Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-06 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 6,1998 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on January 6,1998,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 Minister Charlie Fox gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Insalaco led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Coleman Vice Mayor Surra Councilmember Eck Councilmember Urich Councilmember Insalaco Councilmember McClain Councilmember Durbala Staff Present: Others Present: City Manager Curtis Shook City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney Joel Stern City Engineer Gordon Grandy Public Works Director Doug Dobson Development Services Director Larry Harmer Captain Dan Scott Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias Long Range Planner Kate Morris Assistant Planner Paul Michaud ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA ) CONSENT AGENDA BE ACCEPTED WITH THE DELETED UNTIL SOME FUTURE DATE;AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 1 OF 42 )Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM NUMBER 5,WHICH IS TO BE THAT WE RECOGNIZE THE OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY BY THE FOLLOWING CITY EMPLOYEES:PATROL OFFICER DANA STERRETT;VICTIM ADVOCATE COORDINATOR JUDY ROBLES;THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT;THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY;PARKS AND RECREATION EMPLOYEE JIM WALL;PARKS AND RECREATION EMPLOYEE KENNY RICHPIG;YOUTH SERVICES LIBRARIAN LIZ BURKS;PATROL OFFICER HOWARD WILLIAMS;PATROL OFFICER TERESA RODGERS;AND THAT THE RESIGNATION OF TONY VEHON AS CHAIRMAN AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUPERSTITION MOUNTAINS COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.1 BE ACCEPTED. Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. AWARDS.PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms Celia Bachman,201 E.Southern Ave.,Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding the heavy industrial zoning law for the city,which she believes is a "bad law".The ordinance allows hazardous or obnoxious uses in the city, and it has been argued that the city has no control once it is hard zoned. She stated that conclusion is not exactly right,as the ordinance does provide for review and that all of the arguments against that use must be satisfied before the use is allowed in that zoning.She added that council would have to say yes to any use that satisfied the health,environmental and nuisance issue if it was part of a planned development.She urged the council to amend the ordinance with something similar to the amendment for the landfill section of the zoning ordinance,and to consult with their counsel to fix the ordinance. Mari Gardner,1244 S.Pinto Dr.,Apache Junction,addressed the council regarding the school development fees.She commended the council for their action. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Curtis Shook commented that this is the first meeting of 1998 and i t is the year of the city's 20th anniversary.He anticipated there will be special events throughout the year. PUBLIC HEARINGS APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 2 OF 42 LAST STOP )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.She stated the location is under new management and had applied for a new license:they have been notified of this meeting and may be present. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f they wished to address the council.The applicant declined to speak.Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. There being no discussion,he called for a motion. Councilmember Urich MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW LICENSE,INDIVIDUAL,SERIES 10 LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED FOR LAST STOP BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR LUCKY BOB'S LIQUORS )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.She stated this is similar to the first request,and there are comments from the planning department,public safety department and fire district in the packet.The applicant was notified of and was requested to be at this hearing. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f they wished to address the council.The applicant declined to speak.Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. Vice Mayor Surra asked the owner if it was true that she did not intend to be present at the place of business. Mrs.Mohini Hutchins stated her son would be there to manage the business. Vice Mayor Surra stated the manager listed in the application has had a history of sales to minors.She asked how the owner planned to counteract that in the future. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 3 OF 42 Mrs.Mohini Hutchins stated the manager would not be involved in the sales.She added she would be coming in now and then. Mayor Coleman asked if she had taken any steps to relieve the problem of sales to minors,such as moving the alcohol to a more protected area. Mrs.Mohini Hutchins stated the majority of the alcohol would be kept behind the counters and they would be looking at the identification of purchasers.They will try their best to prevent sales to minors. Councilmember Durbala asked if she had sent her people to the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association class to help prevent these sales. Mrs.Mohini Hutchins stated she and her son have both attended the class. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PERMIT,PERSON TRANSFER,INDIVIDUAL,SERIES 9 LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED FOR LUCKY BOB'S LIQUORS BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilmember McClain SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR ABCO FOODS STORE NO.423 )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.She stated the applicant has made a corporate change and is required to reapply with the state.The applicant has been notified to attend this hearing and may be present. he wished to address the council. Mesa,addressed the council.He is Foods.He requested the council to REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 4 OF 42 Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f Mr.John Evans,2104 N.Ashbrook, the store manager and is representing ABCO approve the routine transfer. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion.There being no discussion,he called for a motion. Councilmember Insalaco MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PERMIT,PERSON TRANSFER,CORPORATION,SERIES 9 LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED FOR ABCO FOODS STORE NO.423,BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilmember Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1019/PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO.97-44,CASE PZ-97-18/ SD -97-09.SIERRA ENTRADA,TRACT B )Councilmember Durbala declared he had a conflict of interest and removed himself from the dias until the discussion on the item was over. Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on the item.She stated this proposal concerns the Sierra Entrada Garden Homes subdivision.It was originally designed for its own septic tank disposal system,with a number of lakes in association with the sewage disposal system.One of them has been released by the Department of Environmental Quality and has been purchased by Chartwell Homes.This request is for an amendment to the planned development subdivision zoning and for a preliminary replat for Tract B to develop 8 lots.The amendment would remove Tract B from an exception to the development requirements of existing Ordinance No.145.This is a revised design,as the original was denied by the planning and zoning commission.The applicant withdrew that design for 9 lots and replaced it with this replat of 8 lots,all having access from either Lago or Sierra Vista.The area along Phelps Drive will be open.She added the applicant was in attendance. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f he wished to address the council.The applicant declined.Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. Councilmember McClain commented she appreciated their taking into consideration the suggestions and making the changes. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 5 OF 42 Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1019 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember McClain SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-0-1 (Councilmember Durbala abstained due to conflict of interest.) The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1019,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilmember McClain SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-0-1 (Councilmember Durbala abstained due to conflict of interest.) The motion carried. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO.97-44,A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT SD -97-09,TRACT B OF SIERRA ENTRADA GARDEN HOMES SUBDIVISION,BY CHARTWELL HOMES,QUEEN CREEK, ARIZONA,BE APPROVED. Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-0-1 (Councilmember Durbala abstained due to conflict of interest.) The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1021/CASE NO. PZ-97-31,FRY'S STORE/SHOPPING CENTER ) )Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on the item.This rezones approximately 14 acres of property located at the southwest corner of Idaho and Apache Trail behind the Walgreen's Drug Store.It is currently zoned for multi -family and they are requesting a zoning change to general commercial by planned development.This is for a Fry's Store and future commercial development.Council would be able to view and comment on the other future commercial development.They have exceeded all of the minimum development requirements.The city engineer is concerned about a possible traffic problem,therefore there is an additional REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 6 OF 42 20 ft.of right-of-way included in the ordinance.This should handle the traffic flow as the shopping center develops.She added representatives of the applicant are in attendance. would like to address the council. Mayor Coleman asked if the applicant Mr.Paul Price from Kurt D.Reed and Associates,3200 N.Hayden Rd.,Scottsdale,addressed the council.He stated Fry's is pleased to come to the community and they hope they will enhance the area.He stated he appreciated the assistance of staff in putting the plans together,they have exceeded the requirements in many areas and they do agree to the additional 20'of right-of-way along Phelps Drive. hearing on the item. Mayor Coleman opened the public Mr.Galad Elflandsson,524 W.22nd Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He wanted to clarify why he voted no on the planning and zoning commission for this project.He has no objections to Fry's being in the neighborhood,he just did not like the location.He does not feel they need another grocery store serving the corridor of Apache Junction at this time;he would like to see a store further south for the developments going up there,possibly south of the freeway where they could serve both Queen Creek and the Apache Junction area.He did not think it was fair to throw competition at companies who had been in the area for over twenty years.He stated it appears the city is hungry for any kind of commercial development and that they would let anyone come in and do whatever they want to do,without any thought to the future citizens of Apache Junction.The city is growing,they do not need to give anything away to anybody.They should be able to decide what they need to develop where. Mr.David Hutchins,5323 W.Townley, Glendale,addressed the council.He asked if the 20'of right-of-way was coming out of each side or one side only. City Engineer Gordon Grandy stated it would be 20'on the east side only. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. Vice Mayor Surra commented that her neighborhood is happy to see Fry's coming in.She added she thinks the spirit of competition is nice and she hopes to see lots of specials at the stores now.She complimented them on their color scheme. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 7 OF 42 Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1021 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Clerk read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1021,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. DEVELOPMENT FEE UPDATE )Development Services Director Larry Harmer briefed the council on the item.He stated the first development fees were adopted a little over a year ago,and part of that adoption required an annual review and update of the program.This is the first of two required public hearings in order to consider the adjustment of the fees.This hearing is for input only.On February 3 the issue will come to vote.To date,the development fees collected thus far are approximately $285,000 plus interest. He believes the collection of monies will go up in the future.The monies collected have been almost exclusively by residential;the city will be getting some for commercial soon.As a result,more meaningful funds should be available to help keep pace with the projected growth.He added this item will be scheduled again for the next work session in order to work out any final details in the wording.He has had some contact with the general public recently regarding how certain fees would be assessed.He then gave council a handout which was a summary of the information Mr.Duncan was to give them this evening,and which also includes the comparison of other cities' development fees across the valley.He then introduced Mr.James Duncan of Duncan & Associates. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 8 OF 42 Mr.James Duncan gave an overall summary of the update report.He stated they have added books to the library development fee,as they are a capital expense.They have also added a development fee for municipal buildings,which the city needs due to the type of complex it now has,the new buildings needed and the future growth of the city and facilities.They are both common development fees.When the updates were done,they looked at construction costs to see if they had gone up.They also removed the past two years of debt service as they have to give credit for any debt the city has on the facilities,particulary on the police building.They also deducted the outside assistance for designing the parks which came from the state and federal agencies.They were conservative in their first study and that figure has now been refined and has been increased from 51% to 81%.This means the city is paying a greater percent of its development costs.Roads were increased from 2 miles to 2.16 miles due to the change in boundaries.Functional population is how they distribute the fair share of development fees on traffic generation rates for residential and non- residential.Traffic generation rates are high for convenience stores and day care centers.Since this overweights those areas,they did some fee reductions in those areas.They added the assisted living land use,and they changed the hotel fees and based them on rooms.These changes affect the development fee schedule by making it approximately $1,000 for a single family unit,$900 for a multi -family unit and $700 for a mobile home unit.There is no development fee for parks,schools and libraries for the non-residential. He then went over the changes fee by fee for each type of unit,followed by comparing the city's fees to other cities in the valley.Single family units across the valley average around $5,000,with the lowest being $3,200 by Glendale.When the wastewater and school fees are added,the city total is $4,420,which is competitive with all the other valley cities. Councilmember Durbala asked if they would use the same wording used in the school development fees for the mobile home units. Mr.James Duncan stated that change was incorporated in the public hearing on the school fees.It was their recommendation,agreed with by council,that if a manufactured home goes on a platted lot it will be treated as a single family dwelling unit.If it is placed elsewhere,it would be treated as a mobile home unit.The same approach would be used for these fees. Mayor Coleman asked if these amounts were considered conservative and defensible in court. Mr.James Duncan stated absolutely. He believes they are still conservative in this update.He gave an example that the revised fee for roads is still very much lower than other areas of the valley.The library fee would be going up to one similar to Mesa's,and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 9 OF 42 Apache Junction has one of the finest library facilities in the valley.This fee would enable them to maintain that level of service. Mayor Coleman stated that total includes the school fee. Mr.James Duncan agreed that it does. Councilmember McClain stated she was glad to see the $2,000,as it makes it a more level playing field. includes the school fee. does. of developing the City of Apache Junction. thinks it looks a lot better that way. hearing on the item. Apache Junction,addressed the council. going to be treated on these development that would be upgrading at a later date. Mr.James Duncan stated it is a part Councilmember McClain stated she Mayor Coleman opened the public Mr.Keith Stachar,1153 N.Holmes, He asked how existing properties were fees,particulary older properties Mr.Elliott Fisher,547 E.Quail, addressed the council.He stated there is a big difference between Apache Junction and the other communities it was compared with.Apache Junction is lacking an industrial base.This should be considered with any fees being considered. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak.He reopened the item to council discussion. Councilmember Insalaco stated the impact fees are strictly for new development.The fees do not apply to someone who has an older mobile home on the property that they want to upgrade.If a house burns down or you want to add on or upgrade,the fees do not apply. Mr.Keith Stachar asked about if it would apply for nonconforming properties. Councilmember Insalaco stated the property is still there;it has already been accounted for before. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 10 OF 42 Mr.Keith Stachar stated that sounded good. Vice Mayor Surra stated nonconforming still has to conform. City Attorney Joel Stern stated since Mr.Stachar was given a public response,the mayor might want to reopen the public hearing. Councilmember Durbala commented Councilmember Insalaco stated what he was going to say,and the wording should be similar to what it was in the school development fees. Mayor Coleman reopened the public hearing on the item.There being no one wishing to speak,he closed the public hearing a second time.He commented those properties that are nonconforming would still have to be brought into conformance with the new development.He added this hearing was just for public input. Councilmember McClain asked if the it would be worded wherein a residence replaced by a residence,regardless of whether a trailer or site -built house,would not be impacted. understanding from the work session,also. Harmer stated that is so they can determine Councilmember McClain put in somewhere else Vice Mayor Surra stated that was her Development Services Director Larry why it is being brought back at the next work session, the wording for those areas. Councilmember Eck stated had mentioned something about a building permit being .There would be one permit per property. Councilmember McClain stated that might be harder with the older properties. Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated they will also ask the council a number of "what if's"to determine where council would stand on certain issues.This would help them to determine the proper wording.They will work out the details at the work session. Councilmember Durbala asked if they could bring back the wording from the school development fees and make it almost exactly the same. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 11 OF 42 Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated that is not part of the school development fee portion.The wording regarding the code amendment would be brought back at this time.I t has not been discussed in detail and nothing has been approved as of yet. City Attorney Joel Stern stated Mr. Duncan may have to clarify some points on that basis. Mr.James Duncan stated all of the concerns can be taken care of easily.The change made on the manufactured home on a private lot actually solves the problem itself.If a manufactured home is torn down and replaced with a house,it is basically being replaced and the owner should not have to pay any more.The legal principle behind the development fee is the use has a vested right to the facilities that are in the community at the time of adoption of the ordinance.If a home is burned down,it can be replaced;if the size of the home is increased,i t is not charged a development fee.If a non-residential building is increased,such as a small adobe storage unit being increased by 40,000 sq.ft.,that would have a development fee charged. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion on the item and called for a ten minute recess. Mayor Coleman reconvened the meeting. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1020/CASE NO. PZ-97-24,DESERT ROSE CASITAS )Long Range Planner Kate Morris briefed the council on this item.This is a rezoning request for 7.5 acres comprised of 2 parcels.I t is proposed with the owner's residence and the recreational development.The rezoning is from residential single family to a transitional zoning for the purpose of building a guest ranch.It would have 8 duplexes for a total of 16 rooms.In addition there would be the owner's residence,stables,a recreational building which includes a kitchen and dining area,and a pool.The adjacent property owners brought up the perimeter wall during the planning and zoning commission meeting.The applicant had proposed a 6'block wall;it was proposed by staff that it be either a view fence or vegetation,or combination thereof.The fence was addressed by the planning and zoning commission in stipulation 7 of the ordinance.The other main issue was the number of horses and how they would be used.She stated there is a numerical requirement on the maximum number of horses in the guest ranch section of the zoning ordinance.The ordinance states no more than 1 horse per 10,000 sq.ft.of land area,calculated to a maximum of 33 horses allowed on the property.Adjacent property owners have submitted enough valid protest petitions to require a 3/4 vote for passage. Some of the people who have submitted protests are in the audience,along with the applicant. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 12 OF 42 she wished to address the council. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger,115 W. Kaniksu,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She stated she had nothing further to add as she did not know what else the council needed to know.She requested to speak after the neighbors have spoken. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Mr.Ed Houston,1069 S.Vista Rd., Apache Junction,addressed the council.He is the chairman of the board of trustees for the Elks Lodge,which is across the street from this proposal. He is concerned that the applicant wants to drill a well and not contract to Arizona Water.He believes that the nitrate level will go up when the well is drilled,as it did in the past in their well when the Dash In drilled their well.They now have two nitrate tanks to try to combat the problem.He believes the nitrate level will go up and possibly ruin their business.He is concerned they will be shut down if the nitrate level goes too high,plus the water is getting harder.He added nitrates are dangerous,especially for infants and the elderly. Councilmember McClain asked if a person could taste the nitrates. Mr.Ed Houston stated you could not taste nitrates;they are formed from animal waste.He added it takes a long time for nitrates to go into and through the ground.He commented it is costing them almost $3,000 a year to maintain their level under 10 per million,which is what is required by law. Ms.Judith Miller -Smith,2055 N. Cortez Rd.,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She is opposed to building multiple housing units in a residential area with a questionable water supply.She also is opposed to anyone being given cart blanche approval without proof of financial backing.She is also concerned about the terminology of a transitional zoning and what it could mean. Mrs.Anne Chapman,1353 N.Raven, Mesa,addressed the council.Her family is building a new home at 2275 E. Acacia.When they bought their property,they knew that Highway 88 would be commercial,and thought that Cortez Rd.would make a good dividing line for the commercial properties.She is concerned that changing this zoning would put a motel -style business right in the middle of their low density housing. She stated they could not make an informed decision as none of the proper setbacks are in place,the drawing is not to scale,and the road easements are not noted.She is concerned about the sewage,and she has learned the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 13 OF 42 dwellings will have individual septic tanks.She called around to get an estimate on the fencing and living quarters for the project,and her lowball estimate is over a million dollars,not including stabling,furniture and other incidentals.She is concerned about the possibility of the owner changing her mind after the zoning is approved and queried if there are any safeguards if the owner should do that.She added although 6 homes could be built on the property in question,those individual owners would decide on what is best for them,whereas this zoning would have the owner deciding what was best to make money.She suggested the owner look at other areas along Highway 88 that are zoned commercial that have just as nice a setting as their neighborhood,though the price will be higher.She is concerned that if this business fails,the property could be turned into a motel.The only difference between this facility and a motel is the added facilities for horses.The proposed zoning would allow a motel,and she doubts a paying customer would be turned away if they did not have a horse. Councilmember Durbala asked her if her husband Max was here. Mrs.Chapman stated her husband, John,was not.Max Chapman is her neighbor. Councilmember Durbala stated he believed he talked to her husband after the planning and zoning meeting and he asked him about his objections to the property.Mr.Chapman had stated he was planning on putting up a large building to build custom made cars there.The councilmember asked if that was still true. they plan to build a storage facility. facility would be on their property. there for storing their cars and trailers. Mrs.Chapman stated it was,plus Councilmember Durbala if the storage Mrs.Chapman stated it would be Councilmember Durbala wanted to clarify if this would have a machine shop in the building. Mrs.Chapman stated it would be a personal machine shop. Councilmember Durbala stated her husband said it would be heavy use. Mrs.Chapman stated there would be some heavy use for their hobby. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 14 OF 42 Councilmember Durbala stated the reason why he was asking these questions is because she had complained she did not want a for profit business in a residential neighborhood,yet her husband stated these vehicles sold for around $100,000 to $200,000. Mrs.Chapman stated that was correct. Councilmember Durbala stated that sounds like a profitable business in a residential neighborhood.There is also the possibility of noise and chemical problems when the engines are built.He brought it up as he wanted to make sure they were still thinking of doing that. Mrs.Chapman stated they are but i t is not for profit.The street rods are being built for their personal enjoyment.They show them at car shows. Mr.John Pein,6326 E.20th Avenue, Apache Junction,addressed the council.He stated the Superstition Horsemen's Association endorses this application,but they have issue with the planning and zoning recommendation.He commented the Elks Club will be across the street from this project and hundreds of people use the it.There is also a convenience store,a boat shop and a commercial horse stable in the neighborhood,in addition to private residences.There is a state highway with a lot of traffic on it.I t is not a little area with little traffic surrounding it.A guest ranch only requires 3 acres,she has 7.5 acres.His association has a problem with the recommendation by planning and zoning to allow her to have no more than 15 horses on the property.They believe it to be arbitrary.He wanted to remind the council of another ordinance called the equine ordinance,which states the number of horses allowed on a lot shall not be limited.The ordinance referred to earlier limiting the amount of horses by square footage came into being when the city was incorporated in 1978.The equine ordinance was written in 1985.He inquired which ordinance would govern,as he was told earlier that the equine ordinance would govern.He reminded the council that i t had been determined by legal counsel that the courts would not look favorably on limiting the amount of dogs on a property based on the size of the property.He requested council to base its decision on whether she has the right to be there and whether she meets all the setback specifications.The reference to the number of horses should be stricken and let the equine ordinance govern that.He recommended staff update the guest ranch ordinance to bring it under the ordinance that governs today. Mr.Jim Swanson,5274 E.32nd Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.He was the chairman of the horsemen's association when the equine ordinance was written.Prior to that time they used the county ordinance when it pertained to horses,but they were found to be inadequate,primarily restricting the amount of horses according REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 15 OF 42 to the size of the property.He commented numbers on horses is unacceptable, and the equine ordinance has been in effect since the mid -80's.Now with this project,the zoning ordinance shows guest ranch regulations.When the equine ordinance was being discussed in the mid -80's,he had requested all ordinances that were applicable to horses at that time.He as never given this ordinance on guest ranch regulations.Now with the first guest ranch applied for,this document suddenly appears.He can find no record of this ordinance ever going through city processes or being accepted by council.The guest ranch document runs contrary to the equine ordinance.He urged the council to forget the numbers and keep it a health and sanitation issue,and to accept the application.He urged council to amend the zoning ordinance to coincide with the equine ordinance through due process. Mr.Max Chapman,5345 E.McComb, Mesa,addressed the council.He owns the property directly east of the applicant.He commented he plans to develop his property.He understands that council has a tough job for it is hard to determine where to draw the line.He added he could come and ask for his property to be rezoned for commercial use if the applicant's is approved,and it could go on and on with each abutting property.He reiterated it is a tough decision for council.He commented he has addressed his concerns to council previously in letters. There are a number of problems that need to be addressed and he does not know where to find the answers,including how frequently the water must be sampled and who tests it,how the state requirement for manure removal will be monitored,and the procedures for fly control.He is not concerned about the amount of horses of the type of fence,but about who will be responsible for the inspection of the rooms and the surroundings,the length of time to develop the project and if the financing is in place.According to how his property is currently zoned,the residential character of his property should be protected,an environment suitable for family life should be promoted,and there should be regulations for his privacy.The recreation center proposed is 7 feet from his property line.He does not want to prevent the applicant from realizing her dreams,but he is trying to prevent a nightmare for himself and his neighbors.He stated if the casitas were near the residential property and the stables,recreational hall and office were on the west side, then it would be a transitional property and it would reduce the impact on the neighborhood.He asked if council approves this plan that they show concern for the welfare of the residential neighbors to require the plans to be redrawn to protect a peaceful environment for them to live. Mr.John Pein,6326 E.20th Avenue, reminded the council that the applicant could have asked to put 3 commercial boarding stables on the property and it would not have to be rezoned from what the existing zoning is at this time. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger,115 W. Kaniksu,Apache Junction,pointed out the reason why she placed the casitas where they were is because she has to provide parking and she was trying to REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 16 OF 42 limit the amount of traffic along her neighbors'borders.She could not put the pool where she wanted to due to a federally patented easement.She was unaware of the 50'setback and has already agreed to move the buildings back to where they are in compliance.She has already requested the city engineer's assistance in getting into compliance on those matters.She has considered moving the recreation room to either one side or the other to get it close to the federally patented easement and away from the property line. She commented she has spoken to several environmental engineers about the water and they insisted that a properly installed well causes no problems in regard to nitrates.She is aware that the Elks Lodge has a well that is 15 years old and it has a lot of problems,but according to the engineers,those problems are not just caused from the nitrates being on the surface.The well has a problem.She stated her neighbors know the general plan and knew they would eventually have to fight something,they just did not think it would be so soon.They know what the potential zoning is and that the corner was slated for possible future commercial development and they were aware of that when they bought their property.The people who come to guest ranches are not rowdy;they come with their horses for quiet trail rides.She has been to many guest ranches and has never seen a loud party.These people bring their own belongings and things do not get broken.Concerning the funding,she does have the funding and that is all that should matter.Regarding a to scale drawing,these were given to council and the planning and zoning commission, and it has been available for public view. Councilmember McClain asked if she had talked to anyone about the setbacks. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated she was not aware of the setbacks when she did the drawing,but she has become aware of them and she will comply with them. Councilmember McClain asked what the setback requirement was. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated she believed i t is 50'for the corrals and stables. Councilmember McClain asked her to point out the corrals on the map. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger showed her and stated they were in the far southeast corner. Councilmember McClain asked her how many horses could be kept there. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated she did not know. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 17 OF 42 Councilmember McClain stated she recalled that the applicant had limited the number of horses to fifteen at the planning and zoning commission meeting. had originally limited it to fifteen. not believe the gentlemen understood that. understand that she offered that limit. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger admitted she Councilmember McClain stated she did Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated they Councilmember McClain stated they seemed aggressive towards the city over the equine numbers. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated that is because they feel that way personally. Councilmember McClain stated she wanted to make sure the applicant had not changed her mind. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated she changed her mind about the wall to accommodate the neighbors.She is concerned that the 15 horse limit went from 15 guests'horses to 4 of her own and 11 guests'horses.She believes she is giving a lot here,and she does not think she should be limited to only 4 horses of her own. Councilmember McClain stated she had volunteered that. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger commented that would mean she could never own more than 4 horses for the rest of her life. Mayor Coleman asked if that had been suggested to her. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated that it had been suggested by the commission. Councilmember Durbala stated it had been suggested by one of the commission members. Councilmember McClain stated they had asked her,that is what she had said and that is why it was written in that way. suggested to her. it had been suggested by the commission. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 18 OF 42 Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated she is trying to comply and bend whenever possible. Councilmember McClain asked what the setbacks were. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated for transitional they are 20'from the front,7'for sideyards,25'for rear and a 14'separation between buildings. Councilmember McClain asked what they are for the existing zoning. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated i t is 30'in front and back and 10'on each side. Councilmember McClain asked what the setbacks would be through the easement. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated since i t is a federally patented easement,the setbacks would pertain to the easement in addition to the property boundaries.They cannot go into the easement line. Councilmember McClain asked if the parking area is gravel. Ms.Jayleen Brentlinger stated it is decomposed granite. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. Vice Mayor Surra asked if they could parking area is gravel. decomposed granite. address the conflicting ordinances. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the transitional zoning does not have the numerical requirement,i t refers back to the guest ranch section. Vice Mayor Surra asked if it had to do with the use as a guest ranch. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that was correct. Vice Mayor Surra asked how it got into the ordinance without Mr.Swanson's knowledge. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 19 OF 42 Long Range Planner Kate Morris deferred to the city clerk as she was not here at the time. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated she would have to go back through the ordinances to determine what had happened.This is the first she has heard of this problem.The section referred to is in Volume I of the City Code,Chapter 6.That ordinance would have amended Volume I of the City Code.The other ordinance is in Volume II, the Land Development Code,and that would have taken a separate process.She would have to research the adoption dates. Vice Mayor Surra asked what happens when there is a conflict between two ordinances. City Attorney Joel Stern stated the one that was passed last would prevail.It would have to be researched to see which one was passed last. Mayor Coleman stated that would be the equine ordinance in 1985.He stated he had asked earlier about when these had been passed as he had not been aware of any other ordinance passed before the equine ordinance.The first ordinance had apparently been inherited from the county but no one knew when it went in. Long Range Planner Kate Morris read from the equine regulations of the horsemen's association that the keeping of horses,unless otherwise specifically permitted or prohibited in a zoning district's regulations,shall be permitted on residential zones. Vice Mayor Surra asked if this meant the 1 horse per 10,000 sq.ft.would still be in effect regardless of when the equine ordinance was passed. City Attorney Joel Stern stated he thought that was correct. Vice Mayor Surra asked if that is where the number of 33 horses was arrived at. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that was correct. Vice Mayor Surra stated they should not be using any other figures if the ordinance states that amount.That is the amount that should be written into the project. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 20 OF 42 Mayor Coleman asked if this zoning would allow for a hotel,and the rezoning was granted,would there be a way to prevent a hotel from being developed here. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the wording of the ordinance calls for a guest ranch only.It could be further stipulated if council wishes. Councilmember McClain asked if this would revert to the previous zoning if the guest ranch failed. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated this is approval for a specific use.The next use would have to go through review and approval. Councilmember McClain asked if the usual zoning for a guest ranch would be commercial. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it would be transitional. Councilmember McClain asked if someone normally would look for commercial property to build one of these places. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated that would not necessarily be true.It would depend on the zoning designation. Councilmember McClain read the definition of a guest ranch from the code book,and it is defined as being on commercial property. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated this is the only jurisdiction she has come across that has a transitional zoning and i t is very vague. Councilmember McClain stated it has never been used before.She asked if someone came to her looking to buy a piece of property and build one on it,what type of property would they look for. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated they would be looking for commercial property.She added this is a unique property.In many places one would be looking at a government,public or semi-public zone,and not quite business oriented. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 21 OF 42 Councilmember McClain added she was talking about selling gifts at the commission meeting. Long Range Planner Kate Morris recalled it to be crafts that she would be making. Councilmember Eck asked what the percentage was on the petitions. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it calculated out to approximately 44%. Councilmember Eck asked if that included the commercial property. stated that was correct. a percentage of residents only. Long Range Planner Kate Morris Councilmember Eck asked if there was Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it is not broken down that way;it includes all adjacent properties. She put up a map and showed the properties where the protest petitions came from. Councilmember Urich asked for the surrounding properties to be clarified as to what was on them. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated there is vacant land,a house under construction,existing buildings and dwellings. commercial property was. Councilmember McClain asked what the Kate Morris stated it is an RV storage lot.The Dash In is further over. Councilmember Insalaco stated he felt they are using the amount of horses in the wrong way.He does not believe this has anything to do with the amount of horses;it is a commercial property among residential.It is not on a highway.It is in the so called "Y".Other properties may go commercial if this is changed to commercial.He sees it as a commercial property in a low density area. Mayor Coleman stated it has commercial to the north and west and it is fairly close to Highway 88.It is REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 22 OF 42 slightly over a half mile though it would have more However,this is the kind not believe a hotel would prevent that. to the rodeo grounds.I t is staying in one piece, dwelling units on it than if it had been split. of rural business that fits in that area.He does go in that area,and would like to adopt language to Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated there could be stipulations added to that effect. Mayor Coleman commented he did not want to be put in the position wherein something already has the zoning and meets the criteria. City Attorney Joel Stern stated there would be no problem in stipulating a use change. Mayor Coleman asked if an amendment must be made tonight. was correct. could prevent i t from becoming apartments. City Attorney Joel Stern stated that Councilmember McClain asked if that Mayor Coleman stated if it would revert back to the original zoning,it would not allow apartments. Councilmember McClain asked what the difference was between a guest ranch and an apartment;if it was the length of stay. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated it is generally considered anything 30 days or less. There was general discussion on what could be done and how it could be worded for the property to revert back to the original zoning. was one or two parcels of property. stated i t is two parcels.They cannot the buildings could be flipflopped and easement. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 23 OF 42 Councilmember McClain asked if this Long Range Planner Kate Morris combine them at this point. Mayor Coleman stated he had asked if found they could not because of the Councilmember Eck stated he like the project.He thinks i t is a good concept and believes i t is in a good area on the north side.I t has close access to the trails and rodeo grounds.The only problem he has is business going in next to residential.If the surrounding land had more density,he would be more comfortable with it. Mayor Coleman stated i t is the kind of business that is kind of short term residential;i t is not a high traffic, high use commercial development.It has a rural flavor with the equestrian part of it.This use fits that area. Councilmember Eck stated he liked the area,but he would prefer to see it next to an existing business. Vice Mayor Surra stated this project attempts to preserve the local character they have been looking for in the community,yet providing an outlet for the equestrian population to enjoy some of the things they cannot without going somewhere else.She believes it would be a nice addition to the community and she does not look upon it as she would another commercial development.It has a feel and look of residential rather than commercial.People are always concerned about multiple dwellings in a residential area.This attempts to preserve the natural setting.She would, however,like to see the stipulation that this revert back to the original zoning should this project fail.She would like to see this type of development there rather than any other type of commercial development.She believes i t is a compatible use.She does not believe all the surrounding properties should go commercial around it;the council has a right to say no to those developments. Councilmember McClain stated i t is a beautiful concept,but she is concerned about having a commercial development with 18 units in a low density area that is already developed.She would prefer to see this in an area that was either not developed or had higher density nearby.She does not believe it is fair to those neighbors who have already invested in their properties.The applicant has a choice,the others already there do not. Councilmember Durbala commented he is constantly hearing people say they want to keep the rural lifestyle. Tonight this concept would keep that lifestyle while still having a commercial development.He added this could easily be a commercial boarding stable instead.All of the people protesting and that were in attendance at the commission meeting stated knew they were going to have to fight for this land at some time when they bought their land.They knew then it may be developed commercially.This is by the equestrian trails and mountains,and everyone is continually saying they want to keep the rural atmosphere.He would rather see this than a commercial boarding stable there.It could be a great selling point for this community.There is only one other out in the county;i t is REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 24 OF 42 the right thing with the right timing for the community.There will not be a lot of traffic,and she plans on opening it up to the youth of the community as well during the slow time in the summer.He believes this is what is best for the community as a whole. Councilmember Urich stated she drove from the rodeo grounds and she could envision this project there.It agrees with the rural lifestyle and seems a perfect fit. City Attorney Joel Stern commented the language needed to reflect the council's intent should state "cessation of use as guest ranch as described and approved in PZ-97-24 would cause zoning to revert back to R1-43 if council or property owner takes affirmative action to make such revision".He believes state law requires council to undo by action anything that they take action on. Councilmember Eck asked if there would be an additional 50'setback then what was already shown. Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the guest ranch section requires that all stabling facilities be at least 50'from adjacent property lines.This conceptual drawing will have to be altered to comply with those setbacks for the stables. Councilmember Eck and Long Range Planner Kate Morris discussed the setbacks for the general rural zoning and the minimums between the buildings of the current residents and the future applicant's buildings. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1020 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1020,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 25 OF 42 AMENDMENT:THE CESSATION OF USE AS A GUEST RANCH AS DESCRIBED AND APPROVED IN PZ-97-24 ZONING TO REVERT BACK TO R1-43 IF COUNCIL OR PROPERTY OWNER TAKE ACTION TO MAKE SUCH REVISION. amendment. amendment. MOTION. RESTRICTION NO.4 IN THE ORDINANCE. MOTION. There was general discussion on the Mayor Coleman stated he had another Councilmember Durbala SECONDED THE Mayor Coleman MOVED TO STRIKE Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE Mayor Coleman identified the restriction as "the maximum of 15 horses shall be permitted on the property delineated as follows:no more than 4 to be belonging to the owner of the property with a further 11 being brought by guests;at no time shall there be more than 30 horses on the property for a single event". City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked if that would put the regular provision in effect. revert to the regular provision. zoning stipulation would apply. the guest ranch stipulation. Vice Mayor Surra stated it is to Mayor Coleman stated the regular TR Vice Mayor Surra stated it would be City Attorney Joel Stern stated that is what they would be doing if they removed Restriction No.4. There was general discussion on the numeric maximum and that they could not change the ordinance on that as it was not on the agenda for tonight. Mayor Coleman stated they would vote on the second amendment removing Restriction No.4 first.He asked if the amendment would require a 3/4 vote. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 26 OF 42 Long Range Planner Kate Morris stated the entire motion would call for a 3/4 vote. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated the mayor's motion was strictly for an amendment,the vice mayor's motion was for approval of the ordinance with an amendment.She believes both would require a 3/4 vote. City Attorney Joel Stern agreed. There was general discussion as to which motion would be voted on first,and it was determined they go in reverse order. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly reminded the council that this vote is to delete Stipulation No.4. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. Mayor Coleman stated they would now be voting on the main motion with the amendment that was made at that time. VOTE:5-2 (Councilmember Insalaco and Councilmember McClain voted in opposition.) Under the 3/4 vote requirement the motion failed. Mayor Coleman called for a ten minute recess. Mayor Coleman reconvened the meeting. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1017/PZ-97-27, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR A GASOLINE DISPENSING/CONVENIENCE MARKET BY DIAMOND SHAMROCK ) )Assistant Planner Paul Michaud briefed the council on the item.This will be located at the northeast corner of Southern and Ironwood.The property was rezoned in 1988,but development was not requested until now.The current zoning is general commercial by planned development.They propose a gasoline dispensing/convenience market equipped with ATM services from Bank One and a drive-thru fast food service which would possibly be A & W.The fast food service will not go in for approximately a year.This is a permitted use for this site.I t is surrounded by the Apache Junction School District facilities,vacant REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 27 OF 42 commercial and vacant business zone properties.He briefed the council on the site plan and mentioned that the applicant had altered the elevation to more subdued colors.The proposal meets and exceeds the ordinance;the pump islands are 43'from the property line;it exceeds the minimum lot size;the highest portion of the structure does not exceed 19';it meets the minimum setbacks;it offers one more parking space then required;the drives are wider then required;and they have 35% of open space.The signage and landscaping screening will be viewed with the building permit.The planning and zoning commission gave a unanimous recommendation to approve the site plan and architectural elevations.The city engineer made some comments in a letter dated November 18,1997.The police department was concerned about a roof access ladder and crosswalk.A letter was sent to the school district on November 13,1997,describing the plan and the liquor license.No comment has been received.One resident,Mari Gardner,came to the department asking about the liquor license,she is in the audience this evening.He commented on the five stipulations in the ordinance,including the waiver of the internal wall requirement for the property.He finished by stating the applicant is in the audience this evening. Councilmember Insalaco stated the former police chief believes the west driveway may be a possible hazard with turning traffic into the driveway,but he does not see any alternative.He asked if there was anything that could be done. City Engineer Gordon Grandy stated they attempted to move the driveway as far away from Southern as possible,and not knowing how the surrounding property will be developed,another driveway could be right next to it.He added he will keep those driveways apart at the maximum distance as best he can.They do need access from both streets. Councilmember Insalaco asked if he was comfortable with the result. City Engineer Gordon Grandy stated he is comfortable only under the pretense that there will be a left turn lane on Ironwood when further developments are made. Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f they wished to address the council. Scot Williamson,952 E.Baseline, Mesa,addressed the council on behalf of Diamond Shamrock.He gave a brief history on Diamond Shamrock in Arizona.He stated the elevation and color scheme are unique to Apache Junction only.He requested approval of their development plan. Councilmember Eck asked how many students would be allowed inside the business at a time. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 28 OF 42 Mr.Scot Williamson stated that is a concern of the school district.He therefore is limiting the number of students to two inside the business during school hours. Councilmember Eck started to ask about alcohol and tobacco and was asked to wait until the next item was being discussed,which is the liquor permit for this business. Councilmember Durbala asked if there would be a program to pump gas for disabled customers.There is a state law regarding this for full service stations. Mr.Scot Williamson stated they have intercoms at each pump wherein a disabled person could contact the store for an employee to come out and assist them. Vice Mayor Surra asked if their development would be predicated in any way on what happens with the next item. Mr.Scot Williamson stated it is. They are new in the marketplace and they are competing against established companies.They need to have a complete array of products.The beer and wine issue is always a critical issue no matter where the store is located.They would have to find a new location if the liquor license is not granted per his company manager.However,he believes this is the best location in Apache Junction. around the state with school athletic they have had the student limit rule. they all had their turn.He asked to during school hours. Mayor Coleman stated he has traveled teams and he has been at stores where They have had to wait outside while have it verified that this would only be Mr.Scot Williamson stated that was correct.They can modify that in whatever way that would make more sense to anyone.Numerous students in the store at one time would be difficult to monitor.He commented lunch hours will be tough.He added they would like to build the A & W but in order to show they can control the situation,they will eliminate the A & W for now. Councilmember Durbala asked if the reason the A & W is on hold is so they can develop credability that they can police what they are saying they can. Mr.Scot Williamson stated that is correct. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 29 OF 42 Councilmember Durbala commented he thought that was a good idea. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Mrs.Rosalie Gifford,201 E. Southern,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She works with security everyday and the only young adults off the grounds are those with a specific place to go to.If a child goes off the school grounds in the mornings,it is immediately broadcast over the radio.Security picks up that student right away.She does not see any problem concerning children going over there during lunch time or school hours. Mr.Elliott Fisher,547 E.Quail, addressed the council.He thinks it is a great location but he is concerned about the liquor license. Mayor Coleman advised him the liquor license would be the next item on the agenda and Mr.Fisher declined to speak further at this time.Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing with no one else wishing to speak and opened the item to council discussion.There being no further discussion,he called for a motion. Councilmember Eck MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1017 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Councilmember Urich SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read the ordinance by title only. Councilmember Eck MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.1017,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED. Councilmember McClain SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-1 (Vice Mayor Surra voted in opposition.) The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 30 OF 42 APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR DIAMOND SHAMROCK ARIZONA ) )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly briefed the council on the item.This license is different as i t is a new application for a new location.This is for a Series 10,beer and wine liquor license for sales in original containers for off the premises consumption. The applicant is here to answer any questions. Mayor Coleman asked if the applicant wished to address the council again. Mr.Scot Williamson,952 E. Baseline,Mesa,addressed the council.Besides conferring with staff to see if this would be a good location for their store,they also had the state liquor department do a survey to see if Diamond Shamrock should go on that location or another.He has visited with numerous people to talk about what kind of neighbor Diamond Shamrock would be,including the city manager and Dr. Sutter.Beer and wine is a critical part of their product mix.He gave the council a copy of a letter he had drafted after meeting with the city manager and Dr.Sutter,delineating what they had gone over.He stated they would not allow more than 2 students in the store at any time during school hours;2 employees would be on duty at all times;only students with the specific pass allowing them to come over there would be allowed in the store;there would be no self serve tobacco products,all of them would be behind the sales counter and the buyer would have to have proof of age in order to buy them;all the beer and wine will be located in a cooler farthest from the front door and easily seen by the store manager and personnel;and locks are on the cooler doors after the allowed sales hours.It is company policy not to sell adult magazines and they do not sell tobacco rolling papers.There will be no video games.After they have shown how tight their control is over the alcohol and tobacco for about a year or so,they will build the A & W.They ID anyone 35 years of age or under by company policy,and they have a register wherein all buyers must sign in and the clerks write in the ID type,number and expiration in order to make their clerks more aware of fraudulent and under age identifications.There will be no loitering allowed.They have their own security and they are monitored randomly.They have two surveillance cameras, plus the monitors.It is a 24 hour tape.The employees have their own independent alarms in case someone is outside the store and has a problem. They will also pay the development fees needed.The final item is they plan to have individual students work in the store during specific school hours to learn the fundamentals of store management. Councilmember Durbala asked if the personnel would be going through Arizona Liquor Board Association training as well. Mr.Scot Williamson stated they would be going through the training.They go through the one sponsored by the REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 31 OF 42 Department of Liquor Licenses and Control and the Basic Law and Liquor Management Training program. Councilmember Durbala commented he liked the idea that they do not have rolling papers or adult magazines there. Councilmember Urich asked if all customers must sign in. Mr.Scot Williamson stated anyone that is 35 years and younger.They do that in all of their stores. Councilmember Eck asked if that was if they were only purchasing alcohol or tobacco. Mr.Scot Williamson stated that was correct. There was general discussion as to whether it was state law that any one IDed would have to be logged in. Councilmember McClain stated she thought it was a good policy. Vice Mayor Surra asked about the rejection,denial,revocation,suspension or fine of a license that he had been involved in. Mr.Scot Williamson stated it was in the states of Louisiana and Colorado for selling liquor to minors. Councilmember Durbala commented those store employees are probably no longer with Diamond Shamrock. Mr.Scot Williamson stated that is correct;i t is company policy to terminate them. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Barbara Gardner,683 W.Tepee, Apache Junction,addressed the council.She thinks i t is a great development and location,but she is concerned about the liquor and cigarettes sales being that close to a high school.Ideally she would not like to see it there at all,however,if it is approved,she would like to see the safeguards stipulated. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 32 OF 42 Mari Gardner,1244 S.Pinto Dr., Apache Junction,addressed the council.She is concerned about the liquor sales,also.She commented even though they will only allow 2 students in during school hours,they have a lot of events that go on after hours and during the summer.She reminded them that although they may want to hire students to work there,they would have to be 21 in order to sell liquor.She does not like the location next to the school. Mr.Elliott Fisher,547 E.Quail, Apache Junction,addressed the council.He commented Mr.Williamson said all the things he wanted to hear in terms of the security and the sales of alcohol and tobacco.However,when he was their age he stole those items,and he has seen it happen here in Apache Junction.He challenged them to put a block on the cooler to control access.He would not like to see liquor banners hanging from the building regarding liquor sales since i t is across from the high school. Councilmember Durbala asked Mr. Fisher if he has seen any of the Diamond Shamrock stations. Mr.Elliott Fisher stated he has. Councilmember Durbala assured him they do not have liquor signs out front,they have the store situated as stated tonight and the liquor is not in a display case.What Mr.Williamson is saying is corporate policy,i t is not just something thought of today. Mr.Elliott Fisher stated he would still like the operator to have control of the cooler. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. Councilmember McClain asked Mr. Shook what Dr.Sutter's reaction was to the meeting with Mr.Williamson. City Manager Curtis Shook stated Dr. Sutter appeared to feel that they were making every effort to be a good corporate neighbor,they had listened to his concerns and that they were actively trying to find solutions to his concerns about closed campus and the proximity and availability of alcohol and tobacco products.They were addressing his concern about how many people would be in the store insofar as a temptation and attractive nuisance.He did not say whether he supported the license or not,but he did say they were doing things that were important in mitigating his concerns. Councilmember McClain asked if it appeared he was comfortable with what they were saying. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 33 OF 42 City Manager Curtis Shook stated he said he was comfortable with the solutions that were being proposed. Councilmember Eck stated he frequently goes into Diamond Shamrock stores and in his opinion they are the elite of the convenience stores at this time.They are immaculate,all the tobacco is out of reach,and they do a great job of safeguarding the products. I t is inevitable a convenience store would go up in that location,and he is glad i t is Diamond Shamrock. Councilmember Insalaco stated he was having a problem until he found out it was just beer and wine and not the small bottles of alcohol.This is not hard liquor,which is what would scare him.He agreed the tobacco products were out of reach of everyone.He commented he originally was against this,but he has now changed his mind. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Urich MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW LICENSE,CORPORATION,SERIES 10 LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED BY DIAMOND SHAMROCK ARIZONA BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR LICENSES AND CONTROL. Councilmember Eck SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:6-1 (Vice Mayor Surra voted in opposition.) The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.1022/RESOLUTION NO. 97-45,PZ-28-97,SD -97-11,REZONING & PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BASELINE INDUSTRIAL PARK (NICHOLS/NORTON) )Mayor Coleman announced that the rezoning request has been withdrawn.He stated they would proceed with the preliminary plat for the Baseline Industrial Park. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the council on the item.He commented the request for rezoning was withdrawn at the applicant's request today by letter.They are requesting approval of their preliminary plat.They are going to proceed with the straight zoning.The south portion of the property is zoned CI -2,the north majority is zoned CI -1 for light industry.This involves 50 lots for various industrial uses.The subdivision is in compliance with all applicable regulations of either zoning district.There are no building pads proposed at this time;they will have to meet standards setbacks,building heights and REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 34 OF 42 applicable requirements when they come in.The landscaping ordinance will be applied at that time.The subdivision will be improved according to city engineer standards.The commission voted to deny the subdivision request though most of the discussion was centered on the zoning issue.Staff has pointed out some concerns in the report,though if the project is otherwise in compliance with the regulations,there is probably not a substantial reason to deny the plat.There is one potential user for one of the lots,but they have seen no site plans yet or what lot the user is interested in.Staff generally recommends approval of the subdivision request.There were several protests issued against the rezoning,however,since the rezoning has been withdrawn, those protests are also,in effect,withdrawn.A 3/4 vote is not required for passage.He briefed the council on the process the future property owners would have to take for their potential use.He stated the council could add more stipulations or postpone their decision if they are not happy with this project.He then read the stipulations in the resolution. staying with the same plat map. stated i t is the same plat map. heavy industrial will remain on Baseline. Councilmember Eck asked if they are Asociate Planner Rudy Esquivias Councilmember Eck asked if all the Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that was correct.The applicants have stated they wish to attract the best,cleanest projects possible to the subdivision.If there was a heavy industrial user in the other area,they would have to come back to the council for a rezoning.The potential is not completely gone from the light industrial use area.It may be attractive to them because of the larger lots. Councilmember Eck asked if they would be interested in flipping it around. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that would require a rezoning. Mayor Coleman asked what the reason was for the planning and zoning commission to deny the subdivision. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated it all dealt with the zoning.Once that was denied,they automatically denied the subdivision. Councilmember Eck stated he does not feel they are getting a real report as they were following the zoning. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 35 OF 42 Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated there is a section in the staff report that addressed the subdivision by itself.I t is on page three.They did receive some comments from some of the departments that have been included in the report.All of those things are subject to review and approval. Mayor Coleman asked if they could have done this to begin with. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that was correct. Mayor Coleman stated they had wanted to work with the council to get an outdoor storage more centered in the subdivision.He asked if there was any possibility to work with them to try to mitigate the impact that it might have on the residences or the future uses by the surrounding properties. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated at the work session last night council suggested stipulating the heaviest industrial uses be limited to the center lots and the lighter industrial uses be for the outer lots.The applicant would have to address that question,but it appeared to be not economically viable to them. City Attorney Joel Stern requested council to limit their discussion to the preliminary plat. Councilmember McClain asked if it would be okay to address an issue of use in the subdivision. City Attorney Joel Stern stated if it regards the subdivision that is enclosed. Councilmember McClain asked if each individual business coming in would have to apply to the city for a license, would that be the only way the city would have any control over them. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated anything falling under Section 17.0201.e.would be subject to appeal and notification procedures. Councilmember McClain stated that would require more than just going in and getting a business license. Associate Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that was correct.There is a substantial process there for control. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 36 OF 42 Mayor Coleman asked the applicant i f they wished to address the council. Mr.Monty Nichols stated he needs to develop the property and to do that he needs to subdivide it.He has withdrawn the rezoning and would like to leave the zoning the way it is and requested council to consider the subdivision so he can develop the property. He commented Dick Martin,the engineer who drew it up,was in attendance, along with his property manager,Stan Kleban.They laid the subdivision out to the highest and best use they could to maximize the property.The potential buyers could buy as many acres as they desire.They are hoping they will get clean,light industrial businesses as the primary users.He wants a nice frontage to attract buyers and does not want any slaughterhouses or junkyards. Councilmember Durbala asked if he had a company interested in expanding there if this gets put through. Mr.Monty Nichols stated that is correct.I t is a man with Metal Trades who has a clean operation in Mesa. There it is considered heavy industrial because part of it is outside:if it is all covered,it would be considered light industrial.Since it involves 5 acres,he cannot cover all of that,so he would either have to be fit into the front or request a rezoning from the council. Councilmember Durbala asked if a lot of the materials that would be there would go under other federal guidelines. Mr.Monty Nichols stated that is true of any business today.He gave examples of the agencies and gave an example of a fuel tank being put in the ground.He commented at the commission meeting there was propaganda distributed that there would be poison,explosives,etc.Though it might not be false,everyone under planned development would have had to come before council to get permission.They would have had total control over it.Because of what happened in the commission meeting,they decided to go with the current zoning.I t had nothing to do with profit. Councilmember Durbala stated he had heard they may be planning to hire 35-50 people locally if they can find the right quality for the trades. Mr.Monty Nichols stated that was correct.With the expansion,they should be able to hire 40 and possibly 50 people within a year. Councilmember Durbala stated he understood the pay would be between $30,000 and $35,000. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 37 OF 42 it would be higher than that. just trying to show what kind to the open meeting law those cannot ask the questions that about. Mr.Monty Nichols stated he believed Councilmember Durbala stated he was of businesses would be going in there. City Attorney Joel Stern stated due questions should not be asked. Councilmember Durbala stated he would be beneficial for the community to know Mr.Stan Kleban stated they ran into a stone wall at the commission meeting.It was clear they were not receptive to rezoning the entire plat heavy industrial.They feel there is a lot of misunderstanding of what heavy industrial is.One of the most successful industrial parks is located in a neighboring community,and it is a mixture of heavy and light industrial.It is the Scottsdale Airpark.It is 80% heavy industrial.It is a very clean and contributes more revenue than any other single source.It is located with less setbacks than this subdivision calls for.If properly controlled,heavy industrial is not a bad word.However, they are here tonight to ask for subdivision approval.They would like to develop an industrial park that would draw companies in to make a job base and tax base for the city.They want to work with the community and be the starting point for much needed economic development for the city. Mayor Coleman opened the public hearing on the item. Ms Celia Bachman,201 E.Southern Avenue,Apache Junction,addressed the council.She commented that during the commission meeting the lots that are now light industrial were best suited for heavy industrial,and vice versa.She questioned if this is the best layout for these industries,as there is no change in the zoning,why was this not redrawn.She stated if people are taken at their word,there is something about the plat that does not make sense.They are inviting applicants to come back and ask for a rezoning for heavy industry.She would like to be sure that they are not doing something through the back door,and that they had not platted it in the reverse from what it is zoned. Mari Gardner,1244 S.Pinto,Apache Junction,addressed the council.Around ten years ago,there were adult businesses that wanted to come in.Those businesses,as they could not be banned,were put in heavy industry.Now those areas are starting to be developed.She has a problem with having adult businesses inside the city limits.She requested council to change the zoning stipulation for adult businesses. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 38 OF 42 is off the agenda. confine her remarks to the agenda item. relevant issue. City Attorney Joel Stern stated this Mayor Coleman asked Mrs.Gardner to Mrs.Mari Gardner stated it is a Mayor Coleman stated it was not as the zoning had been withdrawn.This is specifically for the subdivision, which is the streets and the lots. Mrs.Mari Gardner stated she misunderstood and she wanted them to think of the worst scenario. Mr.Elliott Fisher,547 E.Quail, Apache Junction,addressed the council.He believes the industrial park is a very good idea as it will bring good paying jobs to the city,and that its close proximity to the highway will be a good location for it.He encouraged council to look for businesses that would like to locate there. Mayor Coleman closed the public hearing and opened the item to council discussion. There was general discussion on whether they could discuss the possibility of moving the CI -2 further north. It was decided they could not. Councilmember Eck stated he was not ready to vote on this tonight. Mr.Stan Kleban stated they could not get started developing in Apache Junction without the first step.They will invest the money as directed by the city to put in the necessary off- sites.Unless they have a subdivision,he cannot go out and sell the development to businesses that are willing to relocate to Apache Junction.He commented if they do not do this now,he did not think anyone else would do it. Mayor Coleman asked if the lot sizes could be combined. Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated they could do it through a significant process. Vice Mayor Surra stated this development is asking for what is already there to be platted in order to make REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 39 OF 42 it saleable.They are not asking to move anything anywhere.There are only certain areas were heavy industrial can go,with the rest being light industrial.There is no change to the zoning regulations.She asked if there was anything else that could be done other than what is already on the books. Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated they could not do so without initiating an additional process. Vice Mayor Surra stated they would have to come through this again. Development Services Director Larry Harmer stated that was correct. Councilmember Eck stated he was trying to be more negotiable in getting something a little more applicable for the area. Vice Mayor Surra stated the city has already decided that this is applicable for the area. Councilmember Eck started to comment on the prior discussion. Vice Mayor Surra stated the prior discussion was at the initiative of the landowner who was willing to do a planned development with a zoning change;the zoning change has been withdrawn.She repeated that what is there is what has always been there. City Attorney Joel Stern commented anything above the dotted line of CI -2 has to be CI -1,and below it is CI -2 with the uses determined by the zoning code.The only way to change i t after tonight would be to ask for a rezoning. Councilmember Insalaco added that would be for each individual lot. Mayor Coleman closed the discussion and called for a motion. Councilmember Durbala MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO.97-45,A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,APPROVING A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT,CASE 5D-97-11,FOR BASELINE INDUSTRIAL PARK SUBDIVISION,BY MONTY AND CLARA NICHOLS,BE APPROVED. Vice Mayor Surra SECONDED THE MOTION. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 40 OF 42 VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS. None. NEW BUSINESS. None. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR ACTION None. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS,AND PURPOSES Vice Mayor Surra MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.BE HELD ON MONDAY,JANUARY 19,1998,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RESPECTIVELY;AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:00 P.M.BE HELD ON TUESDAY,JANUARY 20,1998, IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM. Councilmember Insalaco SECONDED THE MOTION. VOTE:Unanimous. The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS None. ADJOURNMENT ) )Mayor Coleman adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Agenda. 2.Acceptance of Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 2,1997. 3.Acceptance of Minutes of Special Meeting of December 10,1997. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 41 OF 42 4.Recognition of Outstanding Service to the Community by City Employees. 5.Approval and Authorization for City Manager to sign Easement Agreement with Salt River Project to provide power to well and tank locations at Public Works Yard.(Item deleted to a later date.) 6.Acceptance of Resignation of Tony Vehon as Chairman and Member of the Board of Directors of the Superstition Mountains Community Facilities District No.1. ACCEPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF ,1998,BY THE MAYOR AND CITYmmuARy COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTiuN,AKIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 20TH DAY OF JANUARY ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CERTIFICATION ,1998. 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 6th day of January,1998.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 14th day of January,1998. KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 6,1998 PAGE 42 OF 42