is the road going up to the residential property.I t is part of the original
zoning on the whole property.He asked if there was an agreement in there on
this.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated he would have to research that.
Councilmember Durbala asked if the
suggested additional conditions for the entrance road/right-of-way were added
would they be acceptable under Section D.
City Manager Curtis Shook stated the
original question is what happens if the road falls into disrepair.
Councilmember Durbala stated Section
D calls for if the road remains private,an easement shall be recorded for the
public vehicular,pedestrian and utilities with a commitment for maintenance
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 30 OF 35
in addition to any maintenance set forth in the underlying zoning for the
property.I t appears to be an automatic carryover.They would have to
maintain the road.
City Manager Curtis Shook stated the
question is what happens if they do not keep the road in repair.The concern
is i f i t should be a public road.If the council is satisfied with i t
remaining a private road,the city attorney can provide language for it to
remain so and be adequately maintained.
Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias
stated i t is not the intent of Ordinance No.1146 to overturn any previous
ordinances.They would still be in full force.
Councilmember Durbala commented this
would just be more supportive.
Chief Warner commented enforcement
on a private road is non-existent.The road will have a number of commercial
uses and a hospital exiting onto the road.There will be some violations and
motor vehicle accidents.It will be impossible for the police department to
enforce traffic codes and ordinance violations on the roadway.There may also
be some civil cases in court resulting from those accidents.He urged the
council to accept the part of the roadway that can be accepted,especially
that adjacent to the roadway.
Councilmember Durbala asked how much
it would cost to move all the utility lines,the light poles,and take the
dedication out.
City Engineer Ron Grittman stated
the utilities could stay under the pavement that run parallel.The crossings
would have to be moved and the street lights.It would cost about $150,000.
Councilmember Durbala commented that
would be to tear up the entire road and rebuild it.
City Engineer Ron Grittman stated
that is correct.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 31 OF 35
Mr.Phil Entz stated his cost
estimate to rip out the road,move the telephone boxes,extend the sleeves,
cutting the sewer manhole to pavement level,and not including the soft costs
of engineering,was $310,000.The engineering would probably be another 6.5%.
Chief Warner commented he would like
the council to consider making a public road whatever final configuration is
agreed upon.
Mayor Coleman commented they would
probably not have any trouble handing a three lane road over to the city for
the public once it was constructed.He closed the public hearing with no one
else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council discussion.
Vice Mayor Surra commented i t is not
the council's decision to make this a public road unless all of the owners get
together and petition the city to take i t over.She would not like to take
over anything that does not meet the city's standards because the city would
have to maintain it.If the owners would like to make all of their
improvements and then improve the road to city standards,they could then
bring it to the city and request that it become a public road.They do not
have all of the road to give so the council should not even be talking about
taking over the road.If approval hinges on the roadway,the item should be
continued until better information is available.
Mayor Coleman commented the part
that staff was proposing is owned by them.
Vice Mayor Surra commented that
would mean that they do not want to go all the way.She feels that is
ridiculous,as there would be jurisdictional problems.
Mayor Coleman closed the discussion
and called for a motion.
Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT
ORDINANCE NO.1146 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE
ORDINANCE BE WAIVED.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 32 OF 35
Councilmember Dietz SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read
the ordinance by title only.
Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT
ORDINANCE NO.1146,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH
THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ELEVATION PLANS AND OTHER
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DETAILS AS SUBMITTED IN CASE FILE PZ-13-00,SHALL BE
ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS:NO RV HOOK-UPS SHALL BE
PROVIDED ON SITE;THE DEVELOPER,AT THE TIME OF THE FINAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS
SUBMITTAL,SHALL PRESENT THE ATTACHED AND DETACHED SIGN ELEVATION AND SIZES,
SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND FINAL APPROVAL;THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
SHALL BE LIMITED TO 45'FROM THE GROUND LEVEL TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET WALL,
WITH SAID WALLS TO COMPLETELY SCREEN ANY ROOF -MOUNTED EQUIPMENT;(D)IF THE
MAIN ENTRY ROAD TO THE SUPERSTITION FALLS DEVELOPMENT IS TO REMAIN PRIVATE,
THERE SHALL BE EASEMENT RECORDED FOR THE PUBLIC VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN USE
AND UTILITY WITH A COMMITMENT OF MAINTENANCE IN ADDITION TO ANY MAINTENANCE
OBLIGATIONS SET FORTH IN THE UNDERLYING ZONING OF THE PROPERTY.
Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
Mayor Coleman commented the council
is concerned about the traffic there,but they are happy to have the hospital
in the community.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 33 OF 35
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
None.
SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES
Councilmember Dietz announced that
the January 2,2001 meeting had been canceled.He MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE
SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON TUESDAY,JANUARY
16,2001,IN THE CITY CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY.
Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE
MOTION.
VOTE:Unanimous.
The motion carried.
INFORMATION AND REPORTS
Councilmember Durbala will not be attending the January 16 council meeting due
to his being out of town.
ADJOURNMENT
)Mayor Coleman adjourned the
meeting at 10:12 p.m.
Consent Agenda Items are as follows:
1.Acceptance of Agenda.
2.Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 5,2000.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 34 OF 35
3.Recognition of Outstanding Service to the Community by City Employees.
Employees receiving recognition are:Bill [ant;Matt King;Aaron McDonald;
Juli McDaid;Liz Langenbach;Jamie Zacher and Parks and Recreation crew.
4.Consideration and approval of Intergovernmental Agreement with Pinal County
for Voter Registration and Election Services for the 2001 city elections.
ACCEPTED THIS 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2001,BY THE MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA.
SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 16TH DAY OF JANUARY ,2001.
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN CONNELLY
City Clerk
DOUGLAS CO,KEMAN
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 19th day of December,2000.I further certify
that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
Dated this 8th day of January,2001.
KATHLEEN CONNELLY
City Clerk
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 19,2000
PAGE 35 OF 35