FINAL AGENDA
*This is a reschedule of the Regular Meeting of August 26, 2014, due to the Primary Election on that date.
4:00 P.M. MEETING
Individual Items on the 4:00 p.m. meeting agenda may be postponed to the 6:00 p.m. meeting.
|
1. | CALL TO ORDER
NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).
|
|||||||||
2. | ROLL CALL
|
|||||||||
3. | PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MISSION STATEMENT
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the City of Flagstaff is to protect and enhance the quality of life of its citizens. |
|||||||||
4. | APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Budget Retreat of April 23-25, 2014; the Combined Special Meeting and Work Session of May 13, 2014; the Regular Meeting of July 1, 2014; the Work Session of July 8, 2014; and the Regular Meeting of July 15, 2014. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Amend/approve the minutes of the City Council Budget Retreat of April 23-25, 2014; the Combined Special Meeting and Work Session of May 13, 2014; the Regular Meeting of July 1, 2014; the Work Session of July 8, 2014; and the Regular Meeting of July 15, 2014.
|
||||||||||
5. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public Participation enables the public to address the Council about an item that is not on the agenda (or is listed under Possible Future Agenda Items). Comments relating to items that are on the agenda will be taken at the time that the item is discussed. If you wish to address the Council at tonight's meeting, please complete a comment card and submit it to the recording clerk as soon as possible. Your name will be called when it is your turn to speak. You may address the Council up to three times throughout the meeting, including comments made during Public Participation. Please limit your remarks to three minutes per item to allow everyone an opportunity to speak. At the discretion of the Chair, ten or more persons present at the meeting and wishing to speak may appoint a representative who may have no more than fifteen minutes to speak. |
|||||||||
6. | PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS |
|||||||||
A. | Report on Flagstaff Convention and Visitors Bureau Awards and Recognition | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Information only
|
||||||||||
7. | APPOINTMENTS Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for the purpose of discussing or considering employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, disciplining or resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of any public body...., pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(1). |
|||||||||
A. | Consideration of Appointments: Airport Commission. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Make two appointments to terms expiring October 2015.
|
||||||||||
8. | LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Devendrabhai Patel, "India Palace", 103 W. Birch Ave., Series 12 (restaurant), New License. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Hold the Public Hearing
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
||||||||||
B. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Randy Nations, “Sportsman's Bar & Grill", 1000 N. Humphreys St. #98, Series 06 (bar- all spirituous liquor), Person Transfer.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
||||||
C. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Paul Moir, “Proper Meats and Provisions", 110 S. San Francisco St., Suite B., Series 07 (beer and wine bar), Person and Location Transfer.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
||||||
D. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Jeffrey Roff, “Whole Foods Market", 320 S. Cambridge Lane, Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
||||||
E. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Hetal Patel, “O'Leary Street Market", 322 S. O'Leary St., Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
||||||
9. | CONSENT ITEMS All matters under Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving the recommendations listed on the agenda. Unless otherwise indicated, expenditures approved by Council are budgeted items. |
|||||
A. | Acceptance of Grant and Approval of Contract: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Brownfields State Response Grant - Asbestos Abatement for the City of Flagstaff (for Midgley Market at 23 N. Beaver Street - aka The Lion and the Lamb Building)(Approve ADEQ grant contract for asbestos abatement). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Accept the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Brownfields State Response Grant (SRG) in the amount of approximately $55,000 and authorize the City Manager to execute Contract No. ADEQ15-077563 (which includes, but under separate cover, the City's participation in the ADEQ Voluntary Remediation Program).
|
||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | |||||
A. |
Consideration of Bids: 4th Street Gateway Project |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Reject all bids as submitted
|
||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of the Third Amendment and the Fourth Amendment of Purchase and Sale Agreement: Between the City of Flagstaff and Evergreen - TRAX, LLC ("Evergreen"), for the sale of approximately 33.6 acres of property consisting of three parcels located at the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection of Fourth Street and Route 66, and the northwest corner of Fourth Street and Huntington drive adjacent to the Fourth Street Overpass (the "Property"). (Third Amendment to Evergreen Purchase Agreement to extend closing date; Fourth Amendment to Evergreen Purchase Agreement to Adopt Limited Warranty Quit Claim Conditions) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Approve the Fourth Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Flagstaff and Evergreen for the development of the Property. |
||||||
RECESS
6:00 P.M. MEETING RECONVENE |
||||||
NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).
|
||||||
11. | ROLL CALL
|
|||||||||
12. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION | |||||||||
13. | CARRY OVER ITEMS FROM THE 4:00 P.M. AGENDA |
|||||||||
14. | PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None |
|||||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-22: An ordinance setting aside and preserving twenty (20) acres of specific city property for open space and authorizing staff to apply to Coconino County for a rezoning to reflect the preservation.(Designating property near Schultz Pass Rd. and Mt. Elden Lookout Rd. as Open Space) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No.2014-22 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No.2014-22 |
||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-23: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff setting aside specific City owned property for inclusion in Buffalo Park and restricting the land to uses and improvements consistent with a passive park (Neighborwoods) and authorizing staff to rezone the parcel to reflect its new designation. (Designating property at the north end of San Francisco as Open Space) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No.2014-23 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-23 |
||||||||||
C. |
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-25: An ordinance authorizing the provision of a ten (10) foot utility easement encumbering parcel number 301-89-001 (Cinder Lake Landfill) and authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute the necessary documents (Grant utility easement to APS at the Cinder Lake Landfill). |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-25 |
||||||
16. | DISCUSSION ITEMS Review of the September 2, 2014, City Council Meeting Draft Agenda. |
|||||
17. | POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Verbal comments from the public on any item under this section must be given during Public Participation near the beginning of the meeting. Written comments may be submitted to the City Clerk. After discussion and upon agreement of three members of the Council, an item will be moved to a regularly-scheduled Council meeting. |
|||||
18. | INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS FROM COUNCIL AND STAFF, REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS | |||||
19. | ADJOURNMENT | |||||
|
4.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Budget Retreat of April 23-25, 2014; the Combined Special Meeting and Work Session of May 13, 2014; the Regular Meeting of July 1, 2014; the Work Session of July 8, 2014; and the Regular Meeting of July 15, 2014. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Amend/approve the minutes of the City Council Budget Retreat of April 23-25, 2014; the Combined Special Meeting and Work Session of May 13, 2014; the Regular Meeting of July 1, 2014; the Work Session of July 8, 2014; and the Regular Meeting of July 15, 2014.
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
Attached are copies of the minutes of the City Council Budget Retreat of April 23-25, 2014; the Combined Special Meeting and Work Session of May 13, 2014; the Regular Meeting of July 1, 2014; the Work Session of July 8, 2014; and the Regular Meeting of July 15, 2014. | |||||
Attachments: | 04.23.2014.CCBR.Minutes | ||||
05.13.2014.CCSMWS.Minutes | |||||
07.01.2014.CCRM.Minutes | |||||
07.08.2014.CCWS.Minutes | |||||
07.15.2014.CCRM.Minutes | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | ||||||||||
|
6.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Report on Flagstaff Convention and Visitors Bureau Awards and Recognition | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Information only
|
|||||
INFORMATION | |||||
With the support of Economic Vitality Division Director, Stacey Button, and under the direction of Heidi Hansen, Convention and Visitors Bureau Director, our dedicated staff has brought Flagstaff into the limelight through the following Awards and Recognition Received: Arizona Governor’s Tourism Awards – Innovative Promotions for Flagstaff Reimaging Arizona Interactive Marketing Association – Best Display Ad MARCOM Awards – Platinum Winner for Branding Refresh MARCOM Awards – Gold Winner for Advertising Campaign Communicator Awards – Gold Award for Outdoor Advertising - for light rail and king kong bus wraps Communicator Awards – Silver Award for Destination Website Communicator Awards – Silver Award for Integrated Branding Campaign Thanks goes not only to Heidi, but the entire CVB team members who were responsible for bringing this effort together: Our creative and sales team of Heather Ainardi, Jennifer Schaber, Joanne Hudson, Michael Russell and Joyce Lingenfelter, along with Visitors Center staff Jessica Lawrence and Craig Rose, Andy Boyd, Carolyn Pinnick, Anna Goodman, Marsha Almarez, and Marie Green with the assistance of support staff member Carrie Nelson. Their extraordinary work on our City's branding campaign really hit it out of the park, and tonight I ask you to join me in applauding their creative talents that help bring visitors as an economic driver to our City. CONNECTION TO COUNCIL GOALS AND/OR REGIONAL PLAN: COUNCIL GOALS: 5. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base REGIONAL PLAN: Policy ED.6. 1 Support and promote the diversification and specialization of the tourism sector. |
|||||
Attachments: | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | ||||||||||
|
7.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration of Appointments: Airport Commission. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Make two appointments to terms expiring October 2015.
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
By making the above appointments, the Airport Commission will be at full membership.
There are five applications on file and they are as follows: Beth Applebee (new applicant) Brian Cox (new applicant) Terry Greene (new applicant) William Hagan (new applicant) Jeff Wheless (new applicant) |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
These are voluntary positions and there is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
None. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Appoint two Commissioners: by appointing two members at this time, the Airport Commission be at full membership, allowing the group to meet and provide recommendations to the City Council. 2) Table the action to allow for further discussion or expand the list of candidates. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Airport Commission consists of seven citizens serving three-year terms. There are currently two seats available. The Airport Commission is responsible for reviewing and reporting to the Council on the development of the Airpark and on matters affecting the operation and efficiency of the airport, using the Airport Master Plan as a guide. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
It is important to fill the vacancies so as to allow the Commission to continue meeting on a regular basis. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The City's boards, commissions, and committees were created to foster public participation and input and to encourage Flagstaff citizens to take an active role in city government. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
INFORM: Board members and City staff have informed the community of these vacancies though word of mouth in addition to the vacancies being posted on the City's website. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
COUNCIL INTERVIEW TEAM: Mayor Nabours Councilmember Barotz |
|||||
Attachments: | Airport Commission Roster | ||||
Airport Commission Authority | |||||
Airport Commission Applicant Roster | |||||
Airport Commission Applications | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
8.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Devendrabhai Patel, "India Palace", 103 W. Birch Ave., Series 12 (restaurant), New License. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold the Public Hearing
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Devendrabhai Patel is the agent for a new Series 12 (restaurant) liquor license for India Palace. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance (Regulatory action) | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An application for a new Series 12 liquor license was received from Devendrabhai Patel for India Palace. A background investigation performed by Sgt. Matt Wright of the Flagstaff Police Department resulted in a recommendation for approval. A background investigation performed by Tom Boughner, Code Compliance Manager resulted in no active code violations being reported. Sales tax and licensing information was reviewed by Ranbir Cheema, Tax, Licensing & Revenue Manager, who stated that the business is in compliance with the tax and licensing requirements of the City. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the location and the applicant's personal qualifications. A Series 12 license allows the holder of a restaurant license to sell and serve spirituous liquor solely for consumption on the premises of an establishment which derives at least forty percent (40%) of its gross revenue from the sale of food. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is September 8, 2014. The applicant is not required to provide the distance between the applicant’s business and the nearest church or school for government; and the State does not require a geological map or list of licenses in the vicinity for any license series. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on July 31, 2014. No written protests have been received to date. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Attachments: | India Palace - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 12 Description | |||||
India Palace - PD Memo | |||||
India Palace - Code Memo | |||||
India Palace - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
8.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Randy Nations, “Sportsman's Bar & Grill", 1000 N. Humphreys St. #98, Series 06 (bar- all spirituous liquor), Person Transfer.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Series 06 (bar- all spirituous liquor) licenses are obtained through the person and/or location transfer of an existing license from another business. The transfer is from Randy Nations on behalf Flagstaff Sportsman's LLC. to Randy Nations on behalf of Hindman Enterprises LLC, but the establishment name will still be Sportsman's. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance - regulatory action. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An application for a person transfer Series 06 liquor license was received from Randy Nations for Sportsman's Bar & Grill at 1000 N. Humphreys St. #98. The transfer is from Randy Nations for Flagstaff Sportsman's LLC located at 1000 N. Humphreys St. #98., Flagstaff, Arizona. A background investigation performed by Sgt. Matt Wright of the Flagstaff Police Department resulted in a recommendation for approval. A background investigation performed by Tom Boughner, Code Compliance Manager, resulted in no active code violations being reported. Sales tax and licensing information was reviewed by Ranbir Cheema, Tax, Licensing & Revenue Manager, who stated that the business is in compliance with the tax and licensing requirements of the City. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a person transfer, consideration may only be given to the applicant's personal qualifications. A Series 06 (bar - all spirituous liquor) allows a bar retailer to sell and serve spirituous liquors, primarily by individual portions, to be consumed on the premises and in the original container for consumption on or off the premises. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is August 30, 2014. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on July 30, 2014. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Attachments: | Sportsman's - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 06 Description | |||||
Sportsman's - PD Memo | |||||
Sportsman's - Code Memo | |||||
Sportsman's - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
8.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Paul Moir, “Proper Meats and Provisions", 110 S. San Francisco St., Suite B., Series 07 (beer and wine bar), Person and Location Transfer.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Series 07 licenses must be obtained through the person and/or location transfer of an existing license from another business. The license is being transferred from Alexander Mowl with Café Ole, located in Flagstaff. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance - regulatory action. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An application for a person transfer Series 07 liquor license was received from Paul Moir for Proper Meats and Provisions, 110 S. San Francisco St., Suite B. The person transfer is from Alexander Mowl for Café Ole located at 121 S. San Francisco St., Flagstaff, Arizona. A background investigation performed by Sgt. Matt Wright of the Flagstaff Police Department resulted in a recommendation for approval. A background investigation was performed by Tom Boughner, Code Compliance Manager. There are no active code violations being reported. Sales tax and licensing information was reviewed by Ranbir Cheema, Tax, Licensing & Revenue Manager, who stated that the business is in compliance with the tax and licensing requirements of the City. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a person and location transfer, consideration may be given to the applicant's personal qualifications as well as the location of the business. A Series 07 beer and wine bar license allows a beer and wine bar retailer to sell and serve beer and wine, primarily by individual portions, to be consumed on the premises and in the original container for consumption on or off the premises. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is August 30, 2014. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on July 30, 2014. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Attachments: | Proper Meats - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 07 Description | |||||
Proper Meats - Section 13 | |||||
Proper Meats - PD Memo | |||||
Proper Meats - Code Memo | |||||
Proper Meats - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
8.D.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Jeffrey Roff, “Whole Foods Market", 320 S. Cambridge Lane, Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Jeffrey Roff with Whole Foods Market has submitted a liquor license application for a new Series 10 (beer and wine store) license. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance - regulatory action. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An application for a new Series 10 (beer and wine store) liquor license was received from Jeffrey Roff for Whole Foods Market, 320 S. Cambridge Ln. This is an existing business that wants to sell beer and wine. A background investigation performed by Sgt. Matt Wright of the Flagstaff Police Department resulted in a recommendation for approval. A background investigation performed by Tom Boughner, Code Compliance Manager, resulted in no active code violations being reported. Sales tax and licensing information was reviewed by Ranbir Cheema, Tax, Licensing & Revenue Manager, who stated that the business is in compliance with the tax and licensing requirements of the City. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the applicant's personal qualifications and the location. A Series 10 (beer and wine store) license allows a retail store to sell beer and wine (no other spirituous liquors), only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is August 30, 2014. For a Series 10 (beer and wine store) license, the applicant is required to provide the distance between the applicant’s business and the nearest church or school for government; the State does not require a geological map or list of licenses in the vicinity for any license series. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The application was properly posted on August 5, 2014. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Attachments: | Whole Foods - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 10 Description | |||||
Whole Foods - Section 13 | |||||
Whole Foods - PD Memo | |||||
Whole Foods - Code Memo | |||||
Whole Foods - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
8.E.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Hetal Patel, “O'Leary Street Market", 322 S. O'Leary St., Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold public hearing.
The City Council has the option to: 1) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval; 2) Forward the application to the State with no recommendation; or 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial based on the testimony received at the public hearing and/or other factors. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Hetal Patel with O'Leary Street Market has submitted a liquor license application for a new Series 10 (beer and wine store) license. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Effective governance - regulatory action. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An application for a new Series 10 (beer and wine store) liquor license was received from Hetal Patel for O'Leary Street Market, 322 S. O'Leary St. This is an existing business that wants to sell beer and wine. A background investigation performed by Sgt. Matt Wright of the Flagstaff Police Department resulted in a recommendation for approval. A background investigation performed by Tom Boughner, Code Compliance Manager, resulted in no active code violations being reported. Sales tax and licensing information was reviewed by Ranbir Cheema, Tax, Licensing & Revenue Manager, who stated that the business is in compliance with the tax and licensing requirements of the City. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the applicant's personal qualifications and the location. A Series 10 (beer and wine store) license allows a retail store to sell beer and wine (no other spirituous liquors), only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is August 26, 2014. For a Series 10 (beer and wine store) license, the applicant is required to provide the distance between the applicant’s business and the nearest church or school for government; the State does not require a geological map or list of licenses in the vicinity for any license series. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The application was properly posted on August 5, 2014. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Attachments: | O'Leary - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 10 Description | |||||
O'Leary - Section 13 | |||||
O'Leary - PD Memo | |||||
O'Leary - Code Memo | |||||
O'Leary - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
9.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Acceptance of Grant and Approval of Contract: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Brownfields State Response Grant - Asbestos Abatement for the City of Flagstaff (for Midgley Market at 23 N. Beaver Street - aka The Lion and the Lamb Building)(Approve ADEQ grant contract for asbestos abatement). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Accept the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Brownfields State Response Grant (SRG) in the amount of approximately $55,000 and authorize the City Manager to execute Contract No. ADEQ15-077563 (which includes, but under separate cover, the City's participation in the ADEQ Voluntary Remediation Program).
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The City owns the subject site which is contaminated with lead paint, asbestos, and mold. This downtown building has been unoccupied and boarded up for over a decade. If the City desires to redevelop the subject site, for example as a part of a Municipal Courts Facility, or if the City chooses to dispose of the property, abatement is required or appropriate. This abatement work will change a City liability to an asset. Subsidiary Decisions Points: None. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The subject grant will pay for the entirety of the abatement and does not require matching funds. Some staff time will be expended for associated work such as grant administration, bidding of the work, and construction contract administration. While not currently anticipated, there may be some minor additional construction work needed (or desired) when the abatement work is complete. This is an unfunded grant project and we will be using appropriation available in 001-09-402-3239-4-4421 which will have an offsetting revenue. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: LU.3 Continue to enhance the region's unique sense of place within the urban, suburban, and rural context. LU.9 Focus reinvestment, partnerships, regulations, and incentives on developing and redeveloping urban areas. LU.11 Prioritize the continual reinvigoration of downtown Flagstaff, whose strategic location, walkable blocks, and historic buildings will continue to be a vibrant destination for all. NH.1 Foster and maintain healthy and diverse urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods in the Flagstaff region. NH.2 Look to downtown Flagstaff as the primary focal point of the community character. NH.6 Neighborhood conservation efforts of revitalization, redevelopment, and infill are compatible with and enhance our overall community character. ED.7 Continue to promote and enhance Flagstaff's unique sense of place as an economic development driver. ED.8 Promote the continued physical and economic viability of the region's commercial districts by focusing investment on existing and new activity centers. ED.9 Promote redevelopment and infill as a well-established means to accomplish a variety of community economic, planning, and environmental goals. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Accept the Grant (Recommended): A City liability becomes an asset, although we may need or want to do some minor additional work. 2) Decline the Grant: There is no advantage and funds for environmental clean-up will be needed in the future. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
According to the date inscribed on the cornerstone over the front door, the building was constructed in 1927. City directories show that beginning at least in 1929, the building was used for a food market. Between at least 1948 and 1985, the building was used by successive sporting goods and liquor businesses. Beginning at least in 1990, the building was used for a Christian bookstore (The Lion and Lamb) and as an office for Christian ministries. It is not known when the building was no longer used for this purpose. The City of Flagstaff acquired the property through condemnation in December of 2004. The building is currently vacant and unoccupied due to extensive contamination (asbestos, lead, and mold). |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
It is anticipated that the abatement work, strictly performed, would render the building more structurally unsafe than it is today. Therefore, the contract for this work will include additional work as required to leave the building and/or site in a non-hazardous condition. As the least expensive method, this mostly likely means demolition of the entire building. While it is staff's intention to explore cutting the property line walls and leaving the bottom few feet as a screen wall, this may not be aesthetically, structurally, or economically feasible. The costs and the grant request were based on the demolition of the entire building as the most practical means to conclude the work with non-hazardous conditions. The abatement contract will include obtaining the necessary permits to perform the work and these costs were also anticipated and included in the grant request. To obtain a demolition permit, a Cultural Resource Study (CRS) is required first. If the Phase I CRS recommends a Phase II CRS, staff would likely prepare this second report (drawings and photographs that document the building). Over the entrance door of the building is a cornerstone block inscribed with "Midgley 1927". The abatement work contract will include preserving that block and delivering it to a City owned storage location. Staff contacted the family of the owner of Andy's Sporting Goods (a former occupant) and they have expressed initial interest in obtaining the cornerstone block. On the Aspen Avenue side of the building is a biblical theme mural by Joe Sorren. It is one of his earlier works, done while he was in college. The stucco of the wall surface is poorly bonded to the glazed bricks behind. This combined with the masonry wall construction makes salvaging the mural physically and economically infeasible. The CRS would document the mural with photographs prior to demolition. The Community Code Enforcement Program and the Community Design and Redevelopment Program have been installing bulletin boards in downtown to reduce illegal handbill posting and one such board is currently mounted on the Midgley Building. The program staff are aware that the building may be demolished and have plans to relocate the bulletin board. When the work of the grant is complete, the City may want to fence off the then open area (potentially a hole) where the building used to be, or the City may choose to pave the area for expanded parking. Inexpensive options could involve the simple use of road base with the work performed by City crews. These costs have NOT been included. Also, unforeseen conditions have NOT been included and ADEQ will NOT consider additional funds should we encounter unforeseen conditions. The terms of the grant are such that the City must participate in ADEQ's Voluntary Remediation Program (VRP). Through this program, property owners, prospective purchasers and other interested parties investigate or clean up a contaminated site in cooperation with ADEQ. VRP results in a streamlined process for program participants who work with a single point of contact at ADEQ to address applicable cross-program remediation efforts. ADEQ reviews these voluntary remedial actions and provides a closure document for successful site remediation that is accepted by all relevant ADEQ programs. The cost of participating in the VRP is included in the grant amount but the funds will transfer directly (not passing through the City) making the effective grant amount $45,250. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Environmental clean-up of this site would aid the City's efforts on a variety of possible paths. In the short term, the current Municipal Courts Facility could benefit from an expanded parking area. Should the City choose to construct a new Municipal Courts Facility on this site, this work anticipates that project and reduces the costs for same. Should the City choose to dispose of the property at some point, clean-up would be appropriate and this work anticipates that need. At all times, eliminating an empty boarded up building from downtown is an advantage. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Grant Contract | ||||
Grant Application | |||||
Site Map | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
10.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration of Bids: 4th Street Gateway Project |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Reject all bids as submitted
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Bids were substantially higher than the project’s budgeted amount. Staff recommends that City Council reject all bids as submitted for Bid #2014-86, 4th Street Gateway project. All bids received for this project were substantially greater than the Engineer’s estimate and budgeted amount. Staff will re-assess budget availability and project scope. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The project has a total project budget appropriation of $184,360 from the BBB Beautification fund and is scheduled in the Beautification 5-year plan, funded in the FY 2014-2015 authorized budget. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Council Goals: Retain, expand, and diversify economic base REGIONAL PLAN: Goal WR.5. Manage watersheds and storm water to address flooding concerns, water quality, environmental protections, and rainwater harvesting. Goal WR.6. Protect, preserve, and improve the quality of surface water, groundwater, and reclaimed water in the region. Goal CC.3. Preserve, restore, enhance, and reflect the design traditions of Flagstaff in all public and private development efforts. Goal CC.4. Design and develop all projects to be contextually sensitive, to enhance a positive image and identity for the region. Goal CC.5. Support and promote art, science, and education resources for all to experience. Goal LU.1. Invest in existing neighborhoods and activity centers for the purpose of developing complete, and connected places. Goal LU.18. Develop well designed activity centers and corridors with a variety of employment, business, shopping, civic engagement, cultural opportunities, and residential choices. Goal PF.2. Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics. |
|||||
Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No
|
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Reject all bids as recommended. 2) Approve the award to the lowest bidder. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The 4th Street Gateway is designed to enhance 4th Street and create a memorable, visually-appealing focal point that announces the 4th Street corridor. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The 4th Street Gateway design incorporates the flexibility needed to accommodate displays of interchangeable public art; integrates a low seat wall constructed of locally available and contextual materials; supports a “4th Street” sign for viewing by eastbound traffic that includes a stone monolith pier sign for westbound motorists; includes space for pedestrian use and access anticipated to increase with development on the south side of Route 66; buffers the view of adjacent commercial parking lots using colorful, regionally-appropriate plant species; incorporates specialty paving to enrich pedestrian use; provides space for storm water and low impact design; and accommodates periodic maintenance and snow storage/removal. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Below is a summary of the bids received: Engineer’s estimate : $188,996
Bidder Bid
Tri-Com Corp. $295,991.80Woodruff Construction $366,841.50 Morning Dew Construction $412,679.10 BEC Southwest $484,807.46 |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Route 66, the 4th Street Gateway will boldly announce the area’s business and residential community to motorists, pedestrians, and transit riders. It incorporates previously solicited public input and key principles for redevelopment and their respective concept design options as originally outlined under the 4th Street Corridor Master Plan. The Gateway will enhance the development of 4th Street as a destination and support branding and design standards toward a consistent area theme, strong sense of place, and rejuvenated business district. Future (separate budget and bid item) interchangeable public art component will be a key element of the Gateway. Prior to the idea of having the art be interchangeable, support for a permanent public art component or centerpiece was mixed—businesses generally were not in favor, while residents’ support was strong. The Gateway’s design flexibility to display works of art, monuments, or other features such as a giant Christmas tree means that each group of constituents will have the opportunity to see their preferred symbol/artwork/monument displayed as part of the Gateway. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Consult. Outreach for the Gateway began as part of the larger 4th Street Corridor Study project in 2009, even though the idea for the Gateway predated the Corridor Study. A series of Corridor public outreach dialogues were held by the design consultant to identify key issues and considerations which then resulted in conceptual designs for a gateway as part of the Corridor study. A second series of outreach meetings for designing the Gateway, as separate from the Corridor project, began in 2012. Five public meetings were conducted to gather community and business owner ideas for the Gateway. Four alternative designs were produced based on business and residents input at these meetings. The public outreach process culminated in a final public meeting at the Sunnyside Neighborhood Association’s annual barbeque where residents provided additional comments and input on the four alternative designs. These four designs were then presented to the city's Beautification and Public Art Commission (BPAC) for selection of a preferred alternative. The selected preferred alternative was then presented to the Mayor and Council for input in a series of one-on-one meetings. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Reject all bids as recommended. Staff and consultants have value- engineered the project and believe rebidding the project based on the value engineering will result in bids within or close to the project’s budget. 2) Approve the award. |
|||||
Attachments: | Hardscape Plan | ||||
Landscape Plan | |||||
Elevation & Section | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of the Third Amendment and the Fourth Amendment of Purchase and Sale Agreement: Between the City of Flagstaff and Evergreen - TRAX, LLC ("Evergreen"), for the sale of approximately 33.6 acres of property consisting of three parcels located at the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection of Fourth Street and Route 66, and the northwest corner of Fourth Street and Huntington drive adjacent to the Fourth Street Overpass (the "Property"). (Third Amendment to Evergreen Purchase Agreement to extend closing date; Fourth Amendment to Evergreen Purchase Agreement to Adopt Limited Warranty Quit Claim Conditions) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the Fourth Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Flagstaff and Evergreen for the development of the Property. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff Charter requires the City Council to review and approve agreements that "provide for acquisition, sale or exchange of public real property." The Third Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement amends the closing date from August 18, 2014 to the first business day which is at least 31 days after any Solution Date, or earlier date as the City and Evergreen-Trax select. The amendment to extend the closing date is needed to finalize the land title. The Fourth Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement further clarifies the Solution Date and provides for the Limited Warranty Quit Claim language and subsequent relief as related to the any future reversionary interest as related to railroad right of way. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no financial impact. The purchase price remains at $3,041,000. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
1. Retain, expand, and diversify economic base
2. Effective governance. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
|
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the Third and/or Fourth Amendments to the Evergreen Purchase Agreement and ratify the City Manager's signature of the Third Amendment as recommended by City Staff. 2. Modify the conditions and/or include additional conditions. 3. Deny the Third and/or Fourth Amendment and choose not to ratify the City Manager's signature of the Third Amendment to the Agreement. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
In approximately 2007, the City awarded the Property for development. However, due to economic conditions the developer was not able to meet its obligations and returned the property to the City. In October 2010, staff solicited Requests for Proposals (RFP) for the purchase and development of the Property. Revenue generated from this sale was to assist with the repayment of debt incurred by the City in the construction of the Fourth Street Overpass. Only one proposal was received for only two of the three parcels. In addition, the proposal was significantly below the minimum price requested and the development plan did not meet the expectations that were set forth in the RFP. The Council rejected this proposal as it was determined to not be in the best interest of the City. Council directed staff to reissue the RFP. A new RFP was issued that no longer had a minimum price requirement and provided for a greater emphasis on the type and timing of development that would occur. The RFP closed on August 3, 2011. One response was received with an initial offer from Evergreen Devco, Inc. for all three parcels. The current Purchase and Sale agreement provided for a calculated closing date of August 18, 2014 which was thirty one days after the City Council approved the Development Agreement on July 15,2014. As there wasn't a Council meeting prior to the August 18, 2014 close date, the City Manager signed the amendment to provide for both the City and Evergreen-Trax time to resolve subsequent title issues. This action will approve the agreement and ratify the City Manager's signature. The Fourth Amendment to the purchase and sale agreement is necessary to address a title concern regarding the implied condition of a reverter clause as related to a portion of the right of way originally owned by the railroad. The City is providing a limited warranty against a future reversion and will subsequently pursue the appropriate legislative action to permanently remove the possibility of this type of claim. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The City desires to promote economic development in a number of modalities. Approving the Third Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement for the property will encourage retail development along the Fourth Street Corridor in a more structured manner. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Evergreen has agreed to the amended purchase price of $3,041,000. Previously, Evergreen deposited with the City $212,899.50 as Earnest Money. Of that, $50,000 was transferred to the Seller at the conclusion of the initial Due Diligence Period and a second $50,000 transferred to the City at the conclusion of the Review Period. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits include providing greater commercial and retail opportunities, providing for a larger retail tax base, and providing new job opportunities, particularly along the Fourth Street Corridor. Due to the economic downturn, in addition to the delay in the development of the property, City staff projected that the Fourth Street portion of the transportation tax would not adequately meet the need to fund the Fourth Street Overpass debt service by the time this tax expires in 2020. Staff employed a two-prong strategy to mitigate that risk. First, staff reissued the debt realizing an approximate $1.4 million savings in interest expense. Second, the staff continue to work toward the timely sale and development of the property so that the financial obligation will be met. The City will realize a greater and more certain benefit by receiving incremental growth in both sales and property tax revenues. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Collaborate - Evergreen held a forum in February 2014 for public participation. In addition, other public hearings and various Council actions have already occurred that allowed for public communication, as noted in the 'Prior Council Decision' section. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the Third and/or Fourth Amendments to the Evergreen Purchase Agreement and ratify the City Manager's signature of the Third Amendment as recommended by City Staff. 2. Modify the conditions and/or include additional conditions. 3. Deny the Third and/or Fourth Amendment and choose not to ratify the City Manager's signature of the Third Amendment to the Agreement. |
|||||
Attachments: | 3rd Amendment Signature Pages | ||||
4th Amendment and Deed | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
15.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-22: An ordinance setting aside and preserving twenty (20) acres of specific city property for open space and authorizing staff to apply to Coconino County for a rezoning to reflect the preservation.(Designating property near Schultz Pass Rd. and Mt. Elden Lookout Rd. as Open Space) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No.2014-22 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-22 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No.2014-22 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
After significant public process and City Council discussion, on January 21, 2014 the Council approved Resolution 2014-04 which provided city staff with the direction to bring a parcel of land identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 300-47-004 forward for consideration and possible action to preserve it as open space. The parcel is owned by the City of Flagstaff, but is located in Coconino County. Upon approval of the action preserving it for open space, City staff will apply to Coconino County to rezone the parcel to the zoning most reflective of its new restrictions. The strategy was discussed with the Open Space Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission and both bodies are supportive of the designation. The parcel isaddressed 3620 West Schultz Pass Road and is located near to the intersection of Schultz Pass Road and Mt. Elden Lookout Road and has been referred to informally as the Shultz Y. The designation of the parcel in this manner is revocable by a future City Council through the adoption of an ordinance repealing ordinance 2014-23; however this is believed to be the strongest protection available without the City of Flagstaff giving up control of the parcel. The designation by Ordinance and subsequent rezoning will make any potential future changes subject to multiple public processes which will provide opportunities for public discussion. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There are not significant costs associated with this action. The parcel is already City-owned and not restricted to a specific use. There is not a requirement for reimbursement to a specific fund either. The preservation of the parcel as open space will generate some need for maintenance and prevent the City from generating revenue from the parcel, but is not anticipated to generate significant costs. A partnership with the Forest Service regarding trail development and maintenance has been discussed. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 11. Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: OS 1 - The region has a system of open lands, such as undeveloped natural areas, wildlife corridors and habitat areas, trails, access to public lands and greenways to support the natural environment that sustains our quality of life, cultural heritage, and ecosystem health. REC 1 - Maintain and grow the region's healthy system of convenient and accessible parks, recreation facilities, and trails. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
On January 21st, 2014, City Council approved Resolution 2014-04 which provided staff direction regarding the disposition of 17 parcels of City -owned land. The direction included this specific parcel being brought forward for consideration of a designation as open space. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve Ordinance 2014-22 which will designate parcel 300-47-004 as open space and authorize city staff to take the steps necessary to rezone the parcel. 2) Not approve Ordinance 2014-22 and provide staff additional direction regarding intended disposition of the parcel. 3) Not approve Ordinance 2014-22. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The twenty (20) acre parcel of City-owned land has historic and natural resources and is considered of high value by the Open Space Commission and many members of the community. It is not restricted to other uses by funding source, dedication or previous Council action. City staff performed an inventory of City-owned land and this parcel was brought forward from that process for City Council discussion and to receive guidance regarding its potential uses and disposition. After significant public discussion City Council provided direction, memorialized in Resolution 2014-04, that City staff bring the parcel forward for consideration of preservation as open space. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The public comment related to the parcel demonstrated significant community interest in its disposition and the Open Space Commission recommended it be preserved as open space. It is currently used recreationally and there have been conversations with the Forest Service regarding a potential partnership on the parcel. The parcel is in the County and any rezoning will go through the County process. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
According to the City of Flagstaff Regional Plan and the 1998 Flagstaff Area Open Space and Greenways Plan, parks and open spaces provide significant community benefit and are a value for Flagstaff. The designation of this parcel as open space will increase the amount of land in the region preserved towards that benefit and protect a parcel considered high value. It will also potentially provide for Flagstaff Urban Trail System (FUTS) to Forest Service Trail connectivity in the future. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve Ordinance 2014-22 which will designate the parcel as open space and authorize staff to take the necessary steps to rezone the parcel. This will preserve the parcel as open space and protect it from other uses. 2) Not approve Ordinance 2014-22 and provide staff additional direction regarding the intended disposition of the parcel. This action will provide staff additional guidance regarding City Council's desires disposition and will additional time for revision. 3) Not approve Ordinance 2014-22. This action will maintain the parcel as vacant and unprotected land. |
|||||
Attachments: | Ord 2014-22 | ||||
Ord. 2014-22 Legal desc | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
15.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-23: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff setting aside specific City owned property for inclusion in Buffalo Park and restricting the land to uses and improvements consistent with a passive park (Neighborwoods) and authorizing staff to rezone the parcel to reflect its new designation. (Designating property at the north end of San Francisco as Open Space) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No.2014-23 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-23 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-23 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
After a significant public process and City Council discussion, on January 21st, 2014 the Council approved Resolution 2014-04 which provided city staff with the direction to bring a parcel of land identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 110-03-001B forward for consideration and possible action to preserve it as open space. The City of Flagstaff Regional Plan and the 1998 Flagstaff Area Open Spaces and Greenways Plan provide for different types of land designation and use that are open space appropriate and consistent with open space values. After internal staff discussion it was determined that because the parcel was adjacent to Buffalo Park there were financial and logistical benefits for the Parks Section to oversee the ongoing maintenance of the parcel as long as the parcel was designated as a passive park, which is considered a form of open space, and not utilized as an active park, which is not. This idea was brought to the Open Space Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission and both bodies supported the designation. The designation of the parcel in this manner is revocable by a future City Council through the adoption of an ordinance repealing ordinance 2014-23; however this is believed to be the strongest protection available without the City of Flagstaff giving up control of the parcel. The designation by Ordinance and subsequent rezoning will make any changes subject to multiple public processes which will provide opportunities for public discussion. The parcel is located on the Northeast corner of the intersection of Fir Avenue and San Francisco Street. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The incorporation of the parcel into Buffalo Park will have two financial impacts. The first financial consideration is that the City will be responsible for reimbursing the Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) for the value of the parcel. The City of Flagstaff budgets a general fund transfer to HURF each year and will use that general fund transfer as the payment toward the value of the parcel. Currently the parcel has an assessed value of $835,589, however once the parcel is restricted to passive park use and rezoned the market value will potentially decrease. The second financial impact is ongoing maintenance costs incurred by Parks. The restriction of the land to use as a passive park significantly limits activities and improvements beyond invasive weed removal, litter removal, potential but currently unplanned trail construction and maintenance, signage, and parking so maintenance costs will remain relatively low. General maintenance of the passive portions of Buffalo Park currently costs approximately $50 per acre, but without the addition of improvements it is anticipated that this number could be lower for the parcel being designated. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 11. Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: REC 1 - Maintain and grow the region's healthy system of convenient and accessible parks, recreation facilities, and trails. OS 1 - The region has a system of open lands, such as undeveloped natural areas, wildlife corridors and habitat areas, trails, access to public lands and greenways to support the natural environment that sustains our quality of life, cultural heritage, and ecosystem health. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
City Council approved Resolution 2014-04 which provided staff with direction regarding the disposition of 17 City owned parcels. That direction included this parcel being brought forward for consideration of a designation as open space. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve Ordinance 2014-23 and designate parcel 110-01-003B as open space by making it a part of Buffalo Park. 2) Not approve Ordinance 2014-23 and provide staff additional direction regarding the intended disposition of the parcel. 3) Not approve Ordinance 2014-23. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The parcel was originally purchased with transportation funding for the potential use in the construction a road. The road is no longer intended for the area and the parcel has been vacant. City staff performed an inventory of City land and this parcel was brought forward from that process for City Council discussion and to receive guidance regarding its potential uses and disposition. After significant public input and discussion City Council provided direction, memorialized in Resolution 2014-04, that city staff bring the parcel forward for consideration of preservation as open space. Per the City of Flagstaff Regional Plan and the Flagstaff Area Greenways and Open Space Plan there are a number of potential uses and designations for land that qualify as open space. As the parcel is adjacent to Buffalo Park there were financial and logistical benefits to designating the parcel as a passive park and incorporating it into Buffalo Park. Staff brought this intention to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Open Space Commission and both bodies were supportive of the strategy. Should City Council approve Ordinance 2014-23 staff will further protect the parcel by rezoning it to reflect its passive park use and designation. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
On January 21, 2014 Council approved Resolution 2014-04 which provided direction to staff to bring this parcel forward for preservation as open space. A passive park is considered a form of open space and this parcel, as a passive park, would best fit the category of Neighborwoods from the 1998 Flagstaff Area Open Space and Greenways Plan. The parcel was originally intended for a road and there will be a need for repayment of the property value to the HURF funds, however it appears that over the next years that value will be able to be achieved through budgeted general fund transfers the City is currently anticipating. The assessed value of the parcel is $835,589, however that value may decrease after the restrictions and rezoning are approved. The public comment related to this parcel demonstrated significant community interest in its disposition and it was recommended for preservation by the Open Space Commission. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
According to the City of Flagstaff Regional Plan and the Flagstaff Open Space and Greenways Plan, parks and open spaces provide significant community benefit and are a value for Flagstaff. The designation of this parcel as a passive park and its inclusion into Buffalo Park will increase the land within the City preserved towards that benefit and protect a parcel considered of high value by the Open Space Commission and many members of the public. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Approve Ordinance 2014-23 and designate parcel 110-01-003B as open space by making it a part of Buffalo Park. This will preserve the parcel as open space and as a park and protect it from other uses. Not approve Ordinance 2014-23 and provide staff additional direction regarding the intended disposition of the parcel. This action will provide staff additional guidance regarding City Council's desired disposition and will require additional time for revision. Not approve Ordinance 2014-23. This action will maintain the parcel as vacant and unprotected land. |
|||||
Attachments: | Ord 2014-23 | ||||
Ord. 2014-23 Legal Desc | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-25: An ordinance authorizing the provision of a ten (10) foot utility easement encumbering parcel number 301-89-001 (Cinder Lake Landfill) and authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute the necessary documents (Grant utility easement to APS at the Cinder Lake Landfill). |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the meeting of August 25, 2014
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only for the first time 2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only (if approved above) At the meeting of September 2, 2014 3) Read Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only for the final time 4) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-25 by title only (if approved above) 5) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-25 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Arizona Public Service (APS) realigned a power line to better serve Cinder Lake Landfill during the construction of the administration building and scale house, and the easement for the power line was not relocated to reflect the new alignment. The original easement for a previous location remains in place, but no longer provides necessary rights. APS will abandon the existing easement upon receiving the new easement. Providing the ten (10) foot easement will provide the necessary rights to provide and maintain power to Cinder Lake Landfill and abandon an easement that's no longer utilized. The former easement was sixteen (16) feet and the new one will be ten (10) feet so the City will gain a small benefit in terms of property rights from the transaction. The main benefit is the clarification of an existing incorrect condition and the continued supply of energy to the landfill. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no financial impact to the City as we are trading an obsolete easement for a current easement and APS will be recording the document. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1. Repair Replace maintain infrastructure (streets & utilities) REGIONAL PLAN: Goal PF 2 - Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
In 1999 City Council authorized the initial easement for APS which was recorded as document number 3007712. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Adopt Ordinance number 2014-25 which authorizes the provision of the easement and corrects the property rights issue currently existing with the Cinder Lakes Landfill. 2) Not adopt Ordinance 2014-25 and provide staff with direction regarding potential changes. 3) Not adopt Ordinance 2014-25 which would leave the existing easement which no longer provides useful rights. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
1) The power line is already located where the new easement will be and has been there for a number of years. 2) The City Cinder Lakes Landfill benefits from the power provided via the power line. 3) The new easement is smaller than the existing easement. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Ord. 2014-25 | ||||
Easement document | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|