Minutes
of the regular meeting of June 4, 2001 held at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor
Ronald Drake and Council Members Peggy
Jones
Stephanie
Karlin
Albert
Carroll, Jr
Betty
Lynch
Marie
Lopez Rogers
ALSO PRESENT:
Scott Schrader, City Manager
Andrew McGuire, City Attorney
ABSENT/EXCUSED
Council member Raymond Shuey
STATEMENT BY THE CITY CLERK
Sharon
Marshall, Deputy City Clerk, read a
statement regarding public appearances.
It
is the policy of the Mayor and Council not to comment on items brought forth
under Unscheduled Public Appearance. However, staff can be directed to report
back to Council at a future date or to schedule items raised for a future
Council agenda.
2) CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
There
were no items to report.
3) APPROVAL
OF MINUTES
a.
Regular meeting of May 21,
2001
b.
Work session of May 21,
2001
Council member Lynch moved to approve the minutes
with the corrections. Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
4) RECOGNITION
ITEMS (MAYOR PRESENTATIONS)
a.
Clean up effort on Buckeye Road – Chief Adams
Mayor Drake recognized the Church of Latter Day Saints for their clean up effort on Buckeye Road and presented the representative
with a plaque of recognition.
The representative from the Church of Latter Day Saints thanked the City of Avondale for helping with the project. She stated they
were looking forward to doing this each year.
Mayor Drake recognized Nabor Rodriquez, Fire Marshall,
and Art Snapp, Fire Captain, for all of their efforts in assisting with this
clean-up project.
Mr. Rodriquez thanked the Mayor and Council and the Church of Latter Day Saints. He also recognized Carlos Cabrera’s team and especially Steve
Quesada and Jose Heredia for their assistance. He stated this project could
not have been accomplished without them.
5) UNSCHEDULED
PUBLIC APPEARANCE
None.
6) CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the consent agenda are of a routine nature or
have been previously studied by the City Council at a work session. They are
intended to be acted upon in one motion. Council members may pull items from
consent if they would like them considered separately.
a.
PURCHASE AGREEMENT – SUPER
VAC MANUFACTURING CO – UTILITY TRUCK – FIRE DEPARTMENT
A purchase agreement with Super Vac Manufacturing Co in the amount of
$488,190 (excluding tax) for the purchase of a new light/air utility truck for
the fire department.
b.
LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT –
JORDEN & BISCHOFF
The renewal of the legal services agreement with
Jorden & Bischoff to perform City Attorney functions.
c. ORDINANCE
– CITY TAX CODE AMENDMENT
An ordinance amending the City Tax Code Section
13A-510. 570 and adding 553 in order to conform to Senate Bill 1513.
d. ORDINANCE – ACCEPTING RIGHT OF WAY – THOMAS ROAD
An ordinance accepting certain right of way along the
south side of Thomas Road and along the west side of 107th Avenue at
the southwest corner of the intersection.
e.
RESOLUTION – STATE OF ARIZONA HOUSING FUND GRANT APPLICATION
A resolution authorizing the submittal of an
application for State Housing Funds, Community Housing Plans, from the Arizona
Department of Commerce for $7,500.00.
f. RESOLUTION - MARICOPA COUNTY COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY - MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
A resolution authorizing the execution of a Management
Implementation Agreement with the Maricopa County community Development Agency
to initiate the $350,000 CDBG-DG0101 awarded to the City of Avondale for FY
01-02.
g.
ORDINANCE – ANNEXATION – TOLLESON UNION HIGH SCHOOL
An annexation ordinance annexing approximately 55
acres at the southwest corner of 115th Avenue and Garfield Street
into the City of Avondale.
h.
RESOLUTION –
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT – LITCHFIELD PARK – POLICE SERVICES
A resolution authorizing
an intergovernmental agreement with Litchfield Park to provide their police
services at a cost of $368,300.00.
i.
CABLE CONSULTANT CONTRACT
A contract with Miller
& Van Eaton for $25,000.00 for cable consulting services for assistance
with the development and negotiation of a cable license agreement with Cox
Communications.
j. ABSENT
– RAY SHUEY
Consent for absence at the regular meeting by Council
Member Shuey.
k. CONTRACT
AWARD – FOG SEAL PROJECT – INTERNATIONAL SURFACING SYSTEMS, INC
Award of contract to International Surfacing Systems,
Inc. for the Fog Seal Project in the amount of $63,276.12 and authorize the
execution of said contract.
Councilman Carroll pulled items a and d. Council member
Lynch pulled items g and i. Mayor Drake pulled item j.
Consent
Items b, c, e, f, h, and k were left for action on the consent agenda.
Mr.
McGuire read the ordinances and resolutions by title for these items. Council
member Lynch moved to adopt the resolutions for items 6e, f, and h and the
ordinance for item 6c and to approve items 6b and k. Vice Mayor Rogers
seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council member Jones Aye
Council member Karlin Aye
Council member Lynch Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
a.
PURCHASE AGREEMENT – SUPER VAC MANUFACTURING CO – UTILITY
TRUCK – FIRE DEPARTMENT
A purchase agreement with Super Vac Manufacturing
Co in the amount of $488,190 (excluding tax) for the purchase of a new
light/air utility truck for the fire department.
Councilman Carroll stated the council was informed the
air system was going bad in the current truck and it would cost a lot to repair
it. He asked if the proposed purchase would have a new and larger capacity air
unit included.
Don Foley, Fire Captain,
stated that was correct.
Councilman Carroll stated the
city acquired the equipment in 1991 and he asked what the life expectancy for
this type of unit would be.
Mr. Foley explained staff
thought 15 yrs for the new truck was not an unusual life expectancy. He stated
the vehicle placed into service in 1991 was done on an extremely limited
budget. He stated the truck was low-end quality because price was the primary
determining factor of the purchase. Mr. Foley explained that 10 years later
the truck is in a sad state of affairs. He stated that with the growth of
Avondale and the valley demands have increased on that truck and it is no
longer sufficient to serve the demands on it. He stated it was designed for
small occasional usage.
Councilman Carroll stated he
did not have a problem with the overall request and would agree to authorize
this purchase. He asked how many bids were received.
Mr. Foley stated there was
one bid, one letter of no bid, and one vendor at the pre-conference that did
not submit.
Councilman Carroll asked if
this would be considered a sole source purchase according to the purchasing
policy.
Mr. McGuire stated the sole
source procurement method means the city only solicits one bid and receives one
bid. He stated this was an open bidding process, but only one person
responded.
Councilman Carroll stated he
just wanted to make sure that all were given a chance to bid.
Councilman Carroll moved to
approve. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
d. ORDINANCE
– ACCEPTING RIGHT OF WAY – THOMAS ROAD
An
ordinance accepting certain right of way along the south side of Thomas Road and along the west side of 107th Avenue at the southwest corner of
the intersection.
Councilman
Carroll asked what condition the roadway is in.
Mayor
Drake stated it was brand new.
Councilman Carroll asked if
the work was done on the west and south sides.
Dave Fitzhugh, City Engineer,
stated probably the majority of the roads were constructed by the county until
such time as it was annexed into the city.
Councilman Carroll stated
normally before annexing poor roadway it would be brought up to city standards.
Mayor Drake stated the west
side was repaved within the last month and the north side was completed within
the last three months with full curbs and gutters.
Councilman Carroll asked
about the south side.
Mayor Drake stated it had
been completely repaved.
Councilman Carroll asked if
it should be some time before any work would need to be done.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated there is
a one-year warranty if anything goes wrong as a result of poor construction
practices, and it would have to be repaired within one year of final
acceptance.
Mr. Schrader stated the
improvements were undertaken by the developer rather than the city.
Mr. McGuire read the
ordinance by title. Councilman Carroll moved to adopt. Council member Lynch
seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council member Jones Aye
Council member Karlin Aye
Council member Lynch Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor Drake Aye
Motion
carried unanimously.
g.
ORDINANCE – ANNEXATION – TOLLESON UNION HIGH SCHOOL
An
annexation ordinance annexing approximately 55 acres at the southwest corner of
115th Avenue and Garfield Street into the City of Avondale.
Council member Lynch stated
she knew this was a housekeeping item, but felt betrayed. She stated this has
nothing to do with the high school. She stated the way this came about and in
the beginning was forced on them and then was changed was the reason she felt
betrayed. She requested a roll call vote.
Mayor Drake asked who would
pay for water and sewer improvements to this property.
Felipe Zubia, Development
Services Director, stated the developer. He stated the water service will be
coming up 115th Avenue and the development to the east is installing
a water line, so they would go across 115th Avenue and tap into the
water. He stated those lines are being installed now. Mr. Zubia stated the sewer
will be tapped into by going west to El Mirage but before that there is Cambridge estates and they will tap in about ½ mile to extend services. He stated the
school district would have to pay for it.
Mayor Drake asked if there
was no question that the school district would be paying for this and not the
city.
Mr. Zubia stated that unless
they formally asked the council for that they would install it themselves.
Mr. McGuire read the
ordinance by title. Vice Mayor Rogers moved to adopt the ordinance.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council member Jones Aye – stated she did not like
this item when it came in but that she had no problem with the high school.
Council
member Karlin Aye
Council
member Lynch Nay
Councilman
Carroll Aye
Vice
Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Nay
Motion
carried 4-2.
i. CABLE CONSULTANT CONTRACT
A contract with Miller
& Van Eaton for $25,000.00 for cable consulting services for assistance
with the development and negotiation of a cable license agreement with Cox
Communications.
Mayor Drake excused himself
from any of these discussions as he had a conflict of interest.
Council member Lynch stated
that Cox was in about a year ago and at that time there was at least one other
source of cable service. She asked if there is no other source than Cox.
Todd Hileman, Assistant City
Manager, stated he could not answer at this time because Cox currently has a
licensing agreement with the City of Avondale. He stated staff has not looked
into alternative methods of cable service.
Council member Lynch stated
that from reading the documentation the reason staff has chosen Miller &
Van Eaton is because of their background and asked if that was correct.
Mr. Hileman stated a request
for qualifications was distributed to seven or eight firms and this firm met
all qualifications that staff had laid out.
Council member Lynch stated
she is very concerned with this contract because the residents have had nothing
but problems. She stated people throughout the city are pulling their accounts
from Cox. She stated Cox was asked last year if the City could tie into the
cable at Luke to provide coverage to the government channels in her area, which
they currently do not have. She stated the City was told that it would take two
years and it is now over a year and nothing has happened. She stated she would
make a motion to approve this contract with the stipulation that Cox come in
and meet with council within the next month and a half.
Mr. Hileman stated staff has
heard her questions and have heard similar comments from the community. He
explained there are two facets to the contract, the first one is Miller Van
Eaton is proposing to bring in a technical consultant to review the technical
portion of this system, to address exactly the types of concerns brought up,
and to surface any other technical issues that the City may not be aware of.
He stated, in addition, they would be soliciting comments. He stated Miller
Van Eaton has been very successful and the city needed their professional
technical services before going into negotiations.
Council member Lynch stated
not only does Cox not provide technical quality service but they do not provide
any service. She stated that is the word everywhere, they are known for it,
and she would hate to see the city spend $25,000 and still not have what they
are looking for.
Mr. Hileman stated the staff
has a number of concerns. He stated he put together a subcommittee of
department heads to assist the consultant in this matter. He stated there are
probably about two dozen issues, of which half are customer service related
issues. He stated at this point staff needed to gather as much information
about the system as possible and then address the current customer service
issues. Mr. Hileman stated the issues consist of cutting open new streets and
customer service responsiveness in subdivision areas. He stated staff would
like to see a number of enhancements made through their communications with
Cox.
Councilman Carroll asked if
the names of contact persons in the other municipalities were available.
Mr. Hileman stated yes. He
explained that Lee San Miguel, Assistant to the City Manager, has done research
and has spoken with the representatives from the other municipalities, and did
an extensive background check on Miller-Van Eaton. He stated Miller-Van Eaton
is a firm based out of Washington D.C.
Councilman Carroll asked if
there were any local firms that responded.
Mr. Hileman stated no.
Council member Lynch stated
her motion stands. Councilman Carroll seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
j. ABSENT – RAY
SHUEY
Consent
for absence at the regular meeting by Council Member Shuey.
Mayor
Drake asked for an explanation of this item for those in attendance.
Mr. McGuire stated Council
member Shuey called him a couple of weeks
ago and asked if there were any charter problems if he missed this meeting as
well as the past regular meeting. He stated the charter is clear that more
than two consecutive meetings is an automatic withdrawal from the council. Mr.
McGuire suggested this item so that a technical glitch does not happen and a
council member might automatically be removed for that reason.
Vice Mayor Rogers asked if during the charter review this
subject was brought up or would it be.
Mr. McGuire stated in the
draft charter being presented next week, the Council will see an amendment to
this section where two consecutive meetings will be expanded to also include
four regular meetings in a calendar year.
Councilman Carroll asked if
in reading the charter it wasn’t the type of absence addressed and that if a
member notifies the council prior to their absence then that was covered by
this section of the charter.
Mr. McGuire read the actual
text, which states, “If any councilman should be absent for more than two
consecutive regular meetings without the consent of the council he shall
thereupon cease to hold office.” He stated the concern he had was what exactly
the consent of the council is.
He stated he thought this
item was the perfect way to address this in that the council consents to the
absence of one of its members, so there is always an affirmative consent in the
minutes.
Council member Lynch asked
what if the absence is an emergency and happens that day and so does not get
into the agenda.
Mr. McGuire stated the
emergency provision was specifically for the reason to take care of the ones
known about ahead of time.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve Council member Shuey’s absence. Council member Karlin seconded the
motion. Motion carried unanimously.
7) PURCHASE CONTRACT – DANA KEPNER – MOUNTAIN
STATES PIPE AND SUPPLY – TOUCHREAD AND RADIO READ METERS
Authorization
to award bids to Dana Kepner and Mountain States Pipe and Supply for the
purchase of Touchread meters and Radio Read meters for the total amount of
$222,037.20.
Mr. Schrader stated this item
is for award of contracts to two companies for purchase of touch read and radio
read meters. He stated these items are much more cost effective utilizing less
employee time to conduct meter reads. He stated the total cost of the two
contracts is not to exceed $222,037.20 and the funds are budgeted in the CIP
and are also budgeted in next years CIP.
Mr. Newkirk, Utilities
Director, stated this system has been out for about five years and the
technology has been tested and several other communities are using this system.
Mayor Drake stated his last
month’s water bill was same as the previous month so he assumed it was not
read. He stated if they are going to invest a quarter of a million dollars for
these meters, how will staff make sure they are going to be used properly.
Mr. Newkirk stated the
present computer system is compatible with the new system. He stated he would
have to look at the Mayor’s bill to see if perhaps only the minimum amount of
water and sewer was used. He stated if that standard sewer charge is there and
minimum usage is there, then the bill would be the same from month to month.
Kevin Artz, Finance and Budget Director, stated that was
correct and that the water charge is based on the nearest 1,000 gallons so it
is possible to have an exact bill. He stated staff did go out and do reads
this month and the previous month’s reading was not used.
Mr. Newkirk stated Kevin’s
staff has a signal or flag that if a bill comes out in question, then a list of
re-reads is sent to Mr. Newkirk’s staff for the meter to be reread. He stated
then staff will go out and compare the bill to the meter. He stated they also
read 5 meters at random, write down the numbers and then compare those with the
automatic computer reads to ensure that meters are being properly read.
Council member Jones asked if
the city is replacing touch read with radio read then why is the contract for
touch read meters necessary.
Mr. Newkirk stated staff
needs approval for radio read systems. He explained that the radio read system
would be installed on all new developments so they will not need to hire more
employees to read them. He stated then staff would begin to move meters around
and worn out meters would be replaced with radio read. He stated he
anticipated in 10 years the city should be totally radio read meters but touch
read meters would also still be needed.
Mr. Schrader stated the city
would still need touch read meters during the transition to radio read.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve the contracts. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion
carried unanimously.
8) CHANGE ORDER 1 – VALLEY RAIN CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION – REGIONAL PARK II
Approval of change order 1 in the amount of $79,898.60
to Valley Rain Construction Corporation’s contract for the Regional Park II
Improvement Project.
Mr. Schrader stated Valley Rain is in the process of
undertaking improvements in the Regional Park II project and there is a need
for additional work not anticipated on original drawings. He stated there were
no telephone or electrical connection spelled out and that comes to over
$69,000. He stated the staff, in combination with the design consultant,
should have had the improvements included, but they were not on the drawings.
Mr. Schrader stated money is not being spent over and beyond what would have
been needed originally, but the changes are necessary prior to opening the
park. He noted there are funds available to absorb these additional costs and
the work on the park is about 70% complete.
Dan Davis, Recreation and
Community Services Director, reiterated the fact that although this item was
missed on the plan, it is an item that would have been included in the base bid
and would have been paid for at some point.
Council member Karlin stated
she foresees another change order regarding the three wells.
Mr. Fitzhugh, City Engineer,
stated there is a plan being prepared, but the wells are ready for abandonment
and there is no way to economically retrieve water for any advantage to the
city.
Council member Karlin
expressed concern with another change order.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated it would
be a completely separate process. He stated it would not be done through
Valley Rain and there would be the need to go through a formalized process to
secure ground water to assure no contamination.
Council member Lynch stated
the city was short staffed and she recognized the City would have paid for this
project up front but she is disappointed in Stantech because this is not the
first time this has happened with this consultant. She stated that it has
happened before and various things were going on in the last four or five years.
She stated this is their business and she wondered how Stantech could miss
something such as this electrical hookup when this is their business.
Mr. Schrader stated ideally
it should have been caught. He stated Mr. Fitzhugh is implementing plans to
recognize these omissions at staff level and to improve internal procedures.
He stated the city would have had to pay for it in any respect.
Mayor Drake stated a million
dollar well bid was put together and included in the plan was $100,000 for plan
review and that Stantech did not think that was enough money. He asked if the
city paid for the plan review of this project.
Mr. Schrader stated it was a
different company who reviewed the plans, but Stantech was the engineer design
consultant who put together the plans. He stated staff and the design
consultant work together to review the plans before being formally approved at
the staff level.
Mayor Drake asked if there
was no recourse with the firm being paid to review the plans.
Mr. Schrader stated there is
some shared responsibility with staff and the consultant. He stated this was a
project going through radical changes to assure that the project met the
timeline and the radical change is probably one of reasons this did not get
caught.
Mayor Drake stated if there
is shared responsibility it is easy to put the burden on the taxpayers, but
what about the company.
Mr. Schrader stated staff has
been working with the consultant and has negotiated a reasonable and fair
price. He stated this was not the initial number that was out there.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated this is
not the original number and what happens with a plan review is the engineer
sends plans to various utilities for comment. He stated this one was being
changed often, and with such a strict timeline did not allow the plans to be
sent for comments a second time to see what reasonable location was for
utilities.
Mayor Drake asked if it was
ambiguous on plans.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated it had a
note that said to connect to the power source but where that power source was
located was left out.
Council member Lynch stated
she had the same problem. She asked if this is a negotiated price and she
wonders if the reciprocity issue has been taken care that Mayor Drake and she
have with this item.
Mayor Drake asked how much was saved in negotiations.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated about
$10,000.
Councilman Carroll stated he
understood the part about electricity being left out and that the City would be
paying for it either way. He asked Mr. Davis why telephone service is needed.
Mr. Davis replied there is a
ball field and playground equipment and an emergency phone is needed. He stated
a direct landline for 911 and for staff is critical.
Councilman Carroll asked if
there wouldn’t be a revenue source by installing a public phone. He asked when
the city does not have a staff person in charge if there would be access to the
phone.
Mr. Davis replied that he was
not sure if the wiring included public land line or wiring for the inside. He
stated there is a push within the telephone system to do away with public pay
phones unless the City is willing to pay to have them and then it would be an
operational cost issue that would need to be evaluated.
Councilman Carroll asked if
there would be no public phone on site.
Mr. Davis stated he was not
sure about the public phone but the phone capability for staff is critical
overall. He stated the electrical and phone service are to be buried in the
same trench but the electrical is the driving force behind this change order
request.
Councilman Carroll asked
about gas lines and if staff was looking at additional funds that might be
necessary for natural gas lines.
Mr. Davis stated there is no
need at the present or foreseen in the future that would require that service.
Council member Karlin stated
she served on the review committee and one of reasons for selecting Stantech
was because they were flexible. She stated the plans were probably not looked
at thoroughly because of all the changes going on at the time.
Vice Mayor Rogers stated she
would like to assume that procedure has changed.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated that is
correct and this issue is relatively simple to eliminate. He stated it just
takes a question to determine if this issue has been taken care of in the plans.
He stated it is very easy to eliminate and very easy to miss but they have
implemented a measure to assure that question has been asked.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve. Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-1. Mayor
Drake voted nay.
9) WATER
RESOURCE MASTER PLAN – AWARD OF CONTRACT
Awarding a contract to RBF Consulting for the Water
Resource Master Plan in the amount of $194,845.00.
Mr. Schrader stated this item
went out to bid to conduct Item 9, the Water Resource Master Plan and Item 10,
the Water Infrastructure Master Plan and at that time it was estimated not to
exceed $400,000. He stated there is a question whether these particular
studies might be redundant or duplicate some information. He stated what staff
hoped to get out of these is help to guide our planning efforts, to guide the
demand on scarce water resources, and the infrastructure needed to provide
adequate resources to the growing community.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated there are
two items and number 9 is the water resource component of the water master plan
and number 10 is the blue print to guide the water source development in the
city. He stated currently there is no blueprint to select the resources for
water. He stated they do have the recharge site and the wells on line but no
systematic approach and no solid basis for determining the location of the
wells that will provide the city the best economic approach. Mr. Fitzhugh
stated the plan would assist the city with developing strategies for acquiring
and managing the long-term resource needs. He stated there are four basic
approaches, with the first being evaluation of applicable laws and assuring
that the city is up to speed, a background research of what is our use and
demand, what alternatives are available for supply and reclaimed water
conservation and finally a recommendation that council come back with
recommendations so that staff can move forward making sure that other efforts
are not being duplicated.
Council member Lynch stated one of the key things stated
at the meeting of WESTCAP was not so much that the city is short water but how
water is managed. She stated she wanted to make sure that when this report is
done by WESTCAP that Avondale becomes involved so that efforts are not duplicated.
She stated that Avondale is one of few cities that is not a member of that
group and questioned whether the city should be at the table during these
discussions. Council member Lynch stated they have finished the first phase
and are beginning the second phase of setting up a financial district. She
stated if Avondale is going to be charged with a portion of that funding then
we need to make sure that the consultant brings that back as part of the study
to make sure that the best is available to the city.
Councilman Carroll asked what the end result of the
contracts was and if this would eliminate the need to make another purchase.
He asked how long of a period of time this document would be useful when
looking at future needs. He stated this is going to cover 3,000 plus acres that
is not currently within the city limits and if the annexation for that property
is included then the city would be able to look at this plan and assure that it
will supply commercial, industrial, safety and residential without water
without another study being necessary.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated the
length of time this will be used is about 25 years and in periods of five year
increments but that it needs to be looked at every three to five years. He
stated he did not see a major investment but it may need small changes based on
general plan population projections. He stated staff will be making sure there
is continuity between the two plans. Mr. Fitzhugh stated any plan is a dynamic
process and must be revisited. He didn’t think the staff and council would
have to spend this much again to redo the plan because if revisited every 5
years it will stay current and valid. He stated in terms of the 3000 acres
development coming in, this is the exact reason for this study, to know in
advance not after that development is already in the city.
Councilman Carroll stated
that ADWR has a plan out there and probably has a draft copy.
Mr. Fitzhugh asked what he
was referring to.
Councilman Carroll explained
the draft he was speaking of came in a 3 inch white binder and the final plan
is approximately 1 inch thick with a blue cover and applied to the state. He
asked if that plan would be of use to Avondale.
Mr. Newkirk stated that one
part of this study is that the contractor is required to look at all rules and
regulations that would affect the city and the water deliveries. He stated,
for example, one proposed regulation is the reduction of water per person used,
so that will be included in the verbiage to the contractor and they must
contact these entities and make sure it is dovetailed back into the master
plan.
Councilman Carroll asked if
that draft was not usable for the field.
Mr. Newkirk stated only the
items the city must comply with.
Vice Mayor Rogers stated that
about 5 years ago the administration stated they had a 100 year water supply
and she guessed that was not the case.
Vice Mayor Rogers moved to
approve. Council member Lynch seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
10) WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN – AWARD OF CONTRACT
Awarding a contract to RBF Consulting for the Water
Infrastructure Master Plan in the amount of $201,814.00.
Councilman Carroll moved to
approve. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor
Drake moved Item 16 for ward here.
16) CHANGE
ORDER 2 – CDM ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS – FUEL ISLAND
Change Order 2 in the amount of $6,500 to the CDM
Engineers and Constructors, Inc. construction contract for the new fuel
island.
Mr. Schrader explained the
justification for this change order deals with delays and circumstances that
arose and was not really the responsibility of any action by the contractor
involved in the project. He stated there were additional requirements the
staff added to the project to make sure the new facility was as functional and
viable as possible.
Councilman Carroll asked how
this was going to be an improvement over the initially approved contract.
Carlos Cabrera, Field
Operations Director, explained there are two improvements. He stated the first
one is the automatic eye light, which controls the dusk to dawn feature and the
other improvement is the rewiring of the electric pump. He stated the other
issues were delays and things beyond control of the contractor and the city.
Councilman Carroll asked if
the wiring of the pumps allow them to operate independently of each other and
he asked about the technical wiring.
Mr. Cabrera stated he did not
know technically how it was wired, but his concern at the time was that nothing
could run without diesel fuel. He stated technically he could not answer his
question but he knew it required a second card reader for each island.
Councilman Carroll asked
about emergency shut off wiring.
Carlos stated that is a State
Fire Marshall requirement and one of first things that was installed.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve this change order and thanked Carlos for negotiating the price.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
17) WELL 18 (RID WELL) AND MCDOWELL ROAD
TRANSMISSION LINE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT –
DESIGN CONTRACT
Award of a contract to Coe and
Van Loo for the design of the RID Well and Transmission Line Improvement
Project in the amount of $15,485.00..
Mr. Schrader stated Items 17
and 18 are related and this is a proposal to outfit this RID well to tap into
the reservoir next to the Rancho Santa Fe subdivision. He stated #17 deals with
the design work necessary to have those improvements undertaken and #18 is to
contract for the installation of the equipment. He stated this is being
proposed to provide an additional cushion that is necessary to have adequate
water supply and to meet peak demand needs. Mr. Schrader added that the city
runs a risk if one pump has mechanical failure and the city is not able to
provide needed water at peak demand times. He stated this was being viewed as
an emergency procurement so someone could be brought on board so improvements
could be completed by the first of July in order to get the water flowing. He
stated if staff followed a more traditional procurement process the project
probably would not be done until the need has passed. Mr. Schrader explained
that the project was planned and is in the CIP in a much larger amount. He
stated this is the first phase of a larger project and explained that part of
the reason for moving forward now is the significant upsurge of housing in our
community. He stated in addition at a recent meeting the council authorized
staff to move forward with well 15 and soon well 14 but they would not be
operational until fall when the peak water time has passed.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated the item
is a design contract with Coe and Van Loo consulting engineers in the amount of
$15,485.00. He stated this was a short time frame for plans and specifications
and basically, staff was trying to get the pump designed and on line in as
short of time as possible so it would be operational by January.
Council member Lynch asked
because of the way the city code is written is there any reason for the council
to endorse the declaration of emergency.
Mr. McGuire stated it is
written to be the determination by the city manager of an emergency measure.
Council member Lynch stated
apparently the city has jumped on this project already because she noticed
there is work being done on the well that is on the west side of Rancho Santa
Fe and the south side of McDowell.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated that is
correct but the actual construction has not started yet, only preliminary
activities.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
18) WELL
18 (RID WELL) PUMP STATION AND TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT – CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT
Awarding Well 18 Pump Station
and Transmission Line contract to Weber Group in the amount of $352,354.90.
Mr. Schrader stated this is
the actual construction contract and he noted staff will be bringing back an
actual IGA with the RID and where the city will be going with the larger
project and what will be moving forward. He stated no formal IGA has been
adopted but staff has met with the officials and are ready to move forward with
this project. He stated the IGA would be brought forth at the next meeting
Mr. Fitzhugh assured the
council that this decision was analyzed and this was the selection from that
analysis. He stated there were different alternatives and this will provide
1500 gallons per minute and for the amount of money this would get the city
where it needs to be in the fastest amount of time. He stated some work on
Dysart and McDowell impacted the ability of the district to provide water to
all its customers and at the time RID agreed to investigate the exchange of the
RID well with one well that the city has that does not meet water quality
standards but was perfectly suitable for irrigation. He stated a diagram of
all the steps in the process would follow.
Council member Lynch stated
all of Rancho Santa Fe and others thank staff for demolishing the irrigation
ditch and putting a sidewalk at the corner of Rancho Santa Fe Blvd.
Council member Lynch moved to
approve the contract. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion
carried unanimously.
19) DISCUSSION
ITEMS
Council will discuss items listed below and possibly
give direction to city staff to research and prepare item for future meeting.
Mayor Drake stated there is a
citizen who is not a resident of Avondale who would like to bring a
consideration to council regarding “hot” days, similar to “snow” days. Mayor
Drake stated the idea has some merit and he wanted the council to be aware that
this item was out there.
11) RESOLUTION
– PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT – JOHN ANDERSON – ROOSEVELT PARK
A
resolution authorizing a pre-annexation development agreement with John
Anderson for the development of Roosevelt Park.
12) ORDINANCE
– ANNEXATION – ANDERSON – ROOSEVELT PARK
An ordinance annexing 308 acres located at the north
and southwest corners of 107th Avenue and Van Buren Street.
13) ORDINANCE - ZONING CASE Z00-011-AM – ROOSEVELT PARK – FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
A
request for approval of an amendment to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan, to
amend 20 acres from Commercial to single-family residential for Roosevelt Park,
a mixed use development.
14) ORDINANCE
- ZONING CASE Z00-011-A – ROOSEVELT PARK - REZONING
An ordinance rezoning approximately 297.17 acres from
Rural-43 (County Zoning Designation) to PADD single-family residential for
Roosevelt Park, a mixed use development, located ¼ mile south of I-10 Freeway
west of 107th Avenue and 111th Avenue bisected by Van
Buren.
15) ZONING
CASE Z00-011-B – ROOSEVELT PARK - PRELIMINARY PLAT
A request for preliminary plat approval from David
Evans and Associates, for Roosevelt Park, a proposed master planned development
consisting of residential, mix-use, and commercial developments.
Mr. Schrader presented agenda
items 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 as a complete package given the interrelated
nature. He stated that several months ago a presentation was given by staff
and the developer of Roosevelt Park. He stated it was a thorough report with
some feedback from council and the purpose for bringing it back at this time
was to solicit concerns and questions and get direction from the council
regarding this proposed development. He stated the basic components, in terms
of the mix of uses, overall densities, commercial development are there and
staff is requesting as much feedback as possible from the council. He stated
it is a large project and the discussion can be carried over to a future meeting.
Mr. Zubia stated the request
is for a discussion of the five items on the agenda. He explained that the
pre-annexation development agreement and the scope of this project warrants
detailed analysis of what this project does. He stated the annexation is 308
acres owned by Mr. Anderson and the rezoning applies to 297.17 acres, a
difference due to the alignment of Roosevelt Street coming in at the end of the
property. He stated this project was started in 1999 and was originally
started with about 2000 units, 403 were over 45 foot wide lots and over 1000
were high density lots. Mr. Zubia explained that since that time in working
with staff, what is presented are 45 foot wide lots and 727 high density
units. He stated the purpose of this agreement is that this property needs to
be annexed by the City of Avondale and the property owner wants to have some
assurance that the densities, as discussed, will be approved. He stated the
city would be reimbursing the developer for over sizing of the sewer and water
lines to accommodate development further south so that it will not have to be
done later. He stated the development agreement is something staff believes
protects the city in regard to the development of the infrastructure as well as
the right of way. He stated the development has an overall density of 5.33
units per acre and the project is broken out in 2 phases, with one south and
one north of Van Buren.
Mr. Zubia stated the
commercial acres as it applies to the number of persons is 10 acres per 1000
people to support what is brought in as residents. He stated given persons per
household of 3.6 and putting those numbers to this project, the city could
anticipate about 4200 new residents in this project. He explained that with
that number of residents and using the rule of thumb the project ends up being
42 acres and the project is proposing 46 acres. He stated this is the freeway
corridor, not only about supporting the residents being brought on line but
trying to attract the regional retail and employment. Mr. Zubia stated there
is property still to be developed north of this project. He stated the strip
along the I-10 is commercial development and everything north of Roosevelt will be zoned non-residential.
Council member Lynch stated
on April 2nd there was a brief workshop, much too brief for this project and a
number of questions were asked and the council was told that the answers would
be provided on the 9th of April. She stated she has yet to hear
those answers. She stated those questions had to do with why this particular
layout was being used as opposed to some others and the only thing she saw in
the five packages is that there is other commercial development and business
development to come to the north of I-10 where Mr. Long is going to develop on
some other sites, but she did not get the answer to any of the other questions.
Mr. Zubia replied that the
applicant nor staff had forgotten about those answers but what they were
referring to was to be brought forth at the next meeting where the case would
be considered, which they thought would be the April 9th meeting.
He stated the applicant did have the answers and specifics would be answered in
the presentation.
Council member Lynch stated
the city is talking about rewriting the general plan and rewriting ordinances.
She asked if it was typical to give a developer 15 years to say the city can’t
make changes.
Mr. McGuire stated the time
is actually rather short as some development plans take 20 –25 years. He
stated the idea with the pre-annexation development agreement and the master
plan is to acknowledge the plans work together within the context of good land
use planning. He stated whether the city is comfortable with those kinds of
densities is always the question.
Council member Lynch stated
the city needed to make sure that what is approved is what is envisioned for
this city for the future.
Mr. McGuire stated that with
this particular development the changes in land use regulations that will
affect this development will not have anything to do with density, lot
configurations, setbacks, or any of those things. He stated those issues will
be locked in on approval so the council could be assured the plan will be built
as presented.
Council member Lynch stated
this is a key parcel of land to this city and that what the residents and the
Pac committee are saying is that the city should put industrial along I-10, and
then a business corridor south of that with hotels, and south of that the
commercial and further south some lower homes. She stated recently when
Westmark had one of the sessions with the vision of the west valley for the
future, Elliot Pollock, a well known economist in the area, stated that
commercial will bring the homes, as opposed to what has always been thought
about the housing bringing the commercial. Council member Lynch said he then
stated what was needed in the west valley are some larger home sites. She said
Avondale has always had just shy of 18,000 sites that have been approved with
probably 90%, if not 100%, for smaller homes. She reiterated that she had
raised the issue in April that these homes are going to sell for $100,000 to
$105,000, $160,000 to $180,000 and in some cases $200,000 and would take
incomes, according to the developers documentation, of $45,000 to $65,000 a
year. Council member Lynch stated that if there is not a place for these
potential residents to work in Avondale other than retail there is no way these
houses would be affordable and these aren’t large homes.
Council member Lynch referred
to the new blueprints, the minimum lot size is 50 to 115 in the first parcel to
be developed and parcel # 7 still shows 45’ wide. She referred to the map and
showed parcels with orange marks showing lots under minimum size. She asked
what will be built on lots under 20’, a garage. She stated on parcel 5a, 4 and
3 the exact same thing is seen, a 23, 27 and 33’ feet frontage, which will not
allow for a house with side boundaries the Council is looking for. She stated
the maximum boundaries are 5’ and when developing a piece of property, the pool
companies here in Arizona say that 10’ is needed so a dozer can go back and
forth and dump the dirt into the trucks. Council member Lynch went on to say
there are also regulations that all of the RV’s and boats and so forth have to
be behind fences. She asked how an RV or a boat could be placed behind a 1’
fence. She stated that even though this stipulates the averages she questioned
whether the Development Services staff really looked at these lots and what
they are or just used what the table says because it didn’t work. Council
member Lynch stated the information that was provided in April shows that there
are 19 development units per acre and this document shows there are 24, so now
the density of the apartments has increased. She stated the town homes in
parcel 12 show 9.37 dwelling units in April and now shows 12, one group of
cluster units had 6.7 dwelling units before and now have 8 dwelling units and
the other group of cluster homes had 7 and now there are 8, and the other group
of town homes had 10 and now has 12, so the density that council indicated they
wanted lessened has now increased. Council member Lynch stated it was
discussed before the meeting and the answer was that the documentation in April
was not correct. She stated they are trying to work through all of this and be
fair to the developer with the thought that there are already 7000 apartments
units in this city, some of which haven’t been built. She explained that right
now the signs are out there are saying to bring your large dog, get two months
free but please come and rent our apartments. She stated that she realized
there is a stipulation that there must be a market study before building those
apartments but asked why do a market study when if this were laid out
differently it could accomplish the needs that the council and the residents of
the city are looking for and build what is needed in the city.
Council member Lynch referred
to page 30 and 31, items 20.5, 20.6 and 20.7 in the report and stated with
today’s staff she is comfortable with administrative changes not coming to
council, however this council has been forced to wallow through a lot of things
where developers were told that an item was an administrative change and would
be taken care of and it was never taken care of. She stated this council had
to go back and approve things in places that developers had already built. She
felt administrative changes should come to the council for approval. Council
member Lynch referred to page 38, item 26.3 stating the developer has the right
to assign their rights to financial institutions and hoa’s and so on and if
this is approved she would like to see that read, “with the proper notices to
the city”. She explained that otherwise the city is going to go along
thinking it is working with something or someone that it is not. She stated
Item 26.4 says that within 15 years this agreement can terminate but the city
must continue to provide the services. Council member Lynch stated she has a
problem with that because the developer can just walk away but the city must
continue to provide water, sewer and utilities. She stated when looking at
exhibit e of Phase I, which is attached to the develop agreement that she would
like to see it read, “all site plans must receive council approval” and in
phase II, she would like to see the same thing deleting the word city and
inserting council. She stated throughout all of these phases if approved, she
would like to assure that no Arizona ash, mulberry or olive trees be planted in
the common areas.
Mr. Zubia stated that in
dealing with the lot width it seemed to be an oversight by the department, but
actually in reality, the lot width is measured at the setback of the building.
He explained by taking the 22’ that is showing on one lot, typically what you
will see if there is a bend in the road or it is a cul-de-sac, is a shorter
front and then a pie shape going out so that the set backs are measured where
the home is put, 20’ back. He stated in that case it does not meet the minimum
lot width.
Council member Lynch stated
that it did not appear even with the setbacks that there will be enough width
to do what was trying to be accomplished.
Mayor Drake asked how wide
the driveway was.
Mr. Zubia stated the driveway
is typically about 20’ and it is not unlike any other 50’ or 45’ wide lot
development where there is a cul-de-sac. He stated there are issues dealing
with driveways and one of the things staff does in the reviews is try to make
sure driveways are not going in side by side and that there is landscaping
separating each driveway, and also making sure that there is not a gaping
garage, which is done by alternating driveways and landscaping. Mr. Zubia
added that some of the design requirements such as the alternative
architectural materials, whether it is a brick veneer, stone veneer or aluminum
siding helps to break it up. He explained the actual lot width and side yard
setbacks was a concern also raised by the commission and maybe it was an
oversight but a stipulation was not added to the approval to require larger
setbacks.
Council member Lynch stated
if you have 3 or 4 lots side by side of 23-24 feet there would be only
driveways on the whole cul-de-sac because there are no larger lots there.
Mr. Zubia addressed densities
and stated the staff did not allow the developer to change what was proposed
and did make sure that what was represented on the acreages was correct. He
explained that after reading the legal descriptions, it was discovered in some
cases the existing right of way was included and in some cases was not. He
stated the existing right of way for these purposes is not part of what can be
calculated toward the density so whatever the property owner owns is what is
used to calculate density, not any existing right of way that may be adjacent
to the property. He stated that was the reason that some of the numbers
Council member Lynch mentioned had changed, but the number of units has not
changed from the original proposal.
Mr. Zubia referred to the
administrative changes that were referred to in the development agreement and
stated if the council felt more comfortable bringing anything back to the
council then he would support that but that they might want to make a
distinction between plat issues dealing with technical issues that do not
impact the density, number of lots, lot width, or setbacks, which need to be
remain administrative.
Council member Lynch stated
it needed to be spelled out more clearly than it was.
Mayor Drake asked if in the
pre-annexation agreement the annexing of the property could be approved without
approving the preliminary plats.
Mr. McGuire stated the
development agreement is structured in such a way that approving the development
agreement and annexing the property would then require the council to consider
the zoning and the preliminary plat within 15 days or council would be required
to repeal the annexation.
Mr. McGuire stated it is a
more common agreement and once annexation was complete and a development
agreement was reached, if the city breached its agreement then the developer
cannot unwind the annexation and go forward with the development. He stated
what has developed is that if council agrees with the development agreement
there will not be unwinding down the road of the agreement. He wanted to make
sure everyone understands what is going on and that this is becoming a standard
provision but is not commonplace yet.
Council member Lynch stated
the package was delivered late Thursday and that she had spent every waking
hour reviewing it, there is a council member who is missing who at the April
session said he had questions he would ask at the next meeting, and due to the
15 day clause and because of the lack of time available, she asked if this
could be rescheduled as a special council meeting where the entire council
meeting could be devoted to these 5 items. She said that would allow the
council a chance to discuss issues they have with the developer.
Mr. Schrader stated yes but
that it would be best if more issues were discussed to come to a consensus and
identify issues to be further discussed with the developer.
Council member Jones asked
Mr. Zubia with regards to the general plan meetings that have been held and the
current progress along those lines if he saw any departure from the freeway
corridor plan from what it is now.
Mr. Zubia stated no. He
stated in fact this project actually scales back as far as density is concerned
from what was originally envisioned and is more in line with what the general
plan update was to reflect.
Council member Jones asked
about Tolleson Industries at 107th Avenue and what types of
industries are going in there. She stated that she could almost guarantee that
there will be some type of heavy industrial use involving trucks and she saw a
conflict with the residential. She thought there would be opposing residential
and industrial traffic. She stated at a minimum she would like to see some
type of informed consent from the buyers of the properties to make them aware
that this is an industrial area and that these problems may arise. Council
member Jones stated concern with the time line as it seemed a long way out,
kind of like black hole zoning where it could not be seen where the city would
be in 20 years. She explained the vision could change rapidly. She asked if
there is any thought on the two distinct projects being separated. She stated
she thought the project has had a great deal of work and has had a lot of
allowances on the part of the developer.
Mayor Drake stated that he
had asked for reconfiguration of the design to allow for more park space in
April and he asked if the old drawing was available. He stated people are
living with small strips of land in Garden Lakes and it was done well in Rancho
Santa Fe by taking a parcel of land for recreational use. He stated that he
saw this with that same need.
Mayor Drake stated there will
not be parks on the east side in Tolleson, he didn’t know if there was a school
planned nearby because he didn’t see that either and that he had a question
with the north side of Van Buren and the idea of locking in cluster homes
without enough commercial development. He stated he is a little anxious about
moving forward with the pre-annexation development agreement and then in 15
days that falling through because in two weeks there may not be time to change
the plans and reach agreement on all the issues brought up at this meeting. He
stated he does not mind annexing the property into Avondale but was
uncomfortable with the 15 day stipulation.
Mr. Schrader stated he
realized that council needed to be comfortable with the overall project and
that is why the concerns needed to be discussed.
Mayor Drake asked Council
member Lynch to get her questions resolved before coming to the council again.
Mr. Zubia stated he would be
glad to address Council member Lynch’s questions with the developer prior to
the next meeting.
Mayor Drake stated he
believed that all of the council members wanted to have the Anderson property
in Avondale and that they wanted to have the development, but the council wants
to make sure it is a development to be proud of.
Council member Jones
suggested that if changes were to be made to the greenbelt that there be
consideration of some smaller tot lots rather than one long green belt to keep
families from sending children so far.
Council member Lynch stated
some of the other items of concern are the insufficient side setbacks taking
into account the fairness to a resident who is paying that kind of money for a
home. She stated there is a letter from Dr. Flores that talks about the
agreement with the developer and the school. She asked if that agreement was
the same as the Westside Compact, which everyone is bound into with the $300
and $700 or was it something different. She stated Dr. Acock does not address
the agreement but would be looking for it and his letter did not address it.
Council member Lynch stated that in some of the stipulations of what can or
cannot be there she noticed that liquor stores would be disallowed. She
questioned how a developer could disallow a liquor store and allow a drug store
and a convenience store. Council Member Lynch also expressed concern regarding
water features. She stated that even though she recognized that the water
features are re-circulating that between the heat and the winds 30 to 50% of
that water could be lost. She stated that because the city is embarking on a
water conservation project she would like to see the water features removed.
She asked why number 2 could not come before number 1 and why some changes
couldn’t be made so it reflects what she was hearing and what people are going
to see at the general plan meeting later in the week.
Mr. Zubia asked the developer
to address some of the concerns of the council.
Phillip Miller, Protitlement,
represented the applicant and the property owner and stated he had no problem
with this being brought back to council in another 2-3 weeks as a single item.
Mr. Miller stated they did
not come back before council on April 9 because a policy was established in
February that this project, nor other projects, would come before the council
for zoning before the approval of the Water Master Plan. He stated the applicant
was not allowed to come back until items 9 and 10 on this agenda were ready for
council approval.
Mr. Miller displayed a
rendering out of the freeway corridor plan illustrating the vision of the
freeway corridor for the City of Avondale. He stated 115th Avenue
would be predominant and tee off of 115th Avenue with the freeway
itself and then transitions would occur off the arms of that tee.
Mr. Miller presented a slide
show revealing what a typical freeway corridor looks like and incorporates and
relates what the freeway corridor plan allowed and what was proposed for Roosevelt Park. He stated their project was coming in at the low side of density and a lot
of time was spent regarding the vision of this area. He stated they have gone
from 27 acres of open space to 38 acres of open space.
Mr. Miller discussed curveal
linear streets versus the straight streets.
Mr. Miller stated the
intention was not to have a stand alone liquor store in the community and that
wording would be adjusted to read more clearly. He stated they have proposed
taking the open space area and making it more accessible to the community and
there is a lot of open space along the roads and entrances with more than 30’
of open space on collector roads. He stated there would be no dirt turned in
less than three years because of the approvals needed. Mr. Miller addressed
the affordability of the housing, stating the larger lots are more expensive,
but smaller lots at 50 wide are in the low one hundreds. He stated that in one
area cluster and town homes were created in order to get housing below $85,000
per home. He stated that the cost of infrastructure has increased.
Mayor Drake asked if the
affordable housing was an idea of the developer of something staff had proposed.
Mr. Miller stated the concept
of transitional housing, which is in the freeway corridor plan, is housing
afforded by median income families. He stated it would be foolish to approve
a project where there are no buyers. He stated if the project created 2.8
units per acre something would have been created that would not be sellable.
Council member Lynch asked if
he had looked at Rancho Santa Fe.
Mr. Miller stated yes, and
the community is a lot further away from the type of use that is going to exist
within 1/8 of a mile of this community and across the street at 107th Avenue in Tolleson.
Council member Lynch stated
when Rancho Santa Fe was built it was started with a 5 year build out of
initial parcels and additional parcels were bought and built out in less than
two years. She stated the ones that sold first were the bigger homes. She
stated there are people all over the city wanting to come buy those bigger
homes and there are 18,000 homes on the books that are in that affordability
and there are 7000 apartments not rented. Council member Lynch stated it is
just the opposite. She stated the city did not need any more of what he is
calling affordable but more of what is going to bring in more tax dollars and
less city services. She stated she realized it is a different area but if
people keep saying that is already there then that is what will be there. She
stated the larger homes have sold and will continue to sell.
Mr. Miller stated from the
standpoint of a developer and a land seller they would go to a market place and
take a look to see what is being sold to builders. He stated what is being
sold to builders are areas such as Coldwater Springs, CW ranch, Coldwater ranch
and Durango. Mr. Millers stated that area was approved at higher densities
than this project and at different uses that the council no longer has an
interest in approving, which are far above this project. He stated that this
project would have to take a 4 year hiatus and wait for that to sell out before
anyone is willing to buy. He stated he does not disagree with the theory but
was looking at what the market is.
Council member Lynch stated
industrial, business parks and commercial could be done beyond the Automall and
the Tolleson site and then when further south larger homes could be built.
Mr. Miller stated he felt
this was what they had been going over with staff and that maybe larger homes
are the issue and not this particular project.
Vice Mayor Rogers reminded
Mr. Miller that was just one council members opinion. She stated she would
like to see just the opposite.
Mr. Miller stated he
appreciated that.
Mr. Miller distributed an
analysis on commercial development and job creation.
Mr. Miller highlighted a
request by Mayor Drake to bring the retention area closer to the street to
allow it to be more accessible to the community and showed a rendering of what
that would look like.
Mr. Miller stated the
industrial has been approved across from their property at 107th Avenue
and has only one access coming on Van Buren. He stated the bad part of that is
all of the parking lot, open space and large set backs are on Van Buren with no
access on 107th, so the buildings will be closer and are going to
have the 20’ minimum setbacks. He stated his group had added additional
buffering on their side trying to create almost 183’ between the buildings. He
stated the other issue had to do with parcel 7 and that has been replatted to
show minimum 50’ wide lots.
Marvin Davis, attorney for
the Anderson Family, stated they have been ready to come forward to council for
a long time and followed staff direction as to when to come forward. He stated
this meeting was their first opportunity. He stated from the history of the
project they have been and will continue to be flexible as they listen to
comments, with some limits. He stated this is a single project to be developed
as proposed and it is not feasible to develop the phases at different periods
of time.
Mr. Davis stated so that
residents across from the area in Tolleson would know there are industrial uses
planned he has suggested notes on the plat including the possibility of
Tolleson industrial uses that are not planned currently. He explained that
every property owner would receive that as part of their escrow package.
Mr. Davis discussed the issue
regarding minor changes and stated he thought staff should deal with the minor
changes and let council deal with major changes such as density, road alignment
and plat changes. He stated minor amendments at staff level are common to
development agreements. He stated that he believed that Mr. McGuire would
confirm that 25 years in most communities for development agreements is common
and although 15 years is not terribly tight, it could be but that he would be
willing to go forward with it. He stated if it is not built out in 15 years and
not performing, the city could then redesign it with the current owners. He
stated if the city is providing municipal services to the community those could
not be pulled out.
Council member Karlin stated
there would be a substantial amount of residents being brought in and she
strongly suggested that the water availability be addressed.
Mr. Davis agreed and stated
they are working with staff regarding that and no final plat would be approved
until the source of water and the water plan is in place.
Mr. Schrader stated he hoped
there was a clear understanding of what the specific questions and concerns
were. He stated he would continue to discuss these issues with staff and
discussion would be facilitated at the next regular council meeting and that
council may need to come to a consensus.
Mayor Drake asked if there
was any agreement to parking within the cluster home areas.
Mr. Davis stated they are not
at the point where parking has been platted and it would be part of the site
plan when reviewed.
Mayor Drake asked what the
difference is between cluster and town homes.
Mr. Miller stated they are
intended to provide density and he discussed the differences in cluster and
town homes.
Mr. Davis stated they are
unavailable between June 16th and 23rd and would prefer
June 11th for the next meeting.
Mr. Schrader stated that
could be included with the charter review at that time.
Vice Mayor Rogers asked about
bike paths on the streets because she did not see anything listed.
Mr. Zubia stated the paths
are 8’ wide and there are pedestrian and bike paths but were provided on
collector streets.
Council member Lynch moved to
continue Items 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 to the June 11th Special
meeting. Council member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
20)
EXECUTIVE SESSION
An executive session for the following purposes:
Pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. §
38-431.03 (A)(4) for discussion or consultation with the City’s attorney in
order to consider its position and instruct the City’s attorney regarding the
Council’s position regarding pending litigation with respect to Lucas and
Gardner; and pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat.
§ 38-431.03 (A)(1) for discussion and consideration of a performance review for
the city manager.
Council member Lynch moved to adjourn to executive
session at 10:15 p.m.. Vice Mayor Rogers seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to come before the Council, ?? moved to adjourn.
???? seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting
adjourned at ????? p.m.
_________________________________________
Mayor
Drake
Linda
M. Farris, CMC
City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I
hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the
minutes of the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Avondale held on the 4th day of June, 2001. I further certify that the meeting was duly
called and held and that a quorum was present.
_____________________
City Clerk