Minutes of the regular
meeting of August 6,2001 held at Underdown Junior High School, 1642 South 107th Avenue at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor
Ronald Drake and Council Members Peggy
Jones
Stephanie
Karlin
Raymond
Shuey
Albert
Carroll, Jr
Betty
Lynch
Marie
Lopez Rogers
ALSO PRESENT
Mr.
Scott Schrader, City Manager
Andrew
McGuire, City Attorney
STATEMENT BY THE CITY CLERK
Linda
Farris, 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
a.
Introduction of Police
Chief
Mr. Schrader introduced Steve
MacKinnon, the new Police Chief for Avondale.
Mr. Schrader stated that he
is very pleased to have someone of Mr. MacKinnon’s caliber on board with the
City of Avondale. He stated everyone is excited to have him.
Mayor Drake asked the Council
if they had any questions for Mr. MacKinnon. He asked him what he saw as his
biggest challenge in Avondale and how can they as a council help him.
Mr. MacKinnon stated he was
still learning, obviously growth was an issue.
Mayor Drake asked how
important it is to have a shooting range.
Mr. MacKinnon stated the ability to have what a range
would offer and if it could be located in the perfect location would be good
but there are a lot of other ways to address that. He stated the Department
would be looking at the possibility of a range and other things. He stated
they would be going out into the community as well as within the Department to
see what their issues are and what they felt were important.
Mr. MacKinnon stated it would
be better indoors than outdoors because it would give officers a sense of what
they are dealing with out there, although indoors the air must be turned over
every 20 minutes due to lead exposure.
Council Member Shuey
congratulated him on a great job so far and asked his plans for employing
bicycle patrols particularly in the Las Ligas area.
Mr. MacKinnon stated that
area is being targeted as well as the downtown area.
Vice Mayor Rogers stated she
would like to see more cultural sensitivity training, which has been an issue
in the Department in the past.
Mr. MacKinnon stated he would
like to work toward a diverse population in officers as well as cultural
diversity within the community.
b.
Council procedures
Mr. Schrader stated he had a
brief update on the draft of Rules and Procedures for the Council. He stated
there is a lot to go over but he wanted to start the ball rolling. He
suggested adding the item to the agenda early in September because of the many
issues and challenges in meetings the rest of this month.
3) APPROVAL
OF MINUTES –
a.
Regular meeting of July 2, 2001
b.
Public Hearing of July 9, 2001
c.
Special meeting of July 9, 2001
d.
Regular meeting of July 16, 2001
e.
Special meeting of July 23, 2001
Council Member Lynch moved
to approve the minutes with the corrections. Council Member Shuey seconded
the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
4) RECOGNITION
ITEMS (MAYOR PRESENTATIONS)
a.
Recognition of the Charter
Committee
Mayor Drake awarded
Certificates of Appreciation to the Charter Committee and thanked them for
their hard work.
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.
Council Member Lynch pulled
items 6 a,b,h,j,o. Council Member Jones pulled item 6 p.
c.
SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR
LICENSE – SOUTHWEST HISPANIC CULTURE – MEXICAN INDEPENDENCE DAY (FIESTA PATRIAS)
An
application for a special event liquor license for the Southwest Hispanic
Culture to be used in conjunction with Mexican Independence Day, September 15,
2001.
d. SPECIAL
EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE – SOUTHWEST VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – BILLY MOORE DAYS
An application for a special event liquor license
for the Southwest Valley Chamber of Commerce to be used in conjunction with
Billy Moore Days, October 19, 20, and 21, 2001.
e. RESCHEDULING OF REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 2001 – LABOR DAY
Authorization to reschedule the regular council
meeting of September 3, 2001 to Tuesday, September 4, 2001.
f. ORDINANCE
#810-01– PROPERTY TAX LEVY 2001-2002 FISCAL YEAR
An
ordinance setting the primary and secondary property tax levy for the 2001-2002
fiscal year.
g.
ORDINANCE #809-01–
ANNEXATION – RIGHT-OF-WAY – 115TH AVENUE
An ordinance annexing public right-of-way for 115th Avenue between Thomas and McDowell Roads.
i. RESOLUTION # 2260-01– CITY OF PHOENIX INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT – RADIO
COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT SERVICES
A
resolution authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Phoenix
Information Technology Department to provide radio communications support
services.
k.
ORDINANCE #808-01– ANNEXATION – PENDERGAST SCHOOL DISTRICT
An
ordinance annexing 20 acres located at the southeast corner of Encanto Blvd and the 103rd Avenue alignment.
l.
RESOLUTION #2258-01 - JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY INITIATIVE BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM
A
resolution supporting the City’s Safe Schools and JOLTS partnership with the
City of Phoenix, Maricopa County, the Cities of Chandler and Goodyear, and the
Town of Paradise Valley and any other cities that may join the partnership to
utilize FY 2001 JAIBG funds and directs the Governor’s Office to deposit the
City’s $11,157.00 JAIBG funds into the appropriate Maricopa County Juvenile
Probation Dept. account and directs staff to execute necessary documents.
m. ORDINANCE
#807-01– ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF EASEMENT – 115TH AVENUE
An
ordinance authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to accept the Assignment and
Assumption of Easement along the west side of 115th Avenue from Van
Buren Road to approximately 750 feet south of the intersection.
n. LIQUOR
LICENSE APPLICATION – AMERICROWN (PIR)
An application from Kenneth E. Kane, Americrown (PIR),
7602 South 115th Avenue, for a Series 6 On-Sale Retailer’s License
to sell all spirituous liquors at Phoenix International Raceway.
Consent items 6
c,d,e,f,g,i,k,l,m, and n were considered.
Mr. McGuire read resolutions
and ordinances for those items by title. Council Member Lynch moved to
approve. Council Member Karlin seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS
FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
a. ZONING CASE Z01-374-B.1 – PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPROVAL – LOS ARBOLITOS RANCH – TOBAR ENGINEERING
Preliminary plat approval from Dan Tobar representing
Tobar Engineering, for Los Arbolitos Ranch, a 309 lot single-family residential
subdivision located at the southeast corner of 107th Avenue and
Thomas.
Council Member Lynch stated
she pulled the two zoning items because it is her understanding from the League
presentations that zoning items cannot be on the consent agenda unless they are
final plats. She stated if this were incorrect, she would stand corrected.
She stated that she would like to make some general comments, which applied to
all zoning cases before the council at this meeting. First, she had two
questions and asked when the committee code of ethics would be ready for
approval.
Mr. Schrader stated that is
part of the proposed rules and procedures that was e-mailed to the Council.
Council Member Lynch stated
Mr. Schrader had originally scheduled a meeting with Planning and Zoning for
this evening, which was rescheduled and asked when it would be held.
Mr. Zubia, Development
Services Director, replied the Commission would like to meet as soon as
possible, but given the Council’s busy agenda, the time has not been set yet.
Council
Member Lynch read the following statement:
Most
of this council, working together, determined we do not want Levittown in
Avondale. We also do not want a city of houses. We are looking to build a
community of homes for families and a community where those families can also
work and play. This means bringing in industry and corporate businesses.
I am displeased to see
that the individual, on Planning and Zoning, who recently told this council we
had done nothing since coming into office, is now saying in Planning and Zoning
meetings that the city and the council is responsible when developers cannot
build what they want and make the profits they want. This is far from the
truth.
First,
all we have left is the land and that is a precious commodity. We have the
ace.
Developers come in
expecting to make a profit and so they should. However, the city has standards
we want to uphold. We have many citizens to please – some already here and
some on they way.
For the past two years we
have worked with the developers so they know what we expect and, in many cases,
are bringing that product. In others, they are more than willing to work with
us, as they are expected to do in every city, to meet our standards. Although
some may disagree, the Anderson property is a good example of a city, landowner
and developer working together. The product is one we can all be proud of.
A
perfect example of the change is another member of Planning and Zoning recently
wondered why so many homes going up are small and have small side
boundaries.
Doing his job, Felipe
pointed out they were on the books for two years and approved by an earlier
administration and Planning and Zoning. He was surprised because he knew what
is approved now. I’m pleased to see that it is being noticed.
Planning and Zoning is an
arm of this Council and, while they certainly don’t have to do everything
because we say so, its members are also an arm of the city. Therefore, they
should represent the City when they are discussing Planning and Zoning matters
not criticize it. If that can’t be, then perhaps Council erred in its
appointment.
Council Member Lynch stated that there are comments in
the Planning and Zoning minutes that hold the Council to some responsibilities
as far as knowing that a development is not proceeding. She stated the Council
has no way of knowing that unless council is made aware of that by the
Development Services Department, so she would hope that by going forward that
would come to the Council so if something isn’t happening that the Council
needs to know about or needs to do something with, the Council would be made
aware. She stated she also agrees that the Council cannot go back and change
zoning that has already passed because then there would be a lawsuit and even
the Council can’t do that. She stated it is the developer’s responsibility to
expedite, not the City Council. She stated the Council could only work with
them as they go through and she stated that if anyone had a question, there is
a note within stating the Council has this. She stated she just wanted to
bring that out because if nobody advises the Council something isn’t moving
forward, they aren’t going to know it. She stated from the Planning and Zoning
notes, it doesn’t look like there are any changes to this development and asked
if it is just a change to the type of zoning because it was one that came
across wrong.
Mr. Zubia stated there is a
change and they are adding an additional 10 acres and the homebuilder changed
from DeHaven to Coventry, an arm of Del Webb. He stated their product is a
little bit different and because of that they need a deeper lot, but don’t need
as wide of a lot. He stated the plat has changed from a 55’ wide lot, 98’ deep
to a 50’, 110’ and the net difference is an increase in a minimum square foot lot.
Council Member Lynch asked
even though the lot has been made narrow, which she is not happy with, the side
boundaries as were established will be kept as they move forward.
Mayor Drake asked why they
went from 55 to 50.
Mr. Zubia stated each homebuilder
has a different product and a short lot and a 55’ wide lot is not a standard
size lot for the home building industry, as it is typically 50’ or 55’ by
110’. He stated Coventry does not have a product to fit on the size lot
previously approved on the preliminary plat.
Mayor Drake asked if they
couldn’t build homes on a 50’ by 110’ lot.
Mr. Zubia stated yes he
could.
Mayor Drake asked then why
wouldn’t we want to do that because a percentage of open space would be lost as
recommended.
Mr. Zubia stated yes, the
open space percentage goes down some and the density goes up, but to the
average person driving by the changes are negligible. He stated that basically
it is a comparable development.
Mayor Drake asked what were
homes going to sell for originally.
Mr. Zubia deferred the
question to the developer, but there was no representative available.
Mayor Drake stated that maybe
the Council would want to wait until a representative from Coventry was
available so this issue could be discussed. He asked if Council Member Lynch’s
question regarding why this was placed on consent had been addressed.
Mr. Schrader asked Mr.
McGuire about the legalities of zoning cases being a part of the consent
agenda.
Mr. McGuire stated he was not
at the League of Cities presentation. He said the only Planning and Zoning
items he has a problem with being on the consent agenda are those for which
there is a public hearing and anything other than that, requiring the normal
approval of the Council and where there is unanimous consent of the Council to
put it on without discussion would be more of a policy issue whether Planning
and Zoning issues were placed on consent.
Mayor Drake stated he would
like to have a representative from the homebuilder present to tell the Council
what kind of product he is bringing to the community and to tell us why he
cannot build a home on a bigger lot.
Council Member Lynch stated
according to the documentation, because he was taking the extra depth, needed
that to build the number of homes he needed. She agreed with Mayor Drake and
stated they regularly ask that representatives be here for whatever they have
on the agenda and she thought they at least owed the Council that.
Mr. Schrader stated this item
would be continued to a minimum of August 20.
Councilman Carroll moved that
item 6a be continued to a future meeting to be determined. Council Member
Lynch seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
b.
ZONING CASE Z01-487-AR –
SITE PLAN APPROVAL - RANCHO SANTA FE CENTER – THE PLAZA COMPANIES
Site
plan approval for Rancho Santa Fe Center located at the southwest corner of McDowell Road and Rancho Santa Fe Boulevard.
Council Member Lynch asked if
Mr. Reynolds was present and she thanked them for coming to Avondale. She
stated she is familiar with Plaza Del Rio in Peoria and the work that he does
and was ecstatic when the sign went on that site even though there were some
people who did not want to have lunch with their dentist. She stated this is
one of the best things that had happened to Avondale in a number of years.
Council Member Lynch stated the company builds quality offices and it looks
like quality when you go in or drive by. She stated any other sites they find,
she for one would welcome them to Avondale.
Council Member Lynch referred
to the list of requirements and asked if the comments of 7-12-01 needed to be
addressed.
Mr. Zubia stated the comments were dealing with
engineering requirements, such as drainage and grading, to meet the standard.
Council Member Lynch stated
she couldn’t tell from the site plan and she couldn’t find an entrance other
than on the east side where Ranch Santa Fe Blvd comes in and there is a fire
entrance and she asked if that was correct. She stated she couldn’t tell if it
was there only during construction or if there would be an entrance by the
apartments on Rancho Santa Fe Blvd.
Mr. Zubia stated that
entrance will be full access and there would not be any need to go all the way
around the block to get in.
Mayor Drake asked how many
covered parking spaces there would be.
Mr. Zubia stated he was not
sure.
A Plaza Companies
representative stated there would be approximately 75 spaces provided but not
necessarily required so it is a high percentage.
Council Member Jones asked if
there was going to be a thorough way from McDowell to Rancho Santa Fe Blvd, so
you don’t have to go out onto Dysart to get to Walmart.
Mr. Zubia stated that access
would be included in phase two of Palmilla.
Council
Member Lynch moved to approve this zoning case. Council Member Jones seconded
the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
h.
ELEVATOR CONTRACT – OTIS
ELEVATOR COMPANY
Authorizing
the execution of an agreement with Otis Elevator Company for a five- year
elevator maintenance contract for a first year cost of $1,998.60 and each
additional year the price will be adjusted annually based on the consumer price
index and actual changes in the straight time hourly labor rate.
Council Member Lynch referred
to page 6 of 7 of the contract regarding the 20% discount, stating that down
further stated when talking about the index it is 10% and she asked if that was
just coincidental.
Chief Adams stated they split
the contract price between labor cost and material cost and the usage or 20%
reduction is taken from that.
Council Member Lynch asked if
it was based on the index of commodity pricing.
Chief Adams stated yes.
Council Member Lynch moved to
approve the contract. Vice Mayor Rogers seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
j. RESOLUTION
#2259-01– INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT – MARICOPA COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT –
RECIPROCAL BORROWING
A
resolution authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with Maricopa County
Library District to continue the Reciprocal Borrowing Program for the Avondale
Public Library.
Council Member Lynch stated
she knows Dan Davis was not here when the initial presentation was brought
forward but the council was told this would bring in about $20,000 per year in
revenue. She stated when looking at charts, she couldn’t tell if dollar
amounts were lesser because not many people were using them or if there may
have been an error in the estimate.
Dan Davis, Community
Recreation Services Director, replied that the numbers are somewhat misleading
because the program was only implemented in April, so there are only a few
months of actual documentation.
Mr. McGuire read the
resolution by title. Council Member Lynch moved to adopt the resolution. Vice
Mayor Rogers seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
o. LIQUOR LICENSE
APPLICATION – MOBIL ON THE RUN – RANDY NATIONS
An
application from Randy Nations, Mobil on the Run, 1595 North 115th
Avenue, for a Series 10 Off-Sale Retailer’s License to sell beer and wine.
Council Member Lynch stated
after her attendance at a meeting at the Liquor Control Board, she specifically
asked that all future applications have the printout from the Liquor Control
Board of violations and asked if the attached printout was from that Board or
the applicant.
Linda Farris. City Clerk, stated the entire package comes from the
Liquor Control Board.
Council Member Lynch stated
it comes from the Liquor Control Board because the applicant submits it, but
the applicant has to specifically ask the Liquor Control Board to provide a
copy of their listing of violations. She stated the applicant must be aware of
that so they include it in the packet because there are major differences
between what the applicants are submitting and what the Liquor Control Board
shows.
Mr. Schrader asked if she was
suggesting that there might be more violations than what is on the list.
Council Member Lynch stated
when the City receives the package they need to advise the applicant to provide
that information to the City. She stated she would like to see that in this
case because there are 8 violations, two denials, and the applicant applied for
this license ten days after the last problem fell off because the violations
stay on for one year. She stated the last three fell off in June, then within
10 days this license had been applied for and the track record seems to be
increasingly worse as she reviews the records. Council Member Lynch stated
this is one of the reasons that she wants to see what the Liquor Control Board
has. She stated she knows that some Council Members have felt that the Council
was taking away business from applicants, however, she stated that it is not
the Council that is taking it away, it is the applicant themselves, by allowing
these things to continue to happen. She stated against her better judgment
this was approved by this Council and then was denied by the Liquor Control
Board because of the number of violations. She stated this store is on a major
arterial street, close to the highway, there are lots of residents in the area,
and there is a school nearby. She stated she would prefer that the applicant prove
that they can stay away from the violations before this is approved and
requested a report of what the Liquor Control Board says their violations are.
Nicholas Guttilla, attorney
for the applicant, 4150 W Northern, Phoenix stated this applicant has had one
liquor violation since July 7, 2000 and prior to that there were several liquor
hearings and there were 8 to 10 violations per year. He stated the difference
was because in June of 2000 Exxon and Mobil merged, new personnel took over and
new liquor license compliance procedures were implemented. He stated the proof
is there because there had only been one violation in thirteen months versus 8
to 10 every twelve months, which was the reason they were denied. Mr. Guttilla
stated there are currently seven applications pending throughout the valley and
the Liquor Board has an informal policy that if any applicant has three or more
violations within a 12 month period and a new license is applied for, you must
appear before the board and prove that you are qualified, capable, and
reliable. He stated they then look at the applicant’s track record over the
previous twelve months and reiterated there has been only 1 violation in 13
months. He stated staff is trained and re-trained every year for the 47 liquor
licenses. He stated they perform undercover buys, they have swipe machines
that read out age, they card anyone appearing below age of 30 and they have
demonstrated under new personnel their efforts to train and to penalize by
firing people if they violate the law and to reward if the employee passes.
Mr. Guttilla stated the same personnel that had previous violations are not
operating the stores. He said every applicant who files application at the
Liquor Department must submit their violations, for example, he gets a computer
printout from the Liquor Department to double check and he stated Mr. Nations
prepared this report, but he prepares hundreds and, in his view, these are 100%
correct. He stated that no one has ever asked them to submit something in
addition to be verified, under oath.
Council Member Karlin asked
if the store is waiting to open until they get the liquor license.
Mr. Nations stated yes, that
was one of the issues in addition to the drainage issue.
Council Member Lynch moved to
deny the liquor license until the Council sees the State report.
Councilman Carroll stated
based on the information the City Clerk provided that information comes from
the Board.
Mr. Schrader stated staff
gets the complete application from the Liquor Board that the applicant has
submitted and the question was whether the application is comprehensive and
whether the board has a different list of violations that is not in staff’s
possession.
Council Member Lynch stated
that is the question because what the Chairman of the Board explained was the
packets come in from the applicants, the Board takes them and makes copies and
sends them out. She explained that it is the responsibility of the applicant
and the City to take it from there, so the City may or may not have a complete
packet. She stated sometimes there are pages missing and that is why the
applicant needs to be sure that everything the City has, is everything sent to
the Liquor Board because in some cases it has not been and secondly, that the liquor
report is attached.
Councilman Carroll seconded
the motion to deny.
Council Member Jones asked
Mr. Nations and Mr. McGuire if the applicant has submitted everything that was
asked of him.
Linda Farris stated that she did not believe that she could
request the information, but that the applicant can.
Mr. Nations stated the last
time they came before the council, they recommended approval, but the state
denied them. He stated the same packet was submitted to the state and there
were no issues brought up about the previous violations, other than there were
too many. He stated they pulled their statistics from the state and if an
applicant does not submit all his violations it is because the computer has
only two years of violations.
Mayor Drake stated they only
had one violation in the past year and he asked how many stores Mr. Nations
has.
Mr. Nations stated Mobil on
the Run has 47 stores.
Mr. McGuire stated if Council
is delaying the liquor license until they get more information , then that is
different than a denial. He explained that if it is a denial then it needs to
be forwarded to the Board but if the idea is to ask for more information and
bring it back as an agenda item, it should be continued to a date certain.
Council Member Lynch withdrew
her motion and moved to continue until August 20th. Councilman
Carroll seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-2 with Council Member Karlin and
Vice Mayor Rogers voting nay.
Mayor Drake asked Council
Member Lynch to get with the City Manager so the correct information is brought
back to Council.
Council Member Jones wanted
to change her vote to nay. Mr. McGuire stated the item would need to be
re-opened and reconsidered. Council Member Jones decided to disregard it at
this point.
p. RESOLUTION
#2257-01- LTAF II FUNDS - START BUS
A resolution authorizing staff to submit an
application for LTAF II funding from the Arizona Department of Transportation
and directing staff to conduct all negotiations and execute and submit all
documents and any other necessary instruments.
Council Member Jones asked
Mr. Schrader to set up a workshop to look at each route and the performance of
routes and a couple of scenarios so the City does not lose the community funded
transportation of $12,000 and the LTAF monies that are expected to drop.
Michael Powell, Grants Coordinator , replied there is a five year
funding cycle that the legislature has authorized through June 30, 2003.
Council Member Jones stated
there are several things happening and she would like to have a couple of
plans.
Mr. Powell stated the staff
has a meeting scheduled this Wednesday to discuss the various options.
Mr. Schrader stated that
meeting would allow the staff to prepare for a Council workshop on the
subject. He noted staff received word last week that the City is in line to
receive $69,780 as opposed to the original $49,000.
Mr. Powell stated the staff
wanted to make sure this resolution was brought to Council because timing was
everything and he wanted to move this forward.
Council Member Jones stated
it is a subject that is important and she would hate to see the residents lose
services.
Council Member Shuey asked if
there was a possibility of doing a survey to find out what City the residents
riding the express buses are from because he felt the other cities should step
forward when their citizens are utilizing the routes.
Mr. McGuire read the
resolution by title. Vice Mayor Rogers moved to adopt this resolution.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
7) SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCE - COX CABLE COMPANY
A
representative from Cox Cable will address the Council and answer questions.
Mr. Schrader requested to
continue this agenda item to August 20 to allow Cox Cable additional time to
prepare.
8) AMERION
AGREEMENT – INTERNET ACCESS
Authorization to execute a revised Internet access
agreement with Amerion for $11,388.00 per year.
Mr. Schrader stated this was
to provide information regarding the transfer of ownership of the company
providing service to the City.
Tim Greene, Information
Systems Director, addressed the Council. He reviewed the changes within this
contract, which include providing better access to the network along with
security features. He stated staff felt it was a good time to upgrade this
system and still stay within the budget.
Council Member Karlin moved
to approve the contract. Council Member Jones seconded the motion. Motion
carried unanimously.
9) CONSULTING
AGREEMENT – PARRY, ROMANI & DECONCINI
Authorization for renewal of a
consulting agreement in the amount of $96,000.00 with Parry, Romani & Deconcini
for the 2001-2002 fiscal year.
Mr. Schrader outlined this
agreement. He stated that based on prior discussion held, some issues have
been addressed such as making sure the City is getting monthly reports from the
consulting firm providing an update on their activities and what they are doing
on the City’s behalf. He stated the recommendation is, toward the end of this
fiscal year, that the City look at going out for a request for proposals to see
if there are any other firms that might be interested in providing this
service.
Vice Mayor Rogers stated she
would like to look at enhancing the Intergovernmental Affairs position and
perhaps adding staff to that position. She stated that by doing so possibly
the staff could do more of the services the consulting firm is performing.
Mr. Schrader stated when the
staff puts together the scope of services, they will be cognizant of the
respective roles and responsibilities of the Intergovernmental function and the
role of the consultant and will take that into consideration as they put
together what they are seeking to try to get the right blend of services.
Council Member Karlin asked
what is going on at the federal level as the City has a contract with Parry and
Romani. She stated Mr. Ober is here locally and doing the local legislation
and the City is requesting on a monthly basis what is being done, but she would
still like to know what is being done on the federal level.
Mr. Schrader stated the past
practice has been to have an agreement with the firm of Parry, Romani, and
Deconcini as well as Mr. Ober’s group, Policy Development Group, and both are
providing services for the total amount of $96,000. He stated they internally
figure how they divide the funds received based on their proportionate share of
work done. Mr. Schrader stated in terms of the federal side, congress is in
recess and will be back in September and the firm is working on trying to get
Representatives Stump and Pastor and Senator Kyle to lobby on the City’s behalf
before the Veteran’s Administration, HUD Committee, which is the group the City
is looking at in terms of being a potential financial conduit for the funds it
is seeking to make some improvements to the older neighborhoods. He stated
that is one of the projects they have been working on and up to 3 million
dollars have been requested. Mr. Schrader stated once congress is back in
session they will continue to work on having representatives in Washington doing what they can to see if the City can get upwards of 3 million dollars for
improvements. He stated they are also working on making sure the City is in
the best position possible with respect to securing funding for the Army Corp
of Engineers, the proposed project to restore the Aqua Fria River. He stated they are also working with the IG to monitor the START funding process.
Council Member Karlin
expressed her concern at the local level because the firm also contracts with
other cities and she is concerned with the possibility that the City might be
going after the same piece of the pie, so to speak. She was wondering about
completive interest because other cities are represented by the same firm.
Mr. Schrader stated he has
discussed the issue with other city managers as well as Mr. Ober and they are
determined to work out something acceptable to all parties and fortunately the
issue had not yet arisen. He stated if it does, then it is another reason to
go out and look to see if there are other consulting firms who would be able to
provide good service for a reasonable price. He stated they would give weights
to all criteria and decide which firm to use.
Council Member Lynch stated
when she reads through their reports, they are very bland and do not change
verbally from month to month. She stated he is being paid to do the job and
she is not comfortable with the results. She stated they have talked about
what the IG can do, but that he can be spread so thin and there are certain
contacts that need to be made and the Deconcini group is spreading themselves
thinner and thinner. Council Member Lynch stated she does not have as much
concern about conflicts of interest as she does with how thin they are
spreading themselves and how many masters they can serve. She stated that part
of her concern is in some of the cities they serve there is an old boy network
that they work with and there are some old friendships from the legislature or
wherever and that is not true in Avondale. She stated some of the other cities,
who just hired them, may find the same thing as they move along, so the only
way she would agree to approve this is if the City goes out for an RFP and
before budget time have a response from staff about what has been found.
Council Member Lynch moved to
approve the agreement with the stipulation that staff come back no later than
February with an RFP and then no later than May with a recommendation item on
the agenda. Council Member Karlin seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
10) ZONING
CASE Z99-389-A REZONING – 73 EL MIRAGE
A
motion to reconsider zoning case Z99-389A and direct staff to review and
forward the amended application to the Planning and Zoning Commission to be
scheduled for consideration at future public hearings.
Mr. Schrader stated this item
deals with a zoning case that was denied by City Council in March of last year
and deals with property that is located at the southeast corner of Lower
Buckeye and El Mirage Roads. He stated one of the reasons for Council’s denial
was concern of the potential impact of this proposed new subdivision on a
nearby dairy farm and the City has received information from the dairy farm
owner that their prior objections to the project have waned. He stated this is
a revised plan that may be acceptable the City.
Mr. Zubia stated that introduction
summarizes the motion before the Council. He stated if the Council decides to
move forward it would take a motion, by one of the members who previously voted
to deny, for reconsideration of a motion.
Council Member Lynch asked if
the City has anything in writing from the dairy farmer.
Mr. Zubia stated he had
received a call from Mr. Pyleman, the dairy farmer, stating that he was not
aggressively against it, but that he still has issues to work out with the
developer.
Council Member Lynch stated she
would like to receive something in writing before they continue.
Mr. Zubia stated the staff
had anticipated receiving a letter, but since they didn’t, they have it
scheduled for the next Planning and Zoning commission and the item will be
continued until they receive definitive support from the property owner.
Council Member Lynch moved to
continue until information from Mr. Pyleman was received. Vice Mayor Rogers
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
11) ORDINANCE #806-01 - ZONING CASE Z01-499A –
PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING – HENDERSON PROPERTY
An ordinance rezoning approximately 11.10 acres
located approximately 1/3 mile north of Van Buren Street and east of El Mirage Road, from AG to R1-35.
Mr. Schrader stated this was
for consideration of an agricultural district designation to a single- family
residential district located 1/3 mile north of Van Buren Street and east of El Mirage Road.
Mr. Zubia stated that this
request was from Millie Henderson to rezone her property from Agriculture to
R135. He stated the Council will see a few of these cases relating back to the
zoning ordinance text amendment that will deal with the issue of how the City
annexes new properties and then assigns a zoning district following the
annexation. He stated the way the ordinance is written and the way it is
applied is any newly annexed lands are agriculture as soon as they are brought
into the City. Mr. Zubia explained that after discussions with the City
Attorney and the Planning Division, it was determined that section of the
zoning ordinance is in violation of statutory requirements to rezone the
property within thirty days to it’s most comparable zoning district as it had
in the County. He stated this case fell into that category, the property was
annexed in 1978 and at that point it was zoned agriculture, when in fact the
zoning ordinance in the county was rural 43. He stated what that did was not
only violate the state statute, but also violated the right of the property
owner for due process to be heard at a public hearing for the rezoning and when
the property owner came forward to build two homes on the property, at that
time it was brought to her attention that she did not have the proper zoning.
Mr. Zubia stated that after she provided the documentation that within the
County she did have the appropriate zoning, it has been an internal staff
policy that if the verification has been presented, staff would initiate the
zoning process and zone it to the most closely zoned district as in the County.
He stated if the applicant wants it zoned to anything different, then it would
be their request , not the City’s. He stated a text amendment would be brought
forth to not only strike the provision, but to add an additional zoning
district that would create the rural, residential 43,000 sq. foot minimum lot
size in order to provide the transition zone from the County.
Mayor Drake asked if homes
are already there.
Mr. Zubia stated the property
is currently being farmed.
Mayor Drake stated he felt it
would be an excellent site for commercial development and questioned that they
are going to make it into two homes.
Mr. Zubia stated what is
actually being brought forward is the zoning, not the approval of the homes.
He stated that concern was brought forward by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and was also a concern of staff but given the way the property was
rezoned in the past, it was incumbent on the City to process a rezone that was
comparable to what was legally on the property prior to being annexed. He
stated with the concern being raised at the Commission, the response was any
non-residential user that is attracted to the area once the infrastructure is
in place is not going to be deterred by a couple of homes that can easily be
removed. He stated the homes would be going in and the applicant understands
that it would be more marketable for non-residential use.
Council Member Lynch asked if
this will not be a non-conforming use because this is what she already had.
Mr. Zubia stated that was correct
and they are giving the property the appropriate zoning that she had in the
county.
Council Member Lynch asked if
they are only making it what it should have been when the property was annexed.
Mr. Zubia stated that was
correct.
Council Member Lynch asked
how much of the 11 acres would be used for the two homes.
Mr. Zubia stated 2 acres of
the 11 acres and it has already been split into 2-1 acre parcels and a 9 acre
parcel and she will not be able to split the remaining 9 acres unless she
brings in a subdivision plat.
Council Member Lynch asked if
the City can put any stipulation into this that the owner will not stop any
industry or commercial that goes around them.
Mr. McGuire stated a
stipulation that bound a property owner to have no protest rights in the future
would not be enforceable. He stated one of the things that is unclear about
this case is the provision in the zoning ordinance that states upon annexation
everything comes in as agricultural and within 30 days a zoning case must be
initiated, which will change the zoning to the appropriate zoning. He stated
it has been the policy of the City to bring in annexed property roughly at what
they had in the county, but it is not state law that it come in that way. He
stated it is state law that it not be given a zoning more dense than what they
had in the county, so the improper procedure is that the zoning ordinance
provision of initiating a rezone within 30 days did not take place, so the
property has remained agricultural for a period that it would not have if the
City had followed normal procedure.
Council Member Lynch asked
since the property owner did not take advantage of the 30 day window, is the
City required to do it now.
Mr. McGuire stated it is more
of a mandatory provision for the City to initiate the rezone in 30 days.
Council Member Lynch asked if
there was any way the City can protect itself in the future.
Mr. McGuire stated this is
the reason for pre-annexation development agreements, to agree to what the
zoning will be after the annexation.
Council Member Karlin asked
since the property owner is the one coming forward because she wants individual
homes, is there any chance the City could ask her to sign a letter that she is
aware of the possibility that commercial might come in around her.
Mr. McGuire stated in terms
of enforceability, it does not change anything from the previous response but
that in terms of notice it may if there is a letter on record from the property
owner stating she understands this is going to be a commercial corridor and in
the future there may be commercial properties nearby. He stated having on
record that there is notice of a potential conflict is fine.
Council Member Jones stated
it would be best to have a letter stating surrounding circumstances so the City
does not get an “I didn’t know” years from now.
Council Member Shuey asked
about the remaining 9 acres and a reversion clause where if buildings are not
constructed on the property within a certain amount of time the zoning is reverted.
Mr. McGuire stated there is
certainly the ability of the Council to put a reversion clause on a zoning
ordinance and it would be a condition subsequent that if it wasn’t met would
force the Council to put it back on the agenda to be revisited at a later date
if development did not take place.
Mayor Drake asked for public
comments as this was a public hearing.
No comments were received.
Mr. McGuire read the
ordinance by title. Council Member Lynch moved to approve ordinance with the
stipulation that a letter to Ms. Henderson stating that she is aware of the
zoning around her and that there may be industry or commercial and with an
added reversion clause to the zoning that the balance of the property would be
reverted if not used. Council Member Karlin seconded the motion. ROLL CALL
VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
12) ORDINANCE #805-01 - ZONING CASE Z01-468A –
PUBLIC HEARING – REZONING – GARDEN TRAILS SUBDIVISION – MARACAY HOMES
An ordinance rezoning for Garden Trails approximately
39.36 acres located at the southwest corner of 115th Avenue and Thomas Road, from AG to R1-6 PADD.
Mr. Schrader stated this
property was previously zoned and had a preliminary plat approved while still
under the jurisdiction of Maricopa County and the proposed development is for
145 lots of single-family development.
Mr. Zubia stated the final
plat has come before the Council and was approved. He stated this proposed
zoning is the zoning that was presented at that time.
Council Member Lynch asked
why the City couldn’t do some annexations up front rather than having the site
approvals happen in the County, not meeting the necessary requirements of the
Council and then the City has to take them as annexations because they are in
the middle of something or they need the infrastructure to build.
Mr. Zubia stated it is a
series of compromises with the property owner because the property owner must
sign off to come into the City and typically they won’t unless they have some
assurances that they have some development rights. He stated what is being
done at staff level is anyone who is coming forward is being told that unless
they come in with what the City is looking for in this area the City will not
annex them and therefore they will not receive City services.
Council Member Lynch stated
the Council in Litchfield Park is not annexing property, just because the
County approves it. She stated they just need to find their own infrastructure
to operate.
Mr . Zubia stated the
landowners are wanting to get the City on board before they go that route
because they understand it is a dangerous road to go down.
. Mayor Drake asked for
comments from the public, as this was a public hearing.
No comments were received.
Mr. McGuire read the
ordinance by title. Vice Mayor Rogers moved to adopt the ordinance. Council
Member Karlin seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
13) ORDINANCE #804-01- ZONING CASE Z01-495-TA –
TEXT AMENDMENT - ZONING ORDINANCE – NEWLY ANNEXED LANDS
An ordinance amending Section 101.G of the Avondale
Zoning Ordinance to bring it consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes regarding
newly annexed lands.
Mr. McGuire read the
Ordinance by title. Council Member Lynch moved to adopt the ordinance. Council
Member Shuey seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
14) ORDINANCE #803-01- ZONING CASE Z01-494-TA –
TEXT AMENDMENT – ZONING ORDINANCE – RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT – PUBLIC HEARING
An ordinance amending Sections 1 and 2 by creating a
rural residential district.
Mr. Schrader stated that this
is a proposed amendment to provide for the creation of the new rural
residential zoning district. He stated this would promote and encourage low
density residential growth, serves as a buffer between more dense developments
in the community, and helps deals with some of the transition issues from the
County to the City if it is annexed.
Mr. Zubia stated there was a
request to provide additional information on a matrix and what cities were
studied and that was provided to the council. He summarized by stating staff
tried to create a rural district that would be more of the transition zone and
not call it a residential or single family residential as classified R1 and
this will be classified as RR. He stated the reason for that is to make sure
it is a transition zone, for instance in areas such as Glen Arm Farms or Holly
Acres. Mr. Zubia stated these areas would come in to the City as RR versus the
R1, which is what the Anderson property is zoned as. He stated the difference
is to provide for the carryover of the rural uses, such as equestrian and farm
animal on this type of zoning district. He stated staff is recommending the
amendment of the zoning ordinance to create this zoning district for that
purpose.
Council Member Shuey referred
to permitted uses where it provides for no more than two swine, except for pot
bellied pigs and asked why not limit the number of pot bellied pigs.
Mr. Zubia stated the
difference in the pigs is for marketing and the pot-bellied pigs are for
breeding and not for slaughter.
Mayor Drake asked why there
is no limit on fowl.
Mr. Zubia stated the
provision is to provide for the transition from the County to the City and the
intent is to come back and deal with one acre lots and deal with those issues
in the text amendment.
Council Member Lynch stated
it looks like they are creating long, narrow acres in this case.
Mr. Zubia stated this is
strictly used for subdivision purposes and the transition and the lots out
there are long and narrow.
Council Member Lynch stated
the side yard set back is 20-40 and asked Mr. Zubia to explain that.
Mr. Zubia explained that 20’
is the minimum and 40’ is the total so it is 20’ on each side.
Council Member Lynch stated
Beazer has a site in Waddell and she is familiar with people who have bought
there and they are one acre sites that are more square. She stated that one of
the problems that they are having is their side yards are either 30’ or 35’ and
she would like to see the City go to at least that because people are complaining
that they are too close. She stated they are saying 75 feet from the house,
but that is on a straight line, so they still need to get the spread. Council
Member Lynch stated that if there is 35’ on each side of the boundary, then
that is 70 feet, which is better than just 40 feet, between this agriculture.
She stated she still thought it remained agriculture, but she would rather see
a wider spread on the side boundaries.
Council Member Lynch referred
to the discussion about a side street and stated that she assumes that is where
there is a side boundary on the street. She stated she would like the side
yard be equivalent to the back.
Councilman Carroll asked if
the City would be infringing on the rights of the property owner saying where
to place the home.
Council Member Lynch stated
they are talking about the neighbor’s boundary, not their own.
Mr. Zubia stated that the
intent is not to zone or plat a one-acre lot subdivision and that staff will
come back at a later date to present a zoning district that would create the
one-acre lot zoning district. He stated in this specific case, rather than
dealing with the specific setbacks across the board, maybe Council can
entertain increasing setbacks for things that would cause a nuisance for adjacent
homeowners.
Council Member Lynch asked if
what he was saying was to leave it at 20’ and then when you do the R1 the
stronger stipulations can be put in to protect the homeowners.
Mr. Zubia stated yes.
Mr. McGuire read the
ordinance by title. Council Member Lynch moved to adopt the ordinance.
Councilman Carroll seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
Council Member Jones Aye
Council Member Karlin Aye
Council Member Lynch Aye
Council Member Shuey Aye
Councilman Carroll Aye
Vice Mayor Rogers Aye
Mayor
Drake Aye
15) CONTRACT
AWARD – LAS LIGAS & RIO VISTA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS – KIRKHAM MICHAEL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Award
of a contract to Kirkham Michael Consulting Engineers for the design of Las
Ligas and Rio Vista Road Improvements in the amount of $265,900.00 and
authorizing the execution of said agreement.
Mr. Schrader reviewed the
contract award.
Dave Fitzhugh, City Engineer,
stated this is dependent on the Arizona Department of Transportation and their
process. He stated subsequent to the approval of this contract, it is
submitted to ADOT, who puts it together with an IGA, which is returned to the
City for presentation to the Council and requested approval of the IGA.
Council Member Lynch stated
there is a $12,000 difference between the staff report and the letter and asked
if that was coming out throughout the package or in one area.
Mr. Fitzhugh stated the
signed letter is correct and they have a contract.
Council Member Lynch moved to
approve the contract. Council Member Shuey seconded the motion. Motion
carried unanimously.
16) DISCUSSION
ITEMS
Council will discuss items listed below and possibly
give direction to city staff to research and prepare item for future meeting.
a. Council
Member appointments to the Planning and Zoning Commission – Council Member
Lynch
Council Member Lynch stated
she did not intend to point out that this Council might have done something
illegal and that she had been told that everything done meets the open meeting
law. She pointed out that the Council cares about results, like homes and
businesses to work at, not just houses. She stated what she is trying to do is
simply establish a standard for appointing committees, boards and commissions.
Council Member Lynch stated that for example, the Council interviewed for
Planning and Zoning, then voted later by phone and by mail, and appointed
whoever applied to CIP, PAC, Recreation, and Charter without interviews. She
stated the Charter Committee was really a stroke of luck, CIP in her district
had consistent absences, which she contacted staff and let them know about, but
nothing was done and because of that, she did not feel that her district had
proper representation on CIP. She stated on PAC she requested at least 3 times
for all of the names to be included in one of the Council packets and she has
not had a response, recreation people have not yet met but they wanted to be on
that committee. She stated every time the staff has a list of names they have
to come to the Council, and don’t know what the Council wants because sometimes
they interview and sometimes they don’t. She stated she was just trying to
establish a standard to appoint the people.
Mayor Drake asked Mr.
Schrader if he had received the request for members of the PAC.
Mr. Schrader stated he did
not remember the PAC request.
Mayor Drake asked if he could
provide that tomorrow (Tuesday).
Vice Mayor Rogers asked if
this would be addressed within the Council’s policy and procedures.
Mr. Schrader stated yes there
is a section regarding that, but further discussion could take place to see
what Council’s position was.
Councilman Carroll agreed
with Council Member Lynch and stated that he appreciated her efforts and
thoughts toward a standard so that staff will know automatically where Council
is coming from and that will filter out into the community, which is what
Council is looking for when they go out and ask for positions to be filled.
Council Member Shuey
commented that having read through the draft policies and procedures, he likes
the way the staff has drafted the idea of having a subcommittee and he would
like to discuss it at a future meeting.
Mayor Drake asked when it
would be brought forth.
Mr. Schrader stated it would
probably be early September and encouraged any comments from the Council
between now and when the meeting is scheduled, so staff can do any additional
research needed.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to come before the Council, Council Member Karlin
moved to adjourn. Council Member Shuey seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting
adjourned at 9:13 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 6th day of August, 2001. I further certify that the meeting was duly
called and held and that a quorum was present.
_____________________
City Clerk
