Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-01-16 City Council Regular MinutesCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 16,1990 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Apache Junction, Arizona,was held on January 16,1990,at the Apache Junction City Council Chambers pursuant to the notice required by law. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Bluntschly called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. INVOCATION Councilman Eidson gave the Invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilman Cox led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmen Present: Staff Present: Mayor Bluntschly Vice Mayor Damiano Councilwoman Barker Councilman Cox Councilman Eidson Councilwoman Alger Councilman Vehon City Manager Michael R.Lee City Clerk Kathleen Connelly City Attorney David Alexander Assistant to the City Manager George Hoffman Deputy City Clerk Lori Zmayefski Director of Community Services Jeff Bell Captain Reed Cox Director of Public Works Rich Broman Associate Planner/Deputy Director Jim Nakagawa Director of Development Services Adriane Brown -White Assistant Planner Rudy Esquivias Assistant Planner Bob Dunn Housing & Grants Specialist Kurt Knutson REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 1 Others Present:Ms Sylvia Stevens Pinal-Gila Senior Citizens Mr.Ray Johnson 690 N.Pinyon Drive Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Steve Dana Mr.Grant Hedley Arizona Department of Transportation Mr.Russell Jacobsen,President Board of Directors,Roadhaven RV Resort Mr.Marvin Halbert Golden RV Resort 999 W.Broadway Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.frank Gransky 1388 S.Cononino Drive Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Peter Sanchez 2110 W.Roundup Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Bill Duncan Winchester Partners Mr.Scott Ruby Gust Rosenfeld & Associates Mr.Dan Coen Coen Engineering Mr.Julius Barroco 688 N.San Marcos Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Sam Spaulding 1476 W.Superstition Blvd. Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Jeff Iverson 1050 W.Superstition Blvd. Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Bill Beaulieu 306 E.Frontier Road Apache Junction,Arizona REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 2 Mr.Leland Bochen,Pastor Epiphany Lutheran Church 1050 W.Superstition Blvd. Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Ray Barten Tempe Mr.Danny Shannon 1353 W.Superstition Blvd. Apache Junction,Arizona Mr.Donald Finch 455 N.Hilton Apache Junction,Arizona ACCEPTANCE OF CONSENT AGENDA )Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NOS.1 -6 BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED; AND THAT THE RESIGNATION OF ROBIN ELLIS FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET,AND THAT DENTON EARL (BO)WASCOM BE APPOINTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO FILL THAT VACANCY,SAID TERM TO EXPIRE ON JUNE 30,1992; AND THAT THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,1989,BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED; AND THAT AUTHORIZATION BE GIVEN THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS,THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER,TO COORDINATE WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,HIGHWAYS DIVISION,FOR THE OPENING OF THE IDAHO ROAD FROM SOUTHERN AVENUE TO BASELINE; AND THAT ITEM NO.21 BE MOVED UP ON THE AGENDA TO FOLLOW THE CITY MANAGER'S REPORT,PREVIOUS TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. VOTE:In Favor: Opposed: Councilman Cox seconded the motion. Councilwoman Barker,Councilwoman Alger,Councilman Cox, Councilman Vehon,Councilman Eidson,Mayor Bluntschly Vice Mayor Damiano (in favor of all except Item No.4) Vice Mayor Damiano stated that the other applicant should be appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission, because he is retired and would have more time to fulfill those duties. The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 3 Introduction of Distinguished Visitors and Guests Mayor Bluntschly thanked everyone present for attending this meeting. AWARDS,PRESENTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Bluntschly announced that there are two new staff members,Director of Development Services Adriane Brown -White and City Manager Michael R.Lee,and that the City is happy to have them on board. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Ms Sylvia Stevens,representing concerned citizens at the Senior Center, stated that because of the lack of administrative leadership at the Center,they have lost $20,000 and requested a joint meeting with the Council to solve the problems. Mr.Ray Johnson,690 N.Pinyon Drive,Apache Junction,member of the Board of Pinal-Gila Senior Citizens,expressed concerns with the Senior Center and reiterated the request for a work session with the Council. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Michael R.Lee stated that since he's been with the City for only 48 hours there is not a lot to report,but that he has met with almost all department heads,and several councilmembers,and hopefully it will not take too long to become a full partner of the team. APPROVAL OR REJECTION OF RECOMMENDATION MADE BY ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PROHIBIT NORTH -SOUTH LEFT TURNS AT THE HIGHWAY 60 AND IRONWOOD DRIVE INTERSECTION )Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated that "splitting the phases"at the intersection of U.S.60 and Ironwood has been discussed with ADOT,and introduced Steve Dana and Grant Hedley from ADOT,should the Council have questions. Mr.Broman further commented that Mr.Alaverez from ADOT did indicate that splitting the phases at the intersection would increase the delays and create other problems. Mr.Steve Dana explained that by splitting the phases,it would cause even more traffic back-up and higher accident rates as a result. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 4 Mayor Bluntschly asked how much would i t delay the traffic? Mr.Hedley replied that it would be an additional 19 to 24 seconds,cycle time,on top of the 160 seconds to make the movement. Councilwoman Alger asked why this intersection is different than Phelps Drive intersection,which has the split phases. Mr.Dana replied that the geometrics are different,Ironwood is really narrow which does not allow both left turns to move at the same time. Councilwoman Alger stated that there needs to be less accidents and less people caught in the intersection,and split phasing may be the only way to accomplish that. Mr.Hedley stated that the movements are not the same with the two intersections,and they can't be due to the geometrics of the intersection at Ironwood,and that an additional delay seems longer than you would think when you're waiting in an intersection. Mr.Hedley asked why Councilwoman Alger particularly wants split phasing in that intersection? Councilwoman Alger replied that the purpose is to allow traffic to flow through the intersection,as it's a link to three schools and has heavy use,and that traffic gets backed up with no time to make left turns. Councilwoman Alger further explained that i f the left turns are prohibited people would have to go around a considerable distance to get to their destinations. Vice Mayor Damiano asked when the reconstruction of the intersection is to be done? Mr.Dana answered that i t is scheduled for May of 1990. Vice Mayor Damiano suggested that split phasing may alleviate the problems until that construction. Councilman Eidson commented that a few guys with shovels could widen those turn lanes just a little to allow the traffic through. Mr.Dana stated that the light delays had been changed to empty out the intersections,and asked i f that wasn't helping. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 5 Councilwoman Alger answered that i t is helping,and that the traffic is still getting bottled up. Vice Mayor Damiano commented that i t all boils down to courtesy. Mr.Hedley suggested that more clearance time could be allowed to further clear the intersection,but that split phasing will only add to the cycle and would not solve the problem. Mr.Dana stated that i f the Council wants split phasing,it will be done,but that is not the recommendation,and that in order to really improve the intersection would require rewiring the switch cabinet and redoing the whole thing,which could not be done expeditiously and which will be resolved with the construction of the intersection. Mr.Hedley stated that having the left turn lanes widened temporarily,will be looked into. Councilwoman Barker asked i f she understands correctly that the addition of space to the intersection,or additional delay being put on the lights,will be looked into and when will the Council hear on this? Mr.Dana replied that the Council will receive an answer by the end of the week. Councilwoman Barker MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6,1990,AT WHICH TIME THIS INFORMATION WILL BE AVAILABLE AND WE CAN TAKE SOME KIND OF ACTION ON IT. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.714,MAJOR AMENDMENT OF THE ROADHAVEN RV RESORT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (Postponed Item) )Assistant Planner Bob Dunn explained that this major amendment revolves around separation versus setbacks and what that should be,and that Roadhaven Resort has requested the separation of 161/2 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 6 feet to be reduced to 6 or 5 feet on the sides,in some cases,and 5 feet in the rear and to be expressed in terms of setbacks as opposed to separations. Mr.Dunn stated that the Development Coordinating Committee concurs with the idea of setbacks rather than separations,as they are not working in the Resort, however,the recommendation for setbacks are 2 feet on one side,14 feet on the other,and 5 feet to the rear,resulting in a 10 foot separation between units. Mr.Dunn reminded the Council that two legal protests have been filed,although not equaling 20%of the area. Councilman Eidson asked i f the protests are from within the park? Mr.Dunn replied that the protests are from two homes in a subdivision to the south. Mr.Russell Jacobsen,President of the Board of Directors of Roadhaven,made himself available for any questions, and reserved the right to rebutt any statements in opposition. Mr.Marvin Halbert,owner of Golden Sun RV Resort,999 W.Broadway,Apache Junction,residing at 945 S.Bowman, Apache Junction,stated that Apache Junction has approximately 14 or 15 major RV properties,and that the extra rooms proposed by Roadhaven should be welcomed as there is much competition in other areas for winter visitors. Mr.Frank Gransky,1388 S.Cononino Drive,Apache Junction,a resident near Roadhaven,stated that he understands there are over 200 violations within Roadhaven,that the ordinance was not published properly,that this will effect the appearance of the neighborhood, and asked if all of these zoning violations will be grandfathered. Mayor Bluntschly stated that not knowing the specifics of each individual one,he couldn't say,and further that he doesn't know what will be passed as yet. Mr.Gransky stated that each violation has to be corrected prior to the new ordinance becoming effective,and that this ordinance is not valid with "options",but that the ordinance must have the exact wording prior to adoption. City Attorney David Alexander explained that this was advertised as a major amendment to the planned development to Roadhaven,which is the statutory language necessary,and that several proposals have been discussed,but the specifications of the ordinance and the ordinance itself do not have to be published until i t is passed. Mr.Alexander added that i f someone doesn't like the ordinance after it's passed,they have the referendum procedure as an option. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 7 Mr.Gransky asked i f the Council is going to take the DCC recommendations? Mayor Bluntschly replied that until a motion is made,there is no way of knowing. There being no one else wishing to address the Council,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.714 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY,AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. ORDINANCE NO.714,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,APPROVING A MAJOR AMENDMENT OF THE ROADHAVEN RV RESORT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.92 AND ORDINANCE NO.163 (REZONING CASES PZ-6-81 AND PZ-19-82)IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 19-0111(2)OF THE APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA ZONING ORDINANCE;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.714,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: UNIT SIDE:TWO FEET FROM THE LOT LINE PATIO SIDE:14 FEET FROM THE LOT LINE THREE FEET FROM LOT LINE TO PATIO COVER REAR:FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR LOT LINE Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. Councilman Vehon asked i f the two feet and five feet on the unit side and rear side,are to habitable space? Councilwoman Alger confirmed this. Councilman Eidson asked what would happen to the remaining undeveloped property i f this is not approved,and would the property be useless? Mr.Alexander stated that he understands that the location of certain units at this time will make i t REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 8 extremely difficult for the utilization of several or particular lots,but doesn't know how many and that there are setback problems in this park because of previous construction. Mr.Alexander added that this motion is much more stringent than Roadhaven's request,and may have the practical effect of doing away with "Arizona Rooms". Councilman Eidson stated that people have made an investment in their lots,and i f the City doesn't do something, this may make those lots useless. Mr.Alexander suggested that since it was not the individual lot owners that cause the problem,they probably could come in for individual variances,but this ordinance may resolve numerous future problems without the necessity of going through the variance procedure. Mr.Alexander clarified the statement by saying that this resolves future problems,but not the existing problems. Councilwoman Alger explained that Roadhaven is a subdivision not a park,and was originally planned for smaller units which causes difficulty in putting a larger unit plus an Arizona Room,and it would not be in the best interest of the City to allow a subdivision to have unsafe setbacks,so that they can have something that was not planned for. Councilman Vehon asked for clarification that a screened in room that is more than half open,would not be effected. Councilwoman Alger stated that this is what she understood. VOTE:In Favor:Councilwoman Barker,Vice Mayor Damiano,Councilwoman Alger, Councilman Vehon,Councilman Eidson Opposed:Councilman Cox,Mayor Bluntschly The motion carried. Mayor Bluntschly recessed the meeting at 8:07 p.m. Mayor Bluntschly reconvened the meeting at 8:18 p.m. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.711, PZ-15-89,SANCHEZ )Assistant Planner Rudy Esquivias briefed the Council on the request for the rezoning ordinance of a 1.25 acre parcel,located at the northeast corner of Raindance Road and Southern Avenue, REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 9 from GR to CR-2(MH),and stated that staff recommends approval of the application with concerns that should be addressed,and those are the existence of a small storage shed on the east side of the property which is a pre-existing nonconforming use,and also the matter of a potential land split. Mr.Esquivias further stated that staff is recommending a 180 day time limit for either improvement of the property with a properly placed main building,making the shed a conforming use, or removal of the shed,and that the Planning and Zoning Commission also recommends approval with the stipulations as given by staff. Councilman Vehon commented that i f CR-2(MH)does not allow splitting the property into three,the applicant won't be able to. Mr.Esquivias stated that i f the property were split into three parcels,they would fall under the 11,000 square foot requirement,which is why the recommendation is to only allow a split into two. Councilman Vehon stated that the applicant isn't allowed to do a lot of things,and why is i t necessary to list all those things not allowed -it's redundant,and asked i f the shed is movable. Mr.Esquivias replied that the shed Is solid,but that the applicant had indicated he would move i t anyway. Mr.Peter Sanchez,2110 W.Roundup, Apache Junction,stated that with some upgrading the shed would not be that bad and would like to keep i t on the property. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who wished to address the Council in favor of or in opposition to the application?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.711 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY,AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 10 ORDINANCE NO.711,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,ZONING ORDINANCE,BY AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP, CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN REZONING CASE PZ-15-89 FROM GR GENERAL RURAL TO CR-2(MH)SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE/MANUFACTURED HOUSING;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.711,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: THAT STIPULATION NO.4 BE OMITTED. Councilman Vehon seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Damiano commented that the shed has nothing to do with the development of this area,and that the applicant could place i t back after approval. Councilwoman Alger explained that i f a trailer is on the property,within 180 days,he can keep the shed as long as there are the proper setbacks. Councilman Vehon asked i f that shed is in noncompliance right now,as the property sits,zoned General Rural and with no other buildings. Assistant Planner Bob Dunn answered that i t is currently a legal nonconforming use. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.712,PZ-16-89, COUNCIL -INITIATED,LAND SPLITS )Assistant Planner Rudy Esquivias stated that staff was directed to streamline the land split literature,due to the difficulties with the old packet,and the Land Split Committee was formed to review and suggest modifications,and presented to the Council are the draft recommendations. Mr.Esquivias stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend approval of this ordinance. Councilman Vehon asked if deeds are required. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 11 Mr.Esquivias replied that the City does not really require written deeds,but legal descriptions at least are required,however,india ink and mylar drawings are required. Councilman Vehon asked what if an engineer were to bring in a drawing that has been reproduced onto mylar? Mr.Esquivias replied that those are accepted. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly asked the City Attorney i f the references to who the responsible party is,which shows up in other parts of the ordinance that the Council is not considering tonight, can be changed tonight? City Attorney David Alexander replied that those changes would have to go through the Planning and Zoning Commission,etc. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who wished to address the Council in favor of or in opposition to the Item?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.712 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY,AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. follows: Councilwoman Alger seconded the City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as ORDINANCE NO.712,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,AMENDING ARTICLE III (ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS -LAND SPLITS)OF THE APACHE JUNCTION SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WITH CHANGES TO SECTION 3.07 LAND SPLIT APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Barker MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.712,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 12 THAT SECTION 3.07.14 THE WORDS "THE PLANNING DIRECTOR"BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH THE WORDS "DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR". Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilwoman Alger asked i f the intention is to leave the portion with deeds in,or is that to be changed -also the part about India ink. Councilwoman Alger pointed out that why should the ordinance require deeds,if we aren't requiring them in reality. Associate Planner/Deputy Director Jim Nakagawa stated that there is no objection to delete that portion,and added that any similar permanent ink is necessary on a mylar,not necessarily India ink. Councilwoman Alger amended the motion:THAT SECTION 3.07.04(5)STATE "PROVIDE PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR DEPARTMENT REVIEW". Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. VOTE (on the amendment):Unanimous VOTE (on the original motion):Unanimous The motion carried as amended. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.715,AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.606,TOWING SERVICE POLICIES (With Emergency Clause) )Lieutenant Reed Cox explained that this amends the Towing Service Policies to allow the wrecker to be next on the rotation list to get the choice on the tow,and also to allow for quarterly meetings with companies on the rotation list. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone wishing to address the Council in favor of or in opposition to the ordinance?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Vice Mayor Damiano MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.715 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE,AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 13 Councilman Cox seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO.715,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,AMENDING THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,TOWING SERVICE POLICIES;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Vice Mayor Damiano MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.715,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. emergency clause is on this ordinance? Councilman Cox seconded the motion. Councilwoman Barker asked why the Lieutenant Reed Cox stated that i f the change isn't made,the problem will continue for 30 days. Councilwoman Barker commented that the point is understandable,but can't understand how this endangers the health, safety and welfare of the City. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.89-38,CUP -2-89 THE WINCHESTER PARTNERS )Assistant Planner Bob Dunn explained that this is an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a free-standing sign,located at East Highway 60 and Winchester,as the new owners took down the existing signs which were higher than permitted by the Sign Ordinance,although it was permitted at the time it was originally placed on the property.Mr.Dunn further explained that with the changes in the Sign Ordinance the existing sign became nonconforming,and should this be denied the owners will have to either not put signs on the building,or lower the existing free-standing sign and then obtain permits for additional signs on the building. Mr.Dunn stated that the applicants believe that the necessity for advertisement on the highway creates a special circumstance for a higher sign,to which staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission agree.Mr.Dunn added that usually this type of request for signage REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 14 that is higher used this process for "one thing in return for another",in this case being approval for conditions imposed for offsite improvements,and landscaping.Mr.Dunn further stated that the Department of Public Works does not recommend requiring an offsite improvement agreement at this time,however staff does recommend the applicants submit a landscape plan for review by the Development Coordinating Committee within a time period to be set by the Council. Councilman Cox stated that i f the sign is dropped,it will block the view of the southbound traffic on Winchester from the Highway,and will create a traffic hazard. Mr.Dunn replied that staff agrees that there are circumstances that warrant this Permit. Councilman Eidson asked why the road wasn't used as a measuring tool originally. Mr.Dunn stated that 8 feet wasInitiallyrequiredand was changed at the last amendment,but that it was probably overlooked. this sign? Councilman Eidson asked how high is Mr.Dunn replied that i t is 30 feet high,which is why the Building Department suggested going through this process of the Council. has to approve the landscaping plans? Councilwoman Alger asked why the DCC Mr.Dunn answered that this is the technical review committee,and with irrigation and right-of-way concerns,this is the best way to get a comprehensive look at the plan,involving Public Works, Planning,and Building and Zoning. Councilwoman Alger pointed out that they are supposed to be landscaping their own property. Mr.Dunn stated that it would be in the public right-of-way,which is reserved for landscaping. Councilwoman Alger reiterated that when the offsites are put in,this is when the landscaping would be put in and when the DCC would be involved. want landscaping in the right-of-way? REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 15 Mr.Dunn confirmed this. Mayor Bluntschly asked why we would Mr.Dunn stated that i f i t isn't,i t would be set back further,but that there is an allotment in the right-of-way for landscaping. Councilwoman Alger commented that this is typical in a planned development to require landscaping in the plan,but thought it was on the property that it was done. Associate Planner/Deputy Director Jim Nakagawa stated that the landscaping is done both on the private property and in the right-of-way,in an effort to mesh both with the enhancement of the community in mind. Vice Mayor Damiano stated that the area is landscaped,with possibly some repairs necessary,and asked what is the problem.Vice Mayor Damiano further stated that he is sure the property owners will make the repairs. Councilwoman Alger replied that the Council is establishing principles for the future,to make the City look better, and that the situation on this property may change when the offsites are put in, and the City may need to be able to require landscaping at that point. Councilman Vehon questioned whether the City has the authority to enter into an agreement for the laying of the offsites. Mr.Alexander replied that he is not sure the City has that authority either. Councilman Vehon commented that the City may request repairs to the existing landscaping. Mr.Bill Duncan,representing the Winchester Partners,agreed with staff analysis that there are extenuating circumstances with the road levels,but pointed out that the applicants have shown their intent in regards to the upgrade of the property and do plan on repairing the fence and landscaping the area discussed.Mr.Duncan stated that an agreement for landscaping would not be appropriate at this time. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the agenda item? There being no one wishing to address the Council,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO.89-38,APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN EXISTING DETACHED SIGN THAT IS HIGHER THAN PERMITTED FOR THE WINCHESTER RESTAURANT,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 16 Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilman Vehon pointed out that the resolution has contained within i t that the applicant shall enter into an agreement to postpone the improvements to the offsites,and this may need to be changed. Councilman Eidson stated that in that case,as this is not the intent of the motion,the motion is withdrawn. Vice Mayor Damiano withdrew the second. City Attorney David Alexander advised passing the resolution deleting the following paragraphs,and read those. Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO.89-38,APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN EXISTING DETACHED SIGN THAT IS HIGHER THAN PERMITTED FOR THE WINCHESTER RESTAURANT,BE APPROVED WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT THE FOLLOWING SENTENCES BE REMOVED: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT IN FURTHERANCE OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH,SAFETY AND WELFARE,THIS RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: THE APPLICANTS SHALL ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO POSTPONE THE INSTALLATION OF OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. Councilman Eidson seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO.STID-8901-1 (SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD) )Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated that this item is just to acknowledge that the plans and specifications have been submitted and are available at the City Clerk's Office,in regard to the Superstition Improvement District. Councilman Vehon asked i f because there are three inter -linking items regarding the Superstition Improvement District,and there are any public wishing to address the issue,which item should those people address? REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 17 Mr.Broman replied that the appropriate time for public to speak would be at Item No.14,Ordinance No.683. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who wished to address the Council on this item in favor of or in opposition?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT RECEIPT OF ALL PLANS,SPECIFICATIONS AND THE ENGINEERS ESTIMATE COSTS FOR THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO.STID-8701-1 (SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD),IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED. Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Bluntschly recessed the meeting at 9:16 p.m. Mayor Bluntschly reconvened the meeting at 9:29 p.m. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.682,AMENDING THE CITY CODE RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AND FINANCING OF STREETS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY BY PROPERTY OWNERS (Consider and adopt assessment district ordinance regarding recapture agreements) )Mr.Broman stated that this item is also in conjunction with the street improvement district,and that i t is desirable to develop a mechanism to assist constituents that are having difficulty in meeting the obligations imposed by the district,and additionally develops a mechanism in where the City can construct certain street improvements in advance of development and recapture those costs.Mr.Broman further explained that this ordinance changes the City Code,providing a Recapture Agreement format,and that the next agenda item is the actual ordinance of Intent with the motion for the agreement attached. Councilman Vehon asked i f this ordinance could be passed,to set up the policy for recapture agreements,and should the next ordinance be denied,this would be on the books for any future improvement districts proposed. Mr.Broman reiterated that yes,this is independent of the improvement district. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 18 Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone wishing to address the Council in favor of or in opposition to the ordinance?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.682,BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as follows: ORDINANCE NO.682,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,AMENDING THE APACHE JUNCTION CITY CODE CHAPTER 13 PUBLIC WORKS,ARTICLE 13-2 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS BY AMENDING SECTION 13-2-2 DEFINITIONS AND BY ADDING NEW SECTION 13-2-6 IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND SECTION 13-2-7 STREET FINANCING POLICY FOR IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN FINANCING OF STREETS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY BY PROPERTY OWNERS;PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND PROVIDING PENALTIES. Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.682,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilwoman Barker asked about the section of the ordinance pertaining to the financing for single family residences. Mr.Broman stated that this does not pertain to the Superstition Boulevard Improvement District,but would apply to future districts. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 19 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.683,AN ORDINANCE OF INTENTION,ESTABLISHING CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA, IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO.STID-8701-1 (SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD) (With the Emergency Clause) )Mr.Broman briefed the Council on the history of this item,and stated that the originial petition requesting an improvement district from Ironwood to Idaho was submitted in March of 1987. Mr.Broman introduced the Engineering Consultant Dan Coen,and Bond &Financial Consultant Scott Ruby,for any questions of the Council or public. Mr.Broman stated that there did not appear to be interest in the District from the property owners between Ironwood and Meridian and no signatures were received,so it was agreed to concentrate in the area between Ironwood and Idaho,with a smaller project where there was interest,as a "showcase",rather than start a larger project and not be successful with it. Councilman Eidson indicated that he understood,but the reference to the whole distance on the petition may be misleading to the other property owners. Councilwoman Alger asked i f the previous item for a Recapture Agreement,will be the one used for this District. Mr.Braman replied that it would be, although the actual motion for the Agreement is attached to this item,and that people will have to notify the City of a hardship and the need for assistance, which is provided for residential property owners. definition of "hardship". Councilwoman Alger asked for a Mr.Broman stated that this has not be defined as yet,and will have to be agreed upon or brought to the Council to create a policy. Councilwoman Alger asked if all residential properties being considered under the "hardship"provisions,have been discussed. Mr.Broman answered that not all of them,only those who notify the City of a "hardship". Councilwoman Alger asked how many residential properties exist in the District? REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 20 Mr.Dan Coen answered that there are nine. Councilman Vehon asked why this ordinance is presented with the emergency clause. Mr.Scott Ruby,with Gust Rosenfeld, & Associates,explained that the emergency clause helps keep the process with the time schedule that the Council expressed early on,to allow for construction to be completed by the end of summer so as not to interfere with winter traffic, and without that,each action taken by the Council being subject to referendum time periods would extend the completition considerably. Councilman Vehon asked at what point the delay would occur? Mr.Ruby replied that it would delay the entire project completion in succession. Councilman Vehon suggested setting up an information meeting with the property owners between this point and the end of the protest period,would eliminate confusion and allow a better understanding of the protest process,and suggested also that should this project be successful,repolling the property owners between Ironwood and Meridian to possibly move forward with that project. Councilwoman Alger asked what the time line is for developing a hardship policy? Mr.Ruby stated that a policy could be established any time prior to the mailing of the cash demand payment,which occurs about three or four weeks after ordering the work -about March 30th,but in the case of residential it may be earlier. Mayor Bluntschly expressed concern over the definition of hardship,feeling that it will have to be handled on an individual basis. Councilwoman Alger pointed out that the majority of the owners are commercial,which may cause a further hardship on the residential,and suggested not going forward with this ordinance until this is further defined. Councilman Vehon expressed concern also over the lack of a policy,at least a broad one,and asked i f the assumption is that all commercial property owners will not have a hardship. Mr.Broman replied yes,essentially. Mr.Ruby pointed out that the property owners are assessed proportionately. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 21 Councilwoman Alger and Mayor Bluntschly stated that a meeting with the property owners will be necessary. Councilwoman Alger stated that i t should be done in a public meeting of the Council. Mayor Bluntschly commented that this may only require a meeting with the Consultants and staff. asked how a protest works? Councilwoman Alger disagreed,and Mr.Ruby answered that i f the protests comprise less than 51%,the Council may overrule the protest,and further elaborated on the protest periods,to include a hearing on the assessments. Councilwoman Alger stated that the Council needs to be sure the public understands these protest periods. commercial properties are in this District? Councilman Eidson asked how many Mr.Broman answered 22. Councilman Eidson wished to know how many are requesting,of the total 31,the Improvement District. Mr.Braman stated that there are 17 requesting it,with four opposed,and that the attempt was made to contact the other property owners but they never responded. Councilman Eidson stated that he cannot support this without a larger percentage of the people in favor of it,as it would be forcing the wishes of a few on the wishes of many. Mayor Bluntschly commented that he was under the impression that the percentage was greater for those in favor. Mr.Broman explained that the percentage is based on those responding,and also lineal footage,and many efforts were made to contact property owners. Mr.Ruby explained that percentage is primarily based upon front footage,in accordance with State Law. would be 51% of the property owners. received. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 22 Councilman Cox disagreed that this Mr.Ruby stated that there is 52% Councilman Cox stated that this percentage was on footage,and this is not right,and that something should be on the notification that i f they don't respond,it will be assumed that they are for it. Mr.Ruby explained that the reason this is not advised,is that the Statute gives the citizen affected the opportunity to eventually cast that vote - yea or nay -and to convince the Council that i t shouldn't go forward,which first comes up after the adoption of the resolution of intention during the protest period.Mr.Ruby also explained that even i f less than the percentage required to throw i t out protest,i t still rests with the Council to stop the project. Councilwoman Alger asked that the Council look at how this will affect the City,this is the first opportunity where we have had property owners more than willing to participate in the financial cost of putting in infrastructure,and the benefits are tremendous. Councilwoman Alger added that a lot of good things in this community have failed because of lack of education,not educating the citizens. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to the Ordinance? Mr.Julius Barroco,688 N.San Marcos,Apache Junction,property owner in the proposed District,addressed the Council in opposition to the project,stating that commercial property owners can have hardships also and that the signatures should not be based upon footage because the "little guy"is subsidizing the project. Mr.Barroco also stated that the project should be continued through to Meridian. Councilman Vehon asked i f Mr.Borroco would be in favor of the District i f it was through to Meridian? Mr.Barroco replied that he didn't say that,but i f safety is the reason for it,i t should be twice as safe,and that this whole project is for the benefit of a few on the backs of all of the property owners. Mr.Sam Spaulding,1476 W. Superstition Blvd.,Apache Junction,pointed out that those who didn't protest or respond are considered in favor of the project,but that he would be in favor of this District i f it went all the way to Meridian. Councilwoman Alger commented that i t would definitely be a benefit to the City for the project to continue to Meridian,but that the City has in the past taken on projects that were too REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 23 large and didn't progress properly,and now the City is attempting to do a project on a smaller scale,that can actually be accomplished. Mr.Jeff Iverson,1050 W. Superstition Blvd.,Apache Junction,Executive Director of Parish Planning Council for Epiphany Lutheran Church,stated that he has been with this Street Improvement District since it's inception,and that this project is not for just a few but will benefit the whole community. Mr.Iverson pointed out that with the new Post Office and businesses opening up along Superstition Blvd.,the traffic is increasing and needs to be dealt with now. Councilman Cox thanked Mr.Iverson for the information given to the Council. Mr.Iverson informed the Council that there was a meeting for information purposes,at which Mr.Barroco was present,and the distance from Ironwood to Idaho was indicated. Councilman Eidson stated that this would be a wonderful project,but couldn't be in favor of it with less than 50% of the property owners. Mr.Iverson stated that there are more than 50%signatures,and that it was a bid project getting these signatures together. Vice Mayor Damiano commented that the allegation then,that the project is for two people,is a lie. Mr.Iverson stated that since several other people have indicated that they also want the District,i t isn't just two people. Mr.Bill Beaulieu,306 E.Frontier Road,Apache Junction,stated that he owns three pieces of property along the proposed District which total a large amount in assessments,but that he is willing to pay i t for the benefit to the property values and to the community. Mr.Leland Bochen,Pastor at Epiphany Lutheran Church,1050 W.Superstition Blvd.,Apache Junction,stated that it would be nice if decisions could be made with 50% of the potential people in favor of each issue,but people do not always respond,as in elections. Mr.Ray Barten,Tempe,owner of property,stated that when signing the petition in favor of the District it was indicated that the signature was subject to a 75% approval of the partnership, REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 24 that he is in favor of the District,but further stated that there are inequities. Mr.Danny Shannon,1353 W. Superstition Blvd.,Apache Junction,stated that he was only notified one time. Mr.Barroco stated that the percentage was reached because some of the property owners were doubled up because of owning more than one piece of property,and also mentioned to Vice Mayor Damiano that he does not lie -it was stated that the District was started by two individuals -and one of them admitted i t tonight,and also admitted that it was to his benefit. Mr.Dan Coen,President of Coen Engineering,addressed the Council pointing out that there is no requirement on the laws for Improvement Districts in Arizona,to have 51% of the home owners in favor of a project to take i t to the point the project is tonight,and also that the purpose of the item presented tonight is the proper progression of the proposal.Mr.Coen stated that this action tonight is also part of the notification process,as declaring the "intent",and that many more methods of notification follow this action,including publication and posting. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone else who wished to address the Council on this ordinance?There being no onel else wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Councilman Vehon asked i f this proposal goes all the way through,the Council is essentially passing a bond that will pay for the District,other than the portions the City is kicking in to be paid back by property owners over a ten year period,not to exceed 13% interest.Councilman Vehon further reiterated that the Recapture Agreement is for those who over the ten year period,cannot pay the City back. Mr.Ruby confirmed this. Councilman Vehon further asked i f these monies would not have to be paid back unless the property in question was rezoned or developed. Mr.Ruby replied that this is correct,and the carry over would be interest free. Councilman Vehon asked i f the ordinance should not also address lineal footage. Mr.Ruby replied that the Recapture Agreement as presented is in the form of an example,but should be tailored to the specific District and needs of that District. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 25 Councilman Vehon commented that there are still questions in his own mind,but the intention should go forward until a majority of the property owners are heard from,and then the Council can at that time make final decisions. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.683,BE READ BY TITLE ONLY WITH THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE,AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. follows: Councilwoman Barker seconded the City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as ORDINANCE NO.683,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO IMPROVE CERTAIN STREETS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS;DESIGNATING SUCH IMPROVEMENTS AS "CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,IMPROVEMENTS TO DISTRICT NO.STID-8701-1";DETERMINING THAT IMPROVEMENT BONDS WILL BE ISSUED TO REPRESENT THE COSTS AND EXPENSES THEREOF AND DECLARING THE WORK OR IMPROVEMENT TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFIT AND THAT THE COSTS OF SAID WORK OR IMPROVEMENT WILL BE ASSESSED UPON A CERTAIN DISTRICT;PROVIDING THAT THE PROPOSED WORK OR IMPROVEMENT WILL BE PERFORMED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 48,CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 2,ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES,AND ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.683,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. AND THAT THE STANDARD FORMAT (NO.0789)OF THE RECAPTURE AGREEMENT BE APPROVED WITH THE PROVISO THAT MINOR MODIFICATIONS MAY BE AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY,ON A PROJECT -BY -PROJECT AND/OR CASE -BY -CASE BASIS. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilman Eidson asked if all property owners would be notified by registered mail,or a date set for an informational meeting. Mr.Broman stated that property owners would be notified,and a neighborhood meeting would be set up and held by the Consultant,to answer questions on a one-on-one basis. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 26 Mayor Bluntschly asked Mr.Ruby to explain the notification process to the public. Mr.Scott Ruby explained that the Law requires that notice be given by posting and publication only,however,the Council is directing staff to include in this letter inviting people to the meeting,the amount of days provided to protest. Councilwoman Barker pointed out that there was no instruction for those wishing to protest,only that those in favor should fill out the petition and send i t in. Mr.Ruby stated that the law kind of presumes that if you don't protest,you must be in favor. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. Mayor Bluntschly recessed the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Mayor Bluntschly reconvened the meeting at 11:09 p.m. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.716,AMENDING CLASSIFICATION PLAN "POSITION AND SALARY RANGE"FOR POSITION ENTITLED DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly stated that as part of the reorganization,there were changes that need to be made in the adopted budget,specifically the Classification Plan,for the different positions and salary ranges for the Director of Development Services,and delete the position "Associate Planner/Deputy Director"and rename i t "Planning Division Manager",and assign that position a pay range similar to what other division heads are currently paid. Councilman Vehon commented that when the reorganization was first approached,the goal was to allow better coordination without creating a lot of new division heads and salary changes, and although realizing that the supervisor responsibilities of the Deputy Director will increase,he is hesitant knowing the income the City has and the budget that will be coming up in creating a new department head,and that this was the purpose of the Director of Development Services -to prevent numerous division heads. Councilman Vehon asked i f other planners are at a 37. Ms Connelly replied that they aren't. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 27 Assistant to the City Manager George Hoffman stated that they are around a 25. Councilman Vehon asked if Associate Planner/Deputy Director Jim Nakagawa is currently the highest ranged of the planners. Ms Connelly confirmed this. Councilwoman Barker agreed with Councilman Vehon,stating that the budget is strained as i t is,although the change may be warranted,and commented that the ordinance has the effective date as today. Ms Connelly explained that there are salary savings in the departmental budget where the funds would be available. Councilman Vehon asked how this can be effective today,when the swap meet ordinance had to be redone with an effective date of 30 days away? City Attorney David Alexander replied that that was for reporting purposes,and a lot of ordinances are adopted with a retroactive effective date with certain types of financial matters,however the Council may choose any date they want. Councilman Vehon stated that i f this is legal,fine,but would just like to question it. Mayor Bluntschly asked i f there was anyone who would like to address the Council in favor of or in opposition to the ordinance?There being no one wishing to speak,Mayor Bluntschly closed the hearing to the public. Ms Connelly further explained that one of the purposes of this ordinance is to bring a position with additional responsibilities in line with what other division heads are being paid,and i t would be unfair to ask someone to assume additional responsibilities knowing that there are other division heads within the same department that are paid at a higher rate. Councilwoman Barker asked i f service over a period of time is not a factor in the fact that others division heads are paid more. Ms Connelly replied that the other two division heads are much newer employees. Mr.Hoffman concurred with Ms Connelly,and that this change was a rather natural progression. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 28 Councilwoman Barker stated that i t Is also a rather normal procedure to place someone in a position with the understanding that with the new budget year,a change in salary will go into affect. Mr.Hoffman further explained that at the time the reorganization was considered,there was more than ample money in the budget to handle this,but is not sure how that stands now,that would be in the range of $1,000 -$2,000 for the remaining fiscal year. Councilwoman Alger recalled that this was discussed and provisions made for that. Mayor Bluntschly pointed out that the purpose of the reorganization was to increase the quality of service to the people of the community,and to expedite the process,and this is a natural progression of this purpose. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.716 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND THE READING OF THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE BE WAIVED. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. follows: Councilman Cox seconded the motion. City Clerk Kathleen Connelly read as ORDINANCE NO.716,AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,AMENDING THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA;REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO.716,AS READ BY THE CITY CLERK,BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. Councilman Cox seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS RECONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUS ACTION ON PERSONNEL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 29 (APPEAL FILED BY DONALD FINCH)AND SELECTION OF DATE FOR RECONSIDERATION ) )Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT THE PREVIOUS ACTION ON PERSONNEL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE APPEAL FILED BY DONALD FINCH,BE RECONSIDERED. AND THAT THIS RECONSIDERATION BE DISCUSSED ON FEBRUARY 6,1990,AT 7:00 P.M.,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. Mayor Bluntschly informed that Mr.Finch has submitted a "request to speak"form,and stated that this was at the Council's pleasure. Councilmembers indicated that there was no objection to Mr.Finch addressing the Council,i f i t is kept to 5 minutes. Mr.Donald Finch,455 N.Hilton, Apache Junction,addressed the Council pointing out that at the meeting of December 19,1989,the Mayor's statement that Mr.Finch left the job for an hour and one-half which was insubordinate,and was grounds for termination,was not correct,and also stated that this was not the reason given for termination. Mr.Finch stated that he felt that he had not violated the Personnel Rules and Regulations and that the Council had done him an injustice by not accepting the Personnel Board's recommendation,and would use legal means to correct this unjust decision. Mr.Finch added that the City Attorney told the Council that a person is not supposed to terminate for criteria other than that notified. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. PRIVATIZATION PROPOSALS )Director of Public Works Rich Broman stated that at the January 4th meeting the Consultant outlined alternatives of selecting a proposal,rejecting the proposals,or requesting additional proposals. Councilman Cox asked i f figures have been received on hooking in with Mesa. Mr.Broman replied that there are no costs currently available,and that alternatives will be looked into and brought REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 30 back to the Council for a decision on which to pursue.Mr.Broman added that due to unknown costs of Consultant services,and due to re-evaluating the City's position and public information program,i t is premature to select a firm at this time,and recommended the Council reject all proposals. Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT THE PROPOSALS FOR THE PRIVATIZATION FOR SEWAGE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT FACILITIES, BE REJECTED. Councilwoman Alger seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE FOR EXPANDING THE CITY LIBRARY PARKING LOT )Mr.Broman explained that alternatives were provided to the Council one of which is to obtain the 30 x 510 strip instead of additional area for parking,and to utilize the area by the now abandoned Animal Control/Public Works facilities,and requested direction on how the Council would like staff to proceed. Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION WITH THE STATE,AND THAT STAFF LOOK INTO OTHER ALTERNATIVES FOR PROVIDING OVERFLOW PARKING FOR THE LIBRARY. Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. Councilwoman Alger suggested that alternatives that do not involve moving those abandoned buildings be looked into,as that is going to be expensive. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS APPEAL OF DENIED LOT SPLIT REQUEST BY MR.DONALD KOS )Assistant to the City Manager George Hoffman stated that this item was discussed last night,but would be happy to answer questions of the Council. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 31 Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT THE LAND SPLIT REQUEST SUBMITTED BY MR.DONALD KOS BE APPROVED. Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. VOTE:In Favor:Councilwoman Alger,Councilman Cox,Councilman Vehon, Councilman Eidson,Vice Mayor Damiano,Councilwoman Barker Opposed:Mayor Bluntschly The motion carried. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE APACHE JUNCTION FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR FIRE FIGHTERS/PARAMEDICS AS A MEMBER OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TACTICAL TEAM )Captain Reed Cox explained that the Police Department is interested in putting medics on the Tactical Team,as the Team is used in critical instances where medical help may be necessary immediately,but that the Paramedics would be in a separate area from the "inner perimeter". Sergeant Salmon explained that the Tactical Team are specially trained for these situations. Mayor Bluntschly pointed out the possibility that the paramedics will be the inner circle,otherwise they couldn't be trained. Sergeant Salmon stated that yes, only people that are members of the Tactical Team are allowed in that inner perimeter,but that a secure area is set up called "emergency recovery area" where the medics are placed,and that the fire medics would not be involved with firearms or be part of the entry only to supply immediate medical care. Councilwoman Barker asked who will be compensating these medics? Sergeant Salmon replied that the people will be compensated by the Fire District. Councilwoman Barker asked City Attorney David Alexander i f this compensation by the Fire District would affect the liability aspect? City Attorney David Alexander replied that it would not,but i f someone were to get injured it would come down REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 32 to sorting out the pieces,and that there is a "hold harmless"clause in the agreement for arguments sake,however i f there were a third party plaintiff Involved,our agreements are out the window and both the City and the Fire District would be sued. Councilman Cox abstained from any discussion or action,due to a possible conflict of interest. Councilman Eidson pointed out that it's worth taking the chance of a lawsuit to be able to get immediate medical attention to an officer,and should an officer get hurt after the City turns down this opportunity,he would have a lawsuit against the City. Mayor Bluntschly stated that he is also concerned about the Fire Fighters,as they are not trained to be in this type of situation or armed,and posed a large concern with liability to the City. Captain Reed Cox stated that there are 35 agencies across the United States that have Paramedics on their Tactical Team,three of which are doctors,and gave an example of when their presence in a situation was critical to an officer's life. Captain Cox further stated that the cost for training an officer in salary and benefits,to become a paramedic would be approximately $22,000. Councilwoman Alger commented that she would rather be sued for trying,than not trying. Councilman Eidson MOVED THAT THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE APACHE JUNCTION FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR FIRE FIGHTERS/PARAMEDICS TO BE MEMBERS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TACTICAL TEAM,BE APPROVED. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Abstained:Councilman Cox In Favor:Councilman Vehon,Councilman Eidson,Vice Mayor Damiano, Councilwoman Alger,Mayor Bluntschly Opposed:Councilwoman Barker The motion carried. RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENTS -CITY ENGINEER AND DIRECTOR OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 33 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES )City Clerk Kathleen Connelly explained that the City Code requires that department head positions have the ratification by Council of the individual hired,and that Adriane Brown -White is the new Director of Development Services,and Gordon Grandy will be the new City Engineer. Councilwoman Barker MOVED THAT ADRIANE BROWN -WHITE BE RATIFIED FOR THE POSITION OF DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES; AND THAT GORDON GRANDY BE RATIFIED FOR THE POSITION OF CITY ENGINEER. Councilman Cox seconded the motion. VOTE:In Favor:Councilman Cox,Councilman Eidson,Councilwoman Barker, Councilwoman Alger,Councilman Vehon,Mayor Bluntschly Opposed:Vice Mayor Damiano (on Gordon Grandy as a department head) Vice Mayor Damiano explained that he could not agree with a City Engineer as a department head,so therefore could not vote "yes"on this motion,but that if Mr.Grandy were to be a division head as City Engineer this would agreeable. The motion carried. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON PROPOSED CITY LEGISLATION OR ACTIONS: 1.DIRECTION TO STAFF TO PROCEED WITH ACTION REGARDING CACTUS WREN STREET City Attorney David Alexander explained that the three options presented are okay,however,a new option was discussed last night from which i t is necessary to take action. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT STAFF BE DIRECTED,THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER,TO PROCEED WITH OPTION C. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilwoman Alger asked i f the "temporary signing"should be added to the motion,or is i t not included in the option? Mr.Alexander replied that i t should be included in the option. Secretary to the Engineering Division,Theryn Hansen commented that i t is not indicated in Option C how far the Council wishes to vacate. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 34 Councilwoman Alger stated that i t says between Hilton Road and Goldfield. Mr.Broman stated that in the area between Hilton and Goldfield,there is a federally patented easement that is not developed. Ms Hansen asked i f the Council wants the vacation written so that i t leaves the intersection at Wagonwheel open. Mr.Broman asked i f the Council is taking the initiative to vacate this,or should i t go through the public process,which would require notification of all property owners. Mayor Bluntschly replied that this is going to be a Council initiative. Ms Hansen commented that the utility companies will have to be notified. Mr.Alexander stated that this will go through the usual notification process,i t is a question of who started i t -in this case it's the Council. Mr.Broman asked for clarification purposes,i f i t is the Council's intent to place material at Golfield,and barricade that in order to prohibit access. Mayor Bluntschly replied that whatever i t takes to keep people from thinking this is an open roadway. Mayor Bluntschly stated that an amendment to the original action is necessary,because there is a stop sign at Cactus Wren and Goldfield that were placed by Council action. Vice Mayor Damiano amended the motion THAT THE STOP SIGN AT CACTUS WREN AND GOLDFIELD BE REMOVED. Councilwoman Alger seconded the amendment. Vice Mayor Damiano added that this should happen after a barricade is put up. Councilman Vehon questioned that the motion or the amendment actually accomplish leaving Wagonwheel open. Councilwoman Alger and Vice Mayor Damiano withdrew the original motion and second. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 35 Vice Mayor Damiano and Councilwoman Alger withdrew the amendment and second to the amendment. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT STAFF BE DIRECTED THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER,TO PROCEED WITH OPTION C AS FOLLOWS: REMOVAL OF THE STOP SIGN SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE VACATION,AND THAT CACTUS WREN BE VACATED FROM HILTON TO WAGONWHEEL,AND WAGONWHEEL TO GOLDFIELD. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. 2.DIRECTION TO STAFF FOR GRANT,STREET/LIGHT/IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Housing & Grants Specialist Kurt Knutson stated that after the discussion last night,i t appears to be the Council desire to postpone this item until the next regular meeting,and noted that whatever decision is made unless i t is to adopt a resolution to give back the money,the pie will still be $114,000 or more and would direct the Public Works Department to come up with those figures. Vice Mayor Damiano asked who decides where these lights are placed? Mr.Knutson replied that the locations have already be designated in the application,as decided by Julie Reid,but that to meet the requirements of CDBG they had to be within a census block area. Councilwoman Alger asked i f direction could be given that priority has been declared,but want figures brought back to the Council since a decision is going to have to be made. Councilwoman Alger pointed out that the City Manager could bring back a proposal for utilizing the savings,for Council approval,so that they could go ahead and not have to wait another two weeks. Mr.Alexander informed the Council that upon checking with the Finance Controller,this will not amount to transferring interdepartmental funds,so there is no problem with it. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN THE CITY MANAGER THAT MEETING THIS GRANT OBLIGATION IS AN IMMEDIATE CITY PRIORITY; AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER UTILIZE THE SAVINGS FROM CURRENT YEAR STREET IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES TO MEET THIS GRANT LEVERAGE OBLIGATION; REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 36 AND THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN THE CITY MANAGER TO ASSIGN THE ENGINEERING OR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OVERSEEING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STREET AND STREET LIGHTING PORTION OF THE PROJECT. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. Councilman Vehon asked i f this is essentially leaving i t up to the discretion of the City Manager,who shall be responsible. Mayor Bluntschly replied that this is essentially correct. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. 3.DIRECTION ON PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW COMMITTEE City Attorney David Alexander explained that for the positions of City Magistrate and Assistant City Magistrate,there should be formed a Judicial Review Committee for which there is not criteria established,and suggested at least one practising City Magistrate to serve on the Committee,two attorneys,and perhaps one or more laymen.Mr.Alexander added that the Council designate by title,and he will select the persons to serve,and that someone from the City Clerk's office should be present to record along with Councilpersons as observers. Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS BE MEMBERS OF THE JUDICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: ONE CITY MAGISTRATE (FROM ANOTHER CITY) TWO ATTORNEYS TWO LAYMEN TWO CITY COUNCILPERSON AS OBSERVERS (COUNCILWOMAN ALGER AND COUNCILWOMAN BARKER) SOMEONE OUT OF THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO ACT AS RECORDER Councilman Vehon seconded the motion. Councilman Eidson clarified that the Councilpersons present will not be voting members,only observers. Vice Mayor Damiano asked who reports to whom. Mr.Alexander replied that the Committee reported to the Council last year,via the Councilmember,but since REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 37 there is to be a Clerk recording the minutes,with his suggestions to the Committee on Findings,written Findings could be presented to the Council.Mr. Alexander suggested that these positions should be at least posted and possibly published for those who may wish to apply. Vice Mayor Damiano asked what happens i f the Council wishes to retain those already in the positions,what would you tell the others that apply. Mr.Alexander stated that those persons would be told they didn't get the position. Councilman Vehon clarified that all applicants would be considered on an equal basis by the Committee,and a recommendation brought back to the Council. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. 4.DIRECTION ON POLICY REGARDING COURT -DESIGNATED COMMUNITY SERVICES PARTICIPANTS Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN THE CITY CLERK,THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER,TO DRAFT A POLICY REGARDING COURT -DESIGNATED COMMUNITY SERVICE PARTICIPANTS,AS FOLLOWS: THAT PARTICIPANTS SHOULD BE UTILIZED WITHIN CITY LIMITS AND ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, OBTAIN INSURANCE,AND CHECK WITH OTHER AGENCIES. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. 5.DIRECTION ON ORDINANCE REGARDING FLEA MARKETS/SWAP MEETS CONDUCTED IN MOBILE HOME AND RV PARKS Ms Connelly explained that information presented dates back to 1982,which outlines a set of procedures to use,but i t is up to the Council whether or not the same rules should be applied to flea markets within RV/mobile home parks as are applied to other flea markets,or the previous committee's recommendations. Councilman Vehon stated that there is an existing policy used from that committee's recommendations. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 38 Ms Connelly stated that they would be subject to taxation,but that the policy has worked reasonably well. Councilman Vehon suggested that staff review the policy and bring i t back in ordinance form. someone is someone is Councilman Eidson stated that i f selling commercially in a park they should pay sales tax,but i f casually selling within a park,they shouldn't have to pay taxes. Ms Connelly commented that i t is the commercial sales that we need to concentrate on. commercial park owner subject to done. Councilman Eidson suggested that vendors should not be allowed to sell in parks. Ms Connelly further stated that if a or manager is renting space for commercial sales,that is also rental tax. Councilman Eidson stated that i t is Councilman Vehon MOVED THAT DIRECTION BE GIVEN TO THE CITY CLERK,THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER,TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE REGARDING FLEA MARKETS/SWAP MEETS CONDUCTED IN MOBILE HOME AND RV PARKS,AS FOLLOWS: THAT STAFF REVIEW THE EXISTING POLICY PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED,UPDATE IT TO BRING IT UP TO CURRENT STATUS,AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN ORDINANCE FORM AT THE FEBRUARY 20,1990 MEETING. Councilman Cox seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. 6.DIRECTION ON PRELIMINARY AGENDA ALTERNATIVES Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT THIS ITEM BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE CITY MANAGER HAS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT AND GIVE HIS FEELINGS ON HOW HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THINGS HANDLED. Councilwoman Barker seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 39 The motion carried. SELECTION OF MEETING DATES,TIMES,LOCATIONS AND PURPOSES: EXECUTIVE SESSION,WORK SESSION, FEBRUARY 5,1990 EXECUTIVE SESSION,WORK SESSION, FEBRUARY 6,1990 ) )Councilwoman Alger MOVED THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.,AND A WORK SESSION AT 7:00 P.M.,ON FEBRUARY 5,1990,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS; AND THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND WORK SESSION BE HELD AT 6:00 P.M.,ON FEBRUARY 6,1990,IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Vice Mayor Damiano seconded the motion. VOTE:Unanimous The motion carried. INFORMATION AND REPORTS (COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS) Councilwoman Alger informed the Council that the Apache Junction Substance Abuse Task Force and Advisory Council has changed their name to the Abuse Prevention Council. ADJOURNMENT ) )There being no further business to discuss,Mayor Bluntschly adjourned the meeting at 12:25 a.m. Consent Agenda Items are as follows: 1.Acceptance of Regular Meeting Agenda 2.Acceptance of Minutes from the Regular Meeting of December 19,1989 3.Acceptance of Minutes from the Special Meeting of January 4,1990 4.Acceptance of Resignation from and Appointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 40 5.Acceptance of Audited Financial Statements for Year Ended June 30,1989 6.Opening of Idaho Road (Southern to Baseline) ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY ,1990,BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA. SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 6TH DAY OF ATTEST: KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk FEBRUARY KENNETH BLUNTSCHLY Mayor CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CERTIFICATION ,1990. 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 16th day of January,1990.I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this c;2 ?day of \.ja./26tet7 1990. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 41 yLz;ez, KATHLEEN CONNELLY City Clerk REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 16,1990 PAGE 42